No it's next year, they gave away some for the dc or Dallas game, bit it's supposed to be next year for the majority.
No, it's there to be used next year. They offered the Suite for FCD at pretty late notice which makes me believe that they might have had more renewals than expected. Atleast that's what I want to believe.
Does anyone know what the $40 per seat tax actually pays for? My ticket rep has been unable to find out (or unwilling to explain it.) "It is Village West and Sporting Tax" - I pay sales tax, property tax, income tax etc... In every case I can look up to see where or what the tax supports... except this "tax"
It's the same as the sales tax, however sales taxes generated in the Legends district are all earmarked for repaying the bonds that were used to build Legends. EDIT: I should add I'm referring to the state sales tax; the city/county sales tax is most likely charged as normal, assuming there is a sales tax in the UG. I would be surprised if there weren't. I have been advised before that it isn't a surtax, because I originally thought it was, but I'll see what I can dig up to confirm that because I'm curious about that too. It does seem to me that a surtax would kind of defeat the purpose of what the tax district is supposed to do, because it would make prices there artificially higher than anywhere else. Earmarking, otoh, would help explain the hostility to the stadium in certain quarters, because it used up unused budget funds that could have been reappropriated to the state coffers, yet if the taxes are earmarked for bond amortization it wouldn't generate any state revenue for many years.
Are you sure? If I buy something at the Legends, I see a sales tax on my receipt and if it was based sales then, the tax would vary depending on the price of the ticket. SKC is not calling it "sales" tax....
Could be... but the STAR bonds built the whole complex and people that shop there pay taxes on purchases they make in Village West. They don't play a yearly tax. If it was part of the STAR bonds then wouldn't it be tied to the ticket price?
http://www.examiner.com/argentine-in-kansas-city/pros-and-cons-of-the-kansas-city-kansas-sales-tax Make of this article what you will. It sounds pretty complicated to me, but assuming this is all true, and I can't vouch for the source, there is some mildly surprising stuff. So now I'm a little lost. Why is the UG volunteering to help pay off the state's STAR bonds? Strange behavior if you ask me, and it just points to the fact that the financing is pretty complicated. Clearly the UG has some kind of obligation there that I don't fully grasp. What I think I understand is that the state is in dire financial straights, they were hoping to start collect the sales tax revenue in 2014, but then the stadium happened, the sales taxes were plowed back into the project, and since it was already budgeted in the original plan there was nothing Topeka could do to stop it.
You make an excellent point, you would think it would be a percentage of the sale. You are saying that no matter which ticket package you select, the charge is a fixed amount? That is interesting indeed. That throws me for a bit of a loop. Apparently I don't fully grasp the nuances of the financing of LSP, but then I already knew that anyway. Buzz may be onto something with the event tax, I know some municipalities will soak tourists with taxes like that, hotel taxes, etc.
That is what threw me off - that it was a fixed amount versus a percentage. I was under the impression that this tax was applied to all of Legend's including retail and restaurants. I just figured Sporting made it a fixed amount to max it easier from an administrative standpoint. I was also under the impression that this was not related to the stadium but something related to Village West as a hole.
As I understand it, all events that take place in the Legends are being assessed a fixed fee per ticket. So, it's not the stadium per se, but it won't impact retail sales tax.
Just curious, how long is the wait list for Field Club? (honestly will probably end up in either 102 if I can find a position I like or in the cauldron, but pimp seats with all the amenities certainly has some appeal - especially since I live ~90 miles away and won't likely make every game - those seats would be easy to give to family and clients and know they wouldn't be wasted.)
I started 2010 in 102 and lasted one game before moving to the Members Stand. If you think you might want to stand at times other than when a goal is scored, then 102 may not be for you. As for extra tickets to dispose of, I do not think that one would have any problems with Members Stand tickets. I think 102 would be different. There were empty seats there for games. If you do get Field Club Season Tickets and everyone says "no", just ping me.
This is a big expense, to be sure, but when you look at the per-game cost vs. say, Chiefs tickets you're not even going to get into the club level at Arrowhead for that price per game, much less get the free parking that LSP has and all the other treats the Field Club gets you. Now, when you compare it to the cost of other LSP options it's a huge difference. But.. I dunno... I always look at those Crown Seats at the K and think "yeah, if I win the lottery someday" but for LSP you can have the equivalent for a price that, while high, is not completely unattainable.
Thanks. I may end up in the members stand just up at the back (or in the desert of the East annex if I'm desperate for a different angle.) I've only been in there a couple of times this year - is it even possible to go from the members stand to the rest of the stadium? Do they allow you to use that back door into the big stairs behind the East stand, or what?
The East annex gets full, but a great price for the view. The back of the MS is good too, since one gets a decent view of the entire field. Sitting lower makes seeing the action near the South goal difficult to see. Yes, one has access to the rest of the stadium via the stairs you described, but do not lose your ticket stub, since it is needed it for re-entry.
Yeah I didn't mean desert as in population, but enthusiasm... maybe I've not seen it when it's rocking, but usually I look over there and it's mostly "how did I end up here"/"why did I buy the cheapest ticket" families. This might be an un-fair characterization, just based on a few glances that direction.
The back of the MS is so far superior to anything offered in the East Annex -- it was ghastly sitting over there. Those are avoid at all costs seats for me now.
This is a sport where you really need to see almost the entire field at all times because things happening away from the ball can be just as important if not more important than what is happening with the ball. This is one of the reason why I do not sit in the Cauldron. I just need some elevation to be able to see the game the way I want to view it. I need to be about 15 rows back so I can see everything in perfect view. I have say in the East annex while eating a couple of times and it is an odd place as far as the fan vibe goes and I am not a fan of the view at all. It is probably one of the last places in the stadium I would choose to sit.
The East annex is God's waiting room. At the back of the Cauldron you get a pretty good view of the near half, but I've trained myself to switch to the stadium screen when the ball crosses the midfield stripe. That system actually works out pretty well for me.
I tried the the East Annex a couple of times and it isn't my thing either. I did not like the brunt of the sun. Although seats there are not reserved like East Stand sections 126-128, I think that someone that wants a quieter atmosphere and accepts the view gets a great value sitting there @ $260 for at ST, versus $500 for East Stand in comparable rows. Plus, one gets access to the MC for cheaper concessions and some A/C.
You're spot on. It will remain that way until it's it fills up with the type that usually sits in the north end.