Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: Feature

Re: “The Vanishing Underground: Oakland's Housing Crisis Is Also Displacing its Arts and Music Counterculture

COME TO BROOKLYN NY. WHOLE SECTIONS ARE BEING CHANGED. THE PEOPLE WHO HAS FOR YEARS BUILT RELATIONSHIPS A COMMUNITY DISAPPEARING. DE BLASIO BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING...FOR WHO..NOT THE LOWER INCOME. NOT THE DISHWASHER WAITER CASHIER PORTERS. IT TAKES TWO INCOMES TOO MAKE ONE.IF YOU HAVE A CHILD.. THAT'S NOT EVEN ENOUGH...READ ABT THE YOUNG MAN (NYT)THAT LIVES IN A CRAWL SPACE OVER A THEATRICAL BUILDING IN BROOKLYN.

Posted by Oceanview on 09/21/2016 at 7:32 AM

Re: “The Vanishing Underground: Oakland's Housing Crisis Is Also Displacing its Arts and Music Counterculture

Ddddaaaamn. Sadly this is a trend happening in major cities all across the nation. I wonder what's gonna happen next.

Posted by Guerrilla Davis on 09/21/2016 at 3:08 AM

Re: “Craft Beer Keeps Growing, And Corporate Beer Keeps Swallowing Up Independent Breweries

is there any way to keep track of "craft" beers that are owned by the beeropoly?

Posted by marty bauer on 09/19/2016 at 7:47 AM

Re: “Just Vegas, Baby?: What Are the Odds that the Oakland Raiders Move to Sin City?

Las Vegas can do whatever they want to throw money at Davis. At the end of the day, that is not the real issue. No matter what Vegas casino crooks like Sheldon Adelson think, the ultimate question is as follows. Do the modern, corporate, billionaire NFL owners want a franchise partner in the gambling business, in a city known for morally questionable activities (gambling, prostitution), where pretty much anything goes. These owners are obsessed with the value of their NFL shield and my bet is that allowing Davis to move here is a much larger hurdle than naive and desperate Davis thinks it is. My bet is that the NFL owners do not want their young, rich players rolling into Vegas every weekend wandering the strip and various other venues in their free time. Nothing but bad can come from this situation. NFL security will constantly be under pressure to control an unmanageable situation. In addition, the Raider players will constantly be tempted by savory characters and situations that could lead to constant rumors about point shaving and extortion. That is not the front page story that makes the NFL brand stronger moving forward. At the same time, Oakland is in the hottest economic market in the country and the 49ers are trending down. The NFL owners will not be in favor of losing a storied NFL franchise (Oakland Raiders) in a major market in the country. Mark Davis does not represent current NFL ownership. They are corporate, fiscally sophisticated and insanely wealthy. Davis is a picture of the past. He is rough around the edges, unsophisticated, simple and broke. The NFL press conference last year, where the owners awarded the Rams first position in LA, was a great snapshot. The Rams ownership appeared to be corporate and well healed, adorned in expensive designer suits. Davis looked like he crawled out of a trailer and had on a pin stripe suit that he must have purchased from Eastmont Mall in 1975. Al Davis did not raise Mark in the NFL executive culture as Jerry Jones is doing with his sons in Dallas. Mark is an outsider with few friends and has no juice with the majority of the NFL executives. My bet is that like Major League baseball told Lew Wolff, they will vote no on a Raider request to move to Vegas for the good of shield. They will also tell Davis once again to stay in Oakland and make it happen.

Posted by Gary Patton on 09/17/2016 at 7:13 AM

Re: “Craft Beer Keeps Growing, And Corporate Beer Keeps Swallowing Up Independent Breweries

=v= When Whole Foods opened up in Berkeley so many years ago, they were selling George Killian's Irish Red, which was a microbrewery that had at that point been owned by Coors for some time, and was part of the Coors boycott. Whole Foods attempted to placate the boycotters by pretending that their customers had a preference for the microbrewery before it was Coors.

Branding is garbage, you have to keep track of who owns whom.

(In case it's not clear, Whole Foods had no "customers" in Berkeley before the buyout, nor did George Killian.)

Posted by Jym Dyer on 09/15/2016 at 10:35 AM

Re: “Craft Beer Keeps Growing, And Corporate Beer Keeps Swallowing Up Independent Breweries

"...And the owners of the craft breweries cry... All the way to the bank. Your point?"

