More on that little boondoggle

Houston%20Dynamo.jpgCharles Kuffner has an interesting post about the John Lopez column noted earlier here that suggested that the $80 million or so in public financing for the proposed downtown soccer stadium is a political payback to the minority groups that have given certain civic leaders a pass for supporting the two more expensive downtown stadiums, Minute Maid Park ($286 million) and the Toyota Center ($250 million). Kuff goes on to observe about the location of the proposed stadium:

If it’s going to be in Houston and not Sugar Land or the Woodlands, then I think downtown is fine. It will be both more convenient and more attractive than Robertson Stadium, where I presume they’re at least drawing enough of a crowd to be viable. I just think they ought to pay for that downtown stadium themselves.

Norm Chad, as an aside to his funny column regarding the Dodgers’ stadium seats that come with free food, makes the following observation about the number of folks who are really watching MLS soccer:

Column intermission: “Beckham Fever” is contagious. This month, MLS games have attracted throngs of 7,426 in Kansas City, 7,802 in New York and 9,508 in New England. One fan in Houston even thought she sighted David Beckham, but it just turned out to be a good-looking grad student from Rice wearing a Subway sandwich board.

Come to think of it, has any civic leader bothered to ask how many folks are attending Dynamo games?

Super bidding

Roger%20Staubach.jpegDallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones is pulling out all of the stops today to convince the other NFL teams owners to award Dallas Super Bowl XLV in 2011 — Hall of Famer QB Roger Staubach will assist Jones in Dallas’ presentation to the team owners. Dallas’ main competition is Indianapolis, which at least is better for Dallas than competing against Miami or San Diego.
But the fact of the matter is that a Hall of Fame pitch man and new stadium isn’t enough anymore for being assured of a Super Bowl. Texans’ owner Bob McNair learned that the hard way in connection with making Houston’s presentation for the most recent Super Bowl. As a part of that presentation, McNair promised the other NFL owners a trip to a South Texas ranch for some quality quail hunting, which in these parts is a pretty powerful inducement.
Unfortunately, Dolphins’ owner Wayne Huizenga, who headed up Miami’s competing presentation, one-upped McNair. He offered each owner the use of a yacht while they were in Miami for Super Bowl week.
The owners voted for Miami by a landslide.
“Don’t worry, Bob,” Huizenga reportedly told McNair after the vote. “We’ll serve quail on the yachts.”
Update: North Texas lands its first Super Bowl.

How high will the bidding for EGL go?

EGL%20logo%20052107.pngJust when it looked as if an outside bidder had outbid Jim Crane’s management led-private equity group for control of Houston-based EGL, Inc., Crane’s group upped its bid to $46.25 a share (prior posts here) this past Friday. Then, yesterday, the Crane group’s main competitor for EGL — an affiliate of Apollo Management, LP — sweetened its bid to $47.50 per share. EGL’s board, which is being toasted daily by EGL shareholders, notified Crane’s group that it is available until Wednesday to discuss a revision to that group’s $46.25 per share offer.
For those of you keeping score, that newest bid price represents just under a 60% premium over the EGL share price from when Crane’s group announced its his original bid for the company earlier this year.
This all must be very confusing to Ben Stein.

Passport hell

passports.jpgQuestion: What do you get when changes are made in the processing of a governmental service that, even in the best of times, doesn’t really function all that smoothly?
Answer: According to this Lisa Falkenberg/Chronicle column, a real mess:

The scene at the George Thomas “Mickey” Leland Federal Building in downtown Houston resembled a soup kitchen. Outside, tired-looking people crowded benches and sprawled on grass. Inside, State Department guards kept teeming hordes at bay in the lobby so they wouldn’t add to the lines, snaking through hallways outside the fourth floor passport office.
“We started out in a line to get in a line to get to the elevator so that we could get in a line to get a number to wait in another line,” Prothro told me.
Applicants, from El Paso to Oklahoma City, waited like cattle in holding areas, clutching suitcases, gripping manila envelopes of itineraries, some frantically calling congressmen for help. Even those with appointments were shooed by guards to the rear of the line.
The nationwide passport backlog ó prompted by a federal law that took effect in January requiring U.S. citizens to obtain passports before flying to places such as Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean ó was exacerbated this week in Houston by two days of computer system failures, said Eric Botts, assistant regional director.
The crowd grew so large, it presented a fire hazard.
“I can certainly understand people are frustrated,” Botts said.
Botts said his staff has worked overtime, doing “everything humanly possible” for the past two years to meet surging passport demand. Each day, the office may get 500 e-mailed or faxed congressional inquiries about cases, and 800 from the national passport information center. He said his office has a backlog of 90,000 passports.
By midday, passport purgatory quickly deteriorated into passport hell. Around 3 p.m., a worker delivered grim news to an outside line:
“If you’re here trying to get a passport today, that’s not going to happen,” he said. “I don’t know why they sent all of you here. As you can see, they sent thousands of people here. There’s no way an agency this small can handle all this work.”
Inside the stuffy office, more than 250 people, including screaming toddlers, waited in line or in plastic chairs, staring at Fox News, sharing gripes in every language and glaring anxiously at passport agents behind thick glass windows. Many went several hours without eating or drinking, for fear of losing their spots in line. [. . .]
Occasional applause erupted when someone emerged with a passport. These lucky few adopted a distinctive swagger and a wide grin as they coveted their hard-earned treasure.

