Bowl has been sold for huge profit!

[Buckzip]

They say their will be a dome but the pictures don't show a dome.

[lance99]

They say their will be a dome but the pictures don't show a dome.

I was thinking the same thing. I guess the FAA will not let them have one.

Now if this design is a go and is completed as the picture shown, it actually looks really good. That Might draw High Schools back there.

[Balsy]

It looks like a beautiful white elephant.

[ZachTheZip]

That Might draw High Schools back there.

This is something that all these investors seem to be ignoring, but will be crucial for them to have any kind of success. The Akron City high schools need places to play, and the Rubber Bowl needs to be established in the minds of locals as a place where you can watch football again.

[Dave in Green]

Just wait and see how purty this looks next month.

[skip-zip]

This is actually getting funny.

1) When does anyone announce a "Completion DATE", and then list the YEAR? And haven't we had two "years" listed already in previous announcements from these people?

2) Lance99, my information is the same as yours. The FAA already nixed the idea of a dome at that location many years ago, if my memory is correct.

3) "Structurally Sound"? Does this include the sinking sections of the End Zone because it was built over a Spring?

4) I'm still wondering how they will account for the large amount of maintenance that the UofA spent just to operate from game to game with repairs. If the U considered these expenses unsustainable, why would it be any different for a new owner?

5) The yearly property taxes, and the property taxes of nearly 100k that are reported to be unpaid right now....alone....would seem to be impossible to get caught up.

This just seems crazy to me, still. I can't even see it even reaching the point of "usable" again, so I certainly don't see it drawing enough revenue to justify massive improvements. This is reminding me of that "money pit" boat that everyone buys at some point in their lives, that they never use enough, can't keep up on repairs, and it ends up rotting on a trailer in the back yard.

I'd like to know if anyone here ever sees any of this ever becoming reality?

I'm voting that this place looks more like the ruins of the Roman Coliseum in a few years, rather than a football stadium.

[lance99]

This is actually getting funny.

1) When does anyone announce a "Completion DATE", and then list the YEAR? And haven't we had two "years" listed already in previous announcements from these people?

2) Lance99, my information is the same as yours. The FAA already nixed the idea of a dome at that location many years ago, if my memory is correct.

3) "Structurally Sound"? Does this include the sinking sections of the End Zone because it was built over a Spring?

4) I'm still wondering how they will account for the large amount of maintenance that the UofA spent just to operate from game to game with repairs. If the U considered these expenses unsustainable, why would it be any different for a new owner?

5) The yearly property taxes, and the property taxes of nearly 100k that are reported to be unpaid right now....alone....would seem to be impossible to get caught up.

This just seems crazy to me, still. I can't even see it even reaching the point of "usable" again, so I certainly don't see it drawing enough revenue to justify massive improvements. This is reminding me of that "money pit" boat that everyone buys at some point in their lives, that they never use enough, can't keep up on repairs, and it ends up rotting on a trailer in the back yard.

I'd like to know if anyone here ever sees any of this ever becoming reality?

I'm voting that this place looks more like the ruins of the Roman Coliseum in a few years, rather than a football stadium.

Maybe they know something that we don't.

BTY, if that image is recently, than the Roman Coliseum is in better shape!

[Lee Adams]

Back in the '80's U of A had a chance to upgrade the RB before it deteriorated beyond salvage. It wasn't done. When the RB was first built it was still pretty much a 'make work' project. 1939-1940. The US was spending money to get out of the recession and to gear up for war. It wasn't built to last 60-70 years.It is surprising that it was as good a facility as it was for so many years.

[RowdyZip]

As soon as I read "not for profit" next to the supposed football tenant, my first thought was that they'll be applying for property tax exemption. While I don't think it can be applied retroactively (property taxes are paid one year in aarrears in Ohio), it certainly would make things manageable going forward. As it stands right now, according to public records, they are only behind the first half of 2014 taxes ($38,753.18) with 2nd half coming due in July.

