urbanSTL

^ There definitely is some feeling of "doing good" in these Detroit relocations, but the dynamic there is also very interesting in that employers actually pay a premium to have office space downtown over the suburbs. (Plus the costs associated with parking and earnings taxes.) There seems to be more buy-in to the value proposition of locating your company to a dense, vibrant area as opposed to traditional suburban office park. (Clayton diffuses things a bit here as its a second business district but again its what's even beyond Clayton that scratches my head.)

^ I agree with almost all of that, but I would say that we should be very active in trying to land companies of any size as leases come up, etc. We have the space for larger leases that are harder to find in the County and other advantages. Anyway. we should be a consideration for just about everyone and work hard to make big gains.... we won't come out on top on most deals but we should be on a healthy trajectory where we are seeing more wins than losses.

I think the genius "Imported From Detroit" campaign that highlights downtown and refocusing on the grittier, edgier image of a hard fought rebound has helped the local and national perception of urban investment in Detroit.

Let's remember, though, with Detroit and our own downtown, that according to some around here, perception doesn't or shouldn't matter (see Rams thread).

I said nothing about money. The negative perception of downtown was referenced and our perception will take another hit with an exit by the Rams, that's all. It may not last long, but downtown will be seen as not supportive of not only business but now major entertainment. Justified or not it will happen.

I don't claim or have ever touted that the NFL will save anything. It won't. But that doesn't make it worthless. Sports are entertainment and I enjoy them for the very reasons you despise them-they operate on unpredictability. It creates a nice balance from the regimented reason, logic, and evidence-based demands of work. Even more simply, they are fun as hell. I'd like this particular sport to stay and it won't cost me all that much. Just like the city will probably be fine if the Rams leave, it will probably be fine if they stay, too......but every time I hear a stadium basher talk about how the evil NFL and Rams will burn the urban integrity and finances of our gem of a city, the impact keeps growing.

There is no evidence that can deny that this racket has value. A lot of people smarter than me think so, too. What other "bigger/more important" endeavor has local figures standing up for our city and telling the nation STL is worth fighting for? Is that bad? Do we not want these people trying to sell the idea of investing in downtown? Is it not possible that if this works, there could be some level of at least curiosity about the opportunity for other corporations to consider the city? Even if the stadium doesn't happen, isn't it beneficial for our region to hear Peacock's unapologetic stance that the center of the region should be downtown? You can justify a cynical stance about the Rams as a waste of money, etc, however they are still a local asset that may choose to leave for greener pastures just like many other businesses have done before them. And before everyone starts chiming in about no public money in LA, yes, I know.

A better question is what has "done sh*t" for our local reputation, economy, or population, etc. in the last 55 years? I can think of plenty of things that have really crippled us and the NFL is not one of them.

The $295 Million Mall Taxpayers Bought Kansas City
http://nextcity.org/features/view/kansa ... -companies?

The nearly $15 million the city spent repaying Power & Light District debt in 2014 was money it couldn’t spend on public libraries, parks, police, blight cleanup and other public services — no small sacrifice in a city that had a general operating budget of $1.42 billion that year. The debt isn’t going away anytime soon either; last year, the city refinanced, which lowered the payments from 2015 through 2019 but extended the debt schedule from 2033 to 2040.

“I don’t think there will be a point at any time in the foreseeable future, probably the next 20 years, where it actually pays for itself,” City Manager Troy Schulte told the Star in February.

^ I can't recall anyone here saying that it is a good idea to back bonds for Cordish. However, some, including myself, have said we should look at giving more subsidies to get more catalytic downtown projects off the ground.

^ Can you give a synopsis on this?

Also, now that we have a Tiny Bar, is Saint Louis ready for the tiny house movement?

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index ... oment.html

Spending $$ on sprawl is sort of like spending it on hookers and blow. Although that might be too generous. Let me change that to spending $$ on sprawl is sort of like spending it on meth.