“Superstar historian”?

doug%20brinkley_large.jpgPlease excuse three straight posts bashing various Chronicle articles, but this Chronicle/Allan Turner reads like a press release from Rice University regarding the institution’s hiring of former Tulane University history professor, Douglas Brinkley:

The man who once took a busload of college students on a madcap tour of the nation’s historic and natural wonders, including the Grand Canyon and author Ken Kesey’s farm, may be just what Rice University’s austere public policy think tank needs to make itself a household name.
That, at least, was the hope on Thursday as university officials explored the possible benefits of their latest faculty hire ó New Orleans superstar historian Douglas Brinkley ó might bring to Rice and its Baker Institute of Public Policy.
A protege of best-selling historian Stephen Ambrose and a regular commentator for CBS News, Brinkley is renowned for his ability to make complex ideas understandable. He is a prolific author, and his 700-plus page tome chronicling Hurricane Katrina’s devastation of New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast will receive the prestigious Robert F. Kennedy Book Award later this month.
Brinkley, said Baker founding director Edward Djerejian, could be “a bridge between the world of ideas and action,” helping the institute spread its policy recommendations to the general public.
“He’s going to bring us a huge amount of visibility,” added Rice humanities dean Gary Wihl.

“Superstar historian”? That characterization of Brinkley is certainly not shared by all in the academic community, as noted in this earlier post regarding this William McCrary review of Brinkley’s Hurricane Katrina book:

Let me confess that I haven’t read all of the writings of Douglas Brinkley. I doubt that anyone — perhaps not even Mr. Brinkley himself — has ever done that. He is a veritable … deluge of literary productivity, with books to his credit on a dizzying array of subjects, ranging from Beat poetry to Jimmy Carter, and from Henry Ford to, most recently, the failed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. Indeed, the range of his literary productions is so wide as to seem indiscriminate. But his bestknown writings seem to have three things in common.
First and foremost is their relentless mediocrity. I cannot think of a historian or public intellectual who has managed to make himself so prominent in American public life without having put forward a single memorable idea, a single original analysis, or a single lapidary phrase — let alone without publishing a book that has had any discernable impact. Mr. Brinkley is, to use Daniel Boorstin’s famous words, a historian famous for being well-known.

For what it’s worth, I have read both Brinkley’s book on Hurricane Katrina and Jed Horne’s Breach of Faith: Hurricane Katrina and the Near Death of a Great Ameican City (Random House 2006). Horne’s book is a good read and far superior to Brinkley’s book, which is borderline unreadable.
Moreover, this skeptical view of Brinkley’s academic talent is not new. Back in 1999, Slate’s David Platz penned this well-know article about Brinkley taking advantage of his friendship with John F. Kennedy, Jr. to publicize himself after Kennedy’s death in a plane crash:

According to the Washington Post, Brinkley cut a $10,000 deal with NBC for a week of exclusive Kennedy commentary, but then agreed to provide it pro bono. Editors at George [Kennedy’s magazine] are reportedly so annoyed about Brinkley’s death punditry that they have dropped him from the masthead.
Even amid this week’s staggering hyperbole, Brinkley’s emotional profligacy has distinguished him. He is, as he rarely fails to remind his audience, 38 years old like Kennedy, a vegetarian like Kennedy, and a Sagittarius like Kennedy. That identification with Kennedy accounts in part for Brinkley’s tenuous proposition: that Kennedy’s death is the signal event of his generation, the moment Gen X lost its innocence. In the opening paragraph of his New York Times op-ed, Brinkley opined: “It’s as if suddenly, an entire generation’s optimism is deflated, and all that is left is the limp reality of growing old.” Kennedy’s death may have affected his friend Brinkley this way. I am not sure anyone else outside Kennedy’s circle was so moved.[ . . .]
Brinkley’s sunniness and ardor are appealing, but his public history has its shortcomings. His idols, Ambrose and Schlesinger, have won the admiration of the academy and the public. Brinkley has won the public but has not wowed the academy. Some of his colleagues’ dismay is simply jealousy of his entrepreneurship, but some is more substantive. His books read like good journalism–and that’s no insult–but they are not great history. “He has made no analytical contribution at all,” says one Ivy League historian who professes to like Brinkley.