The question is whether or not a tenant could qualify a property for exemption. I'm not sure on that aspect of the law. If it requires the team to own the facility, they're screwed.

[LZIp]

As soon as I read "not for profit" next to the supposed football tenant, my first thought was that they'll be applying for property tax exemption. While I don't think it can be applied retroactively (property taxes are paid one year in aarrears in Ohio), it certainly would make things manageable going forward. As it stands right now, according to public records, they are only behind the first half of 2014 taxes ($38,753.18) with 2nd half coming due in July.

The question is whether or not a tenant could qualify a property for exemption. I'm not sure on that aspect of the law. If it requires the team to own the facility, they're screwed.

I mentioned it before but nobody really had anything to say, I wouldn't be shocked to see an abatement by the city/county if this thing ever were to a point where it seemed likely.

[skip-zip]

Rowdy Zip - The property tax exemption only applies to the owner of the property, and their exemption status.

[RowdyZip]

Rowdy Zip - The property tax exemption only applies to the owner of the property, and their exemption status.

Well there you go. I suppose Team 1 could file for nonprofit status just the same. It is legal in Ohio for non profits to turn a profit. There's some loopholes these guys could work through, but I don't see any of it ever happening.

[skip-zip]

For the most part, you have to be a religious, educational, club/trade association, or some form of charitable entity. And it's a federal designation.

In my experiences with this, I can't see any conceivable way that a marketing group who promotes entertainment could find a way to claim that status, and apply and be accepted.

Maybe the fact that they are "Educating" the public about how to avoid making an investment in a crumbling sports stadium could qualify

[ZachTheZip]

According to a post on Reddit, they're not behind on taxes, the USFL team is already practicing there, and they are actively cleaning up the site.

I drive by every so often and I've never seen a soul there, and it never seems to get any cleaner.

[RowdyZip]

I beg to differ on the taxes. These guys are full of crap and will never make anything other than destroying what was left of that stadium.

Also...if the NFL can gain nonprofit status...

[Sergeant Zip]

Speaking of semi-pro football, whatever happened to Quentin Hines' league?

It is apparently starting it's second season

[skip-zip]

RowdyZip...the NFL gained non-profit status because they are an organization made up of "football clubs".

[K92]

It is apparently starting it's second season

The author of the article looks a lot different than he did when he was fronting Jane's Addiction.

[LZIp]

It is apparently starting it's second season

Thanks.

And speaking of the NFL, they just announced recently they are giving up their non-profit status.

[skip-zip]

Yes, the NFL did make that announcement, but also said that it is not an indication that they are going to change the way that they operate. Very strange.

[LZIp]

Yes, the NFL did make that announcement, but also said that it is not an indication that they are going to change the way that they operate. Very strange.

Seems like its strictly a PR move. Doubt they will have to pay a dime in tax with distributions to teams. A plus is that Goodell won't have to disclose his salary anymore.

[skip-zip]

That's correct. Their distributions make them unprofitable, so they won't pay taxes anyway. It does lead you to believe that there is some other motive.

[Dave in Green]

No mystery at all about the NFL's motive. Congress has been investigating the league's handling of concussions and domestic violence and using the threat of revoking the NFL's tax exempt status as leverage. The NFL's highly paid attorneys and accountants have figured out a way to make just as much money without the tax exempt status. By voluntarily giving it up, they eliminate Congressional leverage and score points with the public, which wonders how on earth a money-minting sports giant doesn't have to pay taxes while ordinary citizens do.

[LZIp]

By voluntarily giving it up, they eliminate Congressional leverage and score points with the public, which wonders how on earth a money-minting sports giant doesn't have to pay taxes while ordinary citizens do.

Its really not that complicated if you have a basic understanding of the system (the problem is most people don't). The taxes are still getting paid somewhere along the line.

[pdt1420]

Count me as someone who would like to see the rubber bowl renovated rather than crumble into dust. A lot of fun memories there and I'd like to see it live on if only for sentimental reasons. Best of luck to these current owners with grand dreams.