It's about monopoly capitalism. If you can't get your head around it, it might suggest something about the size of your head.

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 09/14/2016 at 7:10 PM

Re: “Craft Beer Keeps Growing, And Corporate Beer Keeps Swallowing Up Independent Breweries

...And the owners of the craft breweries cry... All the way to the bank. Your point?

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 09/14/2016 at 5:28 PM

Re: “Craft Beer Keeps Growing, And Corporate Beer Keeps Swallowing Up Independent Breweries

Isn't this the same story repeated again and again in U.S. corporate history? The big fish eat the small fish. Ho hum.

As I recall AB bought its first microbrewery in Seattle (Redhook) about 25 years ago.

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 09/14/2016 at 2:23 PM

Re: “Just Vegas, Baby?: What Are the Odds that the Oakland Raiders Move to Sin City?

"Raiders and the NFL would cover $500 million of the stadium's $1.9 billion price tag, with private investors coming up with $650 million and the public forking over the rest. "

Incorrect.

Raiders give $500M, Nevada contribution specifically *limited* to $750m, *Sands/Majestic* covers all the rest, including overruns.

Tax Increment Financing demands from Sands/Majestic (to recoup investments) were eliminated last week, with the quid-pro-quo being Sheldon Adelson agreeing to buy ±5% of the Raiders for $100M (if plan is approved by Nevada & NFL).

Posted by jq7925 on 09/13/2016 at 11:10 AM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

I want the Oakland Raiders to win and keep selling tickets as this minimizes the risk to Oakland and Alameda county taxpayers footing the bill from the last “deal” made by the Raiders.
The Raiders are an Athletic Entertainment industry, I personally have no interest in their entertainment and even less so in supporting them financially to stay in Oakland.

So let’s just suppose that some (idiot) decides to build a $1.5 billion stadium in Oakland for the Raiders. As I see it for football it will be used for 8 days each year (nine if they make playoffs). How much revenue can 8 football days bring into this prosperous city and county? We have a dearth of hotels and you can be sure all the TV and NFL executives will fill out the delux SF hotels. Yes there are local vendors who can “clean up” during a game but with overpriced crappy food and parking rates that would cause a banker to blush, there are better ways to use the existing complexes.

I say No to any public funding of Raider maintenance but accommodation and encouragement to stay are fine. I suggest the mangers of the complex look to music and other events to fill the existing stadium and coliseum with customers on a regular basis. Make Oakland a real venue destination, not a sports destination.

The Raider support base is not particularly in Oakland, but in all the surrounding communities. The Raider Entertainment Industry has shown previously that is has no local loyalty and clearly they are planning to move again. Fact is you can see the games far better on your HD home screens now than you can at a game!

The NFL is a very well run business organization. They know that they have a huge audience and they will do what it takes to maintain and grow that audience. Loyalty to fans, non-existent here, this only occurs in Green Bay WI where their team is a publically owned non-profit franchise.

Posted by John Maguire on 09/12/2016 at 10:50 AM

Re: “Yelp and the Business of Extortion 2.0

It was great to stumble upon this post. Thanks for the info, you made it easy to understand. I am sure at least once in your life you had to fill out a form. I use a simple service http://goo.gl/JiVVks for forms filling. It definitely makes my life easier!

Posted by Cassy Jeong on 09/10/2016 at 9:40 PM

Re: “Badge of Dishonor: Top Oakland Police Department Officials Looked Away as East Bay Cops Sexually Exploited and Trafficked a Teenager

Disagree with Eric. Legalizing prostitution, among other benefits, would make it far easier to enforce anti-trafficking laws. Overnight, a large segment of the industry would police itself and cooperate with authorities. They have the contacts and exposure to know about trafficking, and an legitimate incentive to suppress it.

This is true for a large number of the illegal activities that now flourish in the shadows.

Posted by Robert T on 09/10/2016 at 10:07 AM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

Good riddance. We're supposed to go tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in debt so an entitled douchbag can make millions by overcharging us to get into his new stadium? Eight dates a year? Puh-lease. It'd be cheaper to buy every Raider fan in Oakland an NFL Sunday Ticket football package on cable, and let us watch the games from Las Vegas.

Posted by Ken Olofia on 09/09/2016 at 5:47 PM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

I honestly want to love the development idea proposed here but it's really nothing more than an absurd fantasy. And just as absurd is the idea of Mark Davis allowing anyone to buy a share of the team and have any influence on the ownership or direction of HIS franchise. But thanks for dreaming anyway.

