Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
GoUSC
ParticipantHere’s the link to the numbers…
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/current/default.htm
ParticipantPerryChase…
It doesn’t work like that when it comes to EIR’s. $10 to $20 million? It could end up costing Gaylord much more than that in time, legal fees, consultant fees etc. I do this stuff for a living and the risks are not easy to quantify.
ParticipantPerryChase…
It doesn’t work like that when it comes to EIR’s. $10 to $20 million? It could end up costing Gaylord much more than that in time, legal fees, consultant fees etc. I do this stuff for a living and the risks are not easy to quantify.
ParticipantI think it has to do with the fact that 60″ plasma were (and some still are) obscenely expensive. Aka $10k. The point was, you walk down the street at Escala and see for-sale signs everywhere, and all the homes have plasma screens that you know were bought with Home Equity Loans.
ParticipantI think it has to do with the fact that 60″ plasma were (and some still are) obscenely expensive. Aka $10k. The point was, you walk down the street at Escala and see for-sale signs everywhere, and all the homes have plasma screens that you know were bought with Home Equity Loans.
ParticipantPerryChase,
The Union told Gaylord that they either sign an agreement obligating Gaylord to ONLY use Unionized Labor or if they didn’t the Union would sue Gaylord during the EIR process and do anything in their power to stop the project. Gaylord had already agreed to pay Union Labor wages but were refusing to be required to limit their bidding pool to only 20% of the contractor labor force in San Diego.
Also I am sure another developer will be found but you are forgetting the 2+ years of work Gaylord has invested in this project and worked with the City. A whole new agreement will have to be drafted, negotiated, etc. This will take years.
And those of you who are quoting it has to do with the current economic situation, this project would not be completed for YEARS. Whatever economic situation we see today will be at least partially corrected by then. Gaylord has a history of tacking big complex projects and has completely may successful ones. They just weren’t willing to fall prey to the Unions and called the Union bluff.
ParticipantPerryChase,
The Union told Gaylord that they either sign an agreement obligating Gaylord to ONLY use Unionized Labor or if they didn’t the Union would sue Gaylord during the EIR process and do anything in their power to stop the project. Gaylord had already agreed to pay Union Labor wages but were refusing to be required to limit their bidding pool to only 20% of the contractor labor force in San Diego.
Also I am sure another developer will be found but you are forgetting the 2+ years of work Gaylord has invested in this project and worked with the City. A whole new agreement will have to be drafted, negotiated, etc. This will take years.
And those of you who are quoting it has to do with the current economic situation, this project would not be completed for YEARS. Whatever economic situation we see today will be at least partially corrected by then. Gaylord has a history of tacking big complex projects and has completely may successful ones. They just weren’t willing to fall prey to the Unions and called the Union bluff.
ParticipantCan we please keep this thread on focus. Thanks.
ParticipantCan we please keep this thread on focus. Thanks.
ParticipantEverything I have read stated pretty clearly the Union wanted Gaylord to only hire Union Members.
ParticipantEverything I have read stated pretty clearly the Union wanted Gaylord to only hire Union Members.
ParticipantThe problem is that the Union only represents 20% of the construction work-force in San Diego. If Gaylord would have agreed they would have cut out 80% of the workers in town. That would have created a virtual monopoly on the few unionized companies and resulted in significantly higher costs. Gaylord was fully prepared to PAY union wages and agreed to it. They just didn’t want to be limited to a small group of sub-contractors. I applaud them for telling the Unions to go to hell.
ParticipantThe problem is that the Union only represents 20% of the construction work-force in San Diego. If Gaylord would have agreed they would have cut out 80% of the workers in town. That would have created a virtual monopoly on the few unionized companies and resulted in significantly higher costs. Gaylord was fully prepared to PAY union wages and agreed to it. They just didn’t want to be limited to a small group of sub-contractors. I applaud them for telling the Unions to go to hell.
ParticipantI disagree. I am in the development business and see this first hand. The Unions have gotten wise to the EIR process and are using the threat of lawsuits on developers to get their way. Gaylord was under no obligation to go forward with the project and could have just as easily said they didn’t want to go forward because of economic conditions.
-
AuthorPosts