POLL: Continue or scrap the Crestwin Bomber stadium project?

JTF wrote:I think hell will be paid if they annoint AS KER to the board...that would be the kiss of death I reckon...

sooooo many people hate the fu ucken guy that it's crazy to think he should be given any honour at all.

He's a douche. plain and simple.

JTF wrote:For sure it'll show up in attendance.

Deank wrote:time for a new provincial party

the "lets remove the bomber board" party

Livio Ciaralli wrote:Given the option...I wouldn't live in the city either.

I'd find a nice remote place OUTSIDE the reach of the extra taxes and abuse.

Livio Ciaralli wrote:Don't have to go 40 Km's Rosie , but if I did that , I wouldn't have to come back into town to work, I'd just change.

Enough already!
Re: ‘Jacking up the price,’ Dec. 22.

Much has been said about the stadium financing. Many are having trouble with the arrangement arrived at as the “final” deal.

The best thing so far is the deal is more upfront about who is eventually going to pay for it. It is going to be the fans who go to the games and the rest of the taxpayers who do not go to games.

Some are still of the mind this should be done by the “private” sector. I say it is time these people woke up and faced the facts. There is no private money, there never was, and there never will be.

When Asper presented his plan as a private project, he was not stating the reality of the project. His plan was to be given everything: the team, the stadium and the Polo Park site.

Yes, he was putting forward some private financing, but the amount was so minute and contingent on so many other taxpayer-funded commitments that it could hardly qualify as significant private investment.

The real question is: does it make sense for a city like Winnipeg to have a football team and would such a team be of any benefit to taxpayers?

If the answer is yes, and if it appears that the club, as a club, can never make any money, why would you suppose that “private” investors would want to be part of it? To lose money? No! It is because they count on the taxpayers to foot the bill for any losses.

So let us at least be honest about it: let the taxpayers foot the bill and let the “private investors” stay out of it. To those people who are having difficulty with this I say: enough already!

Giovanni Versace

There is little to love about this stinker of a stadium deal.

Your Comments


Re: Mr.Versace's comment:
I agree that the "stadium deal" stinks.

It did from the beginning, what with the mis-information that was being put out about the state of our present facility. This mis-information is still being put forth by Selinger in the present debate.


The only positive aspect in this "deal" that I can see, is that it has exposed an obvious chasm in our society regarding "needs" and where money should be spent.


Also, it has given the taxpayer a peek at the secret societies that still seem to exist in this city, and has drawn attention to a lot of questionable practices by way too many individuals.


If I was King, a lot of people would be headless.


Alejandro Le Monjello, December 24th 2010, 9:05am