I am glad that the Chronicle considers Rice’s hiring of a history professor is newsworthy. However, for the Chron article not even to mention the well-known doubts about the academic merit of Brinkley’s work is the type of cheerleading usually reserved for the Chronicle sportspage.

Rationalizing the latest boondoggle

Houston%20Dynamo%20stadium.gifHoustonians are currently enduring the rationalizations of a couple of boondoggles, a big one and a relatively small one. The Chronicle is always a good source for these rationalizations, such as this romantic interlude from Chron soccer writer Glenn Davis regarding the proposed downtown soccer stadium:

[A] downtown stadium will be an unparalleled vehicle for promoting soccer. Stadiums out in the hinterlands in MLS are still trying to prove them-selves as a magnet for fans.
Fans migrating to stadiums located in the inner city can become a part of a ritual.
When I was growing up in New Jersey, my father used to take me to sporting events at Madison Square Garden in the heart of New York. The ritual began as we left the house.
Take the train from the suburbs to Hoboken, N.J., then jump on the Path train (subway) under the Hudson River. As we exited the Path and scrambled up the steps to the street, a whole new world opened up.
The streets of Manhattan were alive with vendors, scalpers hawking tickets, and fans of the New York Rangers or Knicks. The air crackled with competition and excitement.
For a kid from the suburbs, this was like going into a new world. To this day, these impressions are indelible in my mind. Whether going to Madison Square Garden or to Giants Stadium to watch PelÈ and the New York Cosmos, I always felt that sense of anticipation.
[Dynamo CEO Oliver] Luck has told me his ritual with his father was taking public transportation to go to Cleveland Indians games.
Stadiums in the U.S. have in many cases become soulless, with their flight to the suburbs and attempts to woo fans more for the buildings and their amenities than why they were built in the first place.
Stadiums should be a meeting place for like individuals from all ethnic and cultural backgrounds who come together with the common bond of a sport.

I almost broke into a solo of Kumbaya over that one. At least Chronicle sportswriter John Lopez is more realistic, if not more persuasive, of the real basis for public financing of another downtown stadium:

The predominantly white fan base that follows the Astros got theirs. The largely white and black fan base of the Rockets got theirs, too.
What about Dynamo fans? What about the fan base that has been estimated at roughly 45 percent Hispanic, 45 percent white and 10 percent Asian? [. . .]
On paper, yes. It has to make sense. But in the eyes of many, it’s also about getting the same things the Astros, Rockets and Texans fans got. Acknowledgment.

Or, as Kevin Whited muses: “So, we need a new soccer stadium downtown so that Houston can be more like Manhattan, and so that fans of what is a minor-league sport in the United States won’t cry racism?”
Meanwhile, Dennis Coates, a professor of the University of Maryland Baltimore County, provides the following persuasive analysis of the lack of any economic merit to a similar initiative to build a downtown arena in Baltimore:

Studies like that done by KPMG about a new arena for Baltimore have been thoroughly discredited by independent observers. They are much like the predictions of psychics. While a psychic’s predictions of the future are rarely assessed for their accuracy, the predictions of stadium benefits have been thoroughly scrutinized by a wide array of independent researchers. There is almost no support for any of the predictions made by the stadium and arena benefit psychics when those predictions are compared to data on what actually happened. The bottom line is the feasibility studies are more a PR process than a fact finding one. I urge you to not buy into the PR as if it is objective science.

Thus, the local debate regarding another downtown stadium is off to an inauspicious start. If proponents of the stadium deal admit in campaigning for the deal that the economic benefits of the deal are questionable, but that the intangible benefits to the community override the financial risk of the deal, then most reasoned opponents of such deals would at least be satisfied with the debate of the issues. They might not be persuaded to support the deal on that basis, but at least they would have the comfort that the public’s assessment of the deal would be based upon an honest presentation of the issues. As it stands now, the presentation of the economic issues in most stadium campaigns is muddled by highly questionable assertions of direct economic benefits derived from such deals. Here’s hoping that the Chronicle will at least promote truth in advertising in regard to the debate over the downtown soccer stadium deal.