Posted by Richard Bucher on 09/08/2016 at 5:30 PM

Re: “Just Vegas, Baby?: What Are the Odds that the Oakland Raiders Move to Sin City?

What all the cities need to do is to municipalize their teams to city or fan ownership and tie the team to the city physically. Let any city that can field a team and compete. The NFL is a subsidized corporate monopoly that is an anathema to democracy and manipulates the game and the fans as if we were nothing but serfs to be profiteered. Reform the game to minimize violence and physical maiming. Green Bay is a perfect example and the fact that municipalization has been banned by the NFL, except done deal Green Bay, speaks volumes.

Posted by Sandy Sanders on 09/08/2016 at 11:32 AM

Re: “Just Vegas, Baby?: What Are the Odds that the Oakland Raiders Move to Sin City?

It's not Oaklands/Alameda County's fault that Davis isn't rich enough to own a football team...sell it to a tech billionaire ownership group and they can easily build a new stadium. Look at what Stanford did with just a bunch of rich alumni.

Posted by Mike Yarmouth on 09/07/2016 at 5:51 PM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

Hey Chris, obviously you obviously are not a sports fan or native Oaklander. Beyond that, have you been paying attention at all, or just sipping your mocha lattes dreaming of some futuristic urban utopia. ? In the real world, in this market, building a mixed use transit village at the Coliseum site is NOT doable. The City just spent several million dollars and 3 years of study and analysis to conclude that it cannot be financed by private dollars. That is why they are back to building a sports venue on the site. Moreover, the reason the Redevelopment Agency assembled the parcels around the site for the last 20 years was to build the stadium (s). You need to take a drive around East Oakland and tell me where you see any major investment of capital that is not subsidized by the government. The highest and best use of the site is exactly what it has been used for since 1965. I am not in favor of public money for a new stadium, but transit is exactly why it should be built here.

Posted by Gary Patton on 09/07/2016 at 2:22 PM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

Whether they go or stay, Oakland should not pay one cent of taxpayer money to build them a facility. Every stadium built with public money in the U.S. in the last 70 years has ended up costing taxpayers more than they received, and only enriched developers and sports financiers. If it's a viable proposition, they can do it with private money. Otherwise, forget it!

Posted by Rashid Patch on 09/07/2016 at 1:59 PM

Re: “Should Oakland Even Bother Trying to Keep the Raiders?

Nick, I hear your nostalgia. You love the Raiders the way you might love corn syrup. You enjoyed Coca Cola and Red Vines so much when you were a kid, and now you want those things to not be bad for you. But the Raiders are still bad for Oakland:

A new Raiders home, on a transit corridor.
- If you're saying it's an opportunity to get people on transit, then a stadium provides the least benefit, since the stadium is unused for most of the year. Building 100% housing and retail on the site would get people on transit every day.

An NFL franchise with African-American ownership.
- This has soft value only. You can point and say, look at social progress. But this gesture does not put money into the pockets of Oakland's African-American residents. The plan is to continue taking money out of the pockets of Oakland's residents through taxation. If Lott's goal is to encourage this, then shame on him.

An affordable, mixed-use, live-work hub in the heart of East Oakland.
- You can build more of what you're describing if you leave out the stadium. Private investors would back the whole thing. Any money that the city might put into affordable housing would directly benefit residents. Any money that the city might put into a stadium goes to Mark Davis.

A project backed by private dollars, not city or county coffers.
- The Raiders will only deal if there is a city/county subsidy.

Oh, and maybe even a Raiders Super Bowl.
- Is there an un-subsidized team in the NFL that has won a Super Bowl?

So let's build the urban village of the future on the Coliseum site, with transit, retail and affordable housing for a diverse population. This is not only doable, it's far easier than building a new stadium. If you disagree, take a drive around the Coliseum most any day of the year and ask yourself whether this doldrum makes a community more liveable or less liveable. And ask yourself whether it would be worth city/county money to build it again next year.

Posted by Christopher Fallis on 09/07/2016 at 1:18 PM

Re: “Just Vegas, Baby?: What Are the Odds that the Oakland Raiders Move to Sin City?

let the bums move to vegas, tired of the
public subsidizing millionares, let them
go, good riddance, see how well they do
down there, different economics

Posted by bandit on 09/07/2016 at 12:54 PM

Most Popular Stories


© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation