Interesting article on fellow renters at the meadows, bets part is that it's a boston paper reporting <a href="http://www.boston.com/dailynews/148/region/Jets_sue_NJ_sports_agency_say_:.shtml">Jet's Sue!</a>
Here's the link to the Newsday story: http://www.newsday.com/sports/footb...y29,0,186355.story?coll=ny-football-headlines The Jets pay 15% in ticket revenues as rent, and they're complaining that it's too high. Assuming it costs $100,000 for the Metros to rent the stadium, that's over 20% of their ticket revenue.
The Jets are a bunch of crybabies who haven't won a championship in 35 years - Boston.com Fixed your post.
The Giants seem to have been ripped off too, in that they were promised NJSEA would hand over control of the stadium to them (by DiFrancesca? sorry, I don't follow Garden State politics) for the grand total of $1. Now, of course, NJSEA is reneging on that offer, forcing Big Blue to go back to the table. This makes me wonder what kind of landlords the Giants would be. Would this be an improvement?
Let me qualify my above statement: I don't feel as if the Jets are being ripped off. If they want to extend their lease, then they should have their fee lowered the 5% they want. For the Jets to benefit financially because the Giants extend the lease, (while the Jets plan to jump ship to their fantasy westside stadium) isn't only absurd, it is unfair.