Playing well?

ortiz_book.jpgAs noted here last year, the Chronicle’s beat writer for the Stros, Jose de Jesus Ortiz, regularly reveals that he doesn’t really understand the game even after covering it for 10 years and writing a book on the subject. Here is Ortiz’s latest example of analytical confusion, again involving former Stros centerfielder, Willy Taveras:

Former Astros center fielder Willy Taveras stole his 10th base of the year in the Colorado Rockies 40th game. The 10 stolen bases would have tied for the team lead last year.
After a slow start, Taveras is playing well for the Rockies. And although he’s among the league leaders in being thrown out, he has added a running game that Colorado didn’t have last year when Matt Holliday, Jamey Carroll and Cory Sullivan all tied for the team lead.
Taveras, who actually missed the second week of May with groin issues, didn’t need nearly as much time to reach 10.

Playing well? Through a quarter of the season, Taveras has generated 3 fewer runs for the Rockies than a merely average National League player would have created using the same number of outs as Taveras, which is worse than Chris Burke (-1 RCAA) gave the Stros during his brief stint in centerfield earlier this season. Taveras has improved his on-base percentage to a respectable .373, but he undermines that with a horrific slugging percentage of .339 (the NL league average is .432), which is the result of having only 4 doubles, no triples and no home runs among his 33 hits. He has whiffed 22 times while drawing only 11 walks in 130 plate appearances, and his 10 stolen bases is more than offset by the fact that he has been thrown out 7 times.
The bottom line is that Taveras is a well below-average Major League hitter. Inasmuch as Ortiz does not understand that, his analysis of the Stros should be taken with a very large grain of sale.

The real price gougers

price%20gouging250.jpgGeorge Will brilliantly explains the folly of governmental initiatives to control the price of gasoline and, in so doing, exposes the true price gougers:

[House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi announced herself “particularly concerned” that the highest price of gasoline recently was in her San Francisco district — $3.49. So she endorses HR 1252 to protect consumers from “price gouging,” defined, not altogether helpfully, by a blizzard of adjectives and adverbs. Gouging occurs when gasoline prices are “unconscionably” excessive, or sellers raise prices “unreasonably” by taking “unfair” advantage of “unusual” market conditions, or when the price charged represents a “gross” disparity from the price of crude oil, or when the amount charged “grossly” exceeds the price at which gasoline is obtainable in the same area. The bill does not explain how a gouger can gouge when his product is obtainable more cheaply nearby. Actually, Pelosi’s constituents are being gouged by people like Pelosi — by government. While oil companies make about 13 cents on a gallon of gasoline, the federal government makes 18.4 cents (the federal tax) and California’s various governments make 40.2 cents (the nation’s third-highest gasoline tax). Pelosi’s San Francisco collects a local sales tax of 8.5 percent — higher than the state’s average for local sales taxes.

To understand how gasoline prices are set, read this.

Stros 2007 Season Review, Part Two

Hunter%20Pence.jpgAs the Stros reach the quarter pole of the 2007 season, the club’s prospects on the surface seem to be somewhat improved over the dreary first eighth of the season (prior season reviews here). The Stros (20-21) stabilized a bit during the second eighth of the season with a 11-9 record marked by overall improved hitting and pitching, and the spark provided by the arrival of rookie centerfielder, Hunter Pence (9 RCAA/.392 OBA/.652 SLG/1.044 OPS). Despite those positive signs, however, there is nothing that has occurred in regard to the direction of the club over the past 20 games that indicates that this Stros team has much of a chance at competing seriously for a playoff spot.
Through a quarter of the season, the Stros have scored 2 more runs than an average National League team would have scored using the same number of outs as the Stros have generated this season to date (“RCAA,” explained here). That ranks 7th out of the 16 National League teams and trails National League Central rivals the Brewers (26-16 record/29 RCAA, 4th in NL) and the Cubs (19-21/7 RCAA/6th). The Stros had a -13 RCAA during the first 21 games of the season, which ranked 10th among National League teams at the time.
The Stros’ pitching has improved modestly, too. The Stros pitching staff has saved 3 more runs over what an average National League pitching staff would have saved over the same number of innings (“RSAA,” explained here), which ranks 9th in the National League and behind NL rivals the Brewers (13 RSAA/5th in NL) and the Cubs (9 RSAA/6th). The Stros pitching staff had saved 7 fewer runs than an average NL staff during the first 21 games of the season, which ranked 13th among the NL clubs at the time.
Despite this mild improvement, I’m still not bullish on the Stros’ prospects this season. The Brewers are a clearly superior club through the first quarter of the season and the loser of the National League East — either the Mets (27-14) or the Braves (25-16) — appear to be the likely NL Wild Card team. So, the Stros are probably going to have to win the NL Central in order to achieve a playoff spot and I do not see Stros management making the hard decisions necessary for the Stros to overtake the Brewers and probably the Cubs.
The season statistics for the Stros to date are below, courtesy of Lee Sinins‘ sabermetric Complete Baseball Encyclopedia. The abbreviations for the hitting stats are defined here and the same for the pitching stats are here. The Stros active roster is here with links to each individual player’s statistics:

Continue reading

The Bill Fuhs of the Conrad Black trial

In this post from last week, I noted the similarities between the federal government’s vacuous case against Conrad Black and the notorious prosecution of the four former Merrill Lynch executives in the Enron-related case known as the Nigerian Barge case.

Now, according to this Mark Steyn blog post on the trial, yet another similarity has arisen between the two cases.

Although the entire Nigerian Barge prosecution was an abomination, the case against former Merrill mid-level executive William Fuhs was particularly egregious.

Of the four Merrill Lynch defendants in that case, only Mr. Fuhs was not a managing director of the company. He did not participate in the one telephone conference with former Enron CFO Andrew Fastow in which Mr. Fastow allegedly induced Merrill Lynch executives to buy an interest in the barges by assuring them that Enron would broker a deal for Merrill’s interest for a tidy profit within six months. Indeed, Mr. Fuhs’ only connection with the deal was the ministerial processing of the transaction after Merrill had agreed to buy the interest in the barges from Enron.

During the Enron Task Force’s presentation of its case at trial, none of the government’s fact witnesses even knew Fuhs. Fuhs never conferred with anyone at Arthur Andersen (Enron’s auditors) regarding the transaction and the deal was the only Enron transaction that Mr. Fuhs ever worked on. The prosecution presented no witnesses or evidence that Mr. Fuhs — who is not an accountant — had any idea that Enron’s booking of a $12 million gain on the Nigerian Barge transaction was arguably improper, much less that he or Enron intended to do mislead anyone with regard to the accounting of the transaction. As one defense attorney involved in the case put it to me, “the Enron Task Force effectively prosecuted Fuhs for making copies.”

Unfortunately, a weak case in a media and government-stoked anti-business climate didn’t make any difference. Fuhs — a young man in his early 30’s with a wife and two young children — was convicted on multiple counts and sentenced to 37 months in prison (the prosecution an over-the-top request for a 10+ year sentence).

After Fuhs served about a year of that sentence, a clearly appalled Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals took the highly unusual step of ordering Fuhs released from prison shortly after oral argument on his appeal and then threw out the entire conviction against him a few weeks later. As Fuhs and his young family picked up the pieces of his career and their lives, the Task Force prosecutor who promoted this atrocity went on to a lucrative career in private practice.

According to Steyn, the government is deploying the same tactics that it used on Fuhs against a fringe player in the transactions that are being criminalized in the Black trial:

At least two of the four defendants in this courtroom — Peter Atkinson and Mark Kipnis — are only here because they refused to be steamrollered into a plea bargain by the US Attorney’s heavies. But the hollowness of the case against Kipnis, the Hollinger in-house counsel in Chicago and the most junior defendant, beggars belief.

The government’s proposition is that the bonuses Kipnis received during his time with Hollinger was a pay-off for facilitating the $60 million scam. “He got $150,000 in bonus money to help do their crime,” said Jeffrey Cramer during his opening address. That seems like a very piffling share of the swag, but, as Cramer put it, “His price was just a little bit lower. Thatís all. Thatís the only difference.”

Yesterday, David Radler testified that he’d told the government that Kipnis’ bonuses had nothing to do with the non-competes and were related to money he’d saved the company on outside legal fees by his work on CanWest and the other deals.

In other words, Cramer and his fellow prosecutors knew all along that they had no case against this guy, but they chose to pursue it anyway. He will most likely survive, but they’ve destroyed his reputation and his legal career, and he now runs a branch of a commercial-sign store. Kipnis’ signature is on a lot of documents for the same reason my assistant’s is: she’s around when I’m out of town. Radler was mostly in Vancouver, and Kipnis was the guy who signed for him in Chicago.

Patrick Fitzgerald’s team knew this. For them to punish Kipnis for declining to submit to their retrospective criminalization of events is the act of a third-rate bully.

Indeed. There has been a lot of third-rate bullying during this era of repugnant criminalization of business interests.