US says no to Olympics in 2020

The news broke about a week ago that the US Olympic Committee (USOC) was not going to pursue the 2020 Summer Olympics. That can be good news from a financial standpoint; but from a PR standpoint, it's not great.

First, the United States has not done well lately in bidding for the Summer Olympics. New York City tried for the 2012 games; and the city was considered the favorite to win the bid. London ended up winning the bid and the New York loss was considered an embarrassment to the USOC.

A worse blow was dealt in 2009 when Chicago was vying for the 2016 Games. Chicago didn't even last the first round of bidding. There are several rounds of bidding within the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to determine a host. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil won the 2016 Games. It will be the first time an Olympics will be held in South America.

On one hand, it could be a blessing in disguise. The Summer Olympics are such a large production that it takes the host city years to prepare (which is why the 2016 Olympics were selected in 2009). And, it costs a lot of money. Arenas, stadiums and other venues need to be built. Infrastructure needs to be repaired or built.

My parents told me once how they talked to a friend who visited Sydney, Australia a while back. Sydney hosted the 2000 Summer Games. This friend proceeded to tell them about the taxes in the city of Sydney. Restaurants had taxes of 18%. Hotels had similar taxes. Everything in the city was exorbitantly taxed. Outside the city, prices were much lower. What was the deal in Sydney? This friend found out that Sydney was trying to recoup financial losses from the 2000 Olympics.

But, this is the United States, right? We can handle it. The US hosted the Summer Olympics twice in a sixteen-year span. Los Angeles hosted in 1984; and Atlanta in 1996. The Winter Olympics last made an appearance in 2002 in Salt Lake City.

Is it a PR thing? Did Chicago or New York City not prove themselves as viable hosts of the Olympics? I mean, London has hosted the Summer Games twice: 1908 and 1948. 2012 will be their third time. New York City was said to have a tremendous bid for the Games; and really, lost in embarrassing fashion.

Public relations could be part of the reason. Atlanta certainly had its share of problems in 1996; mainly the bombing in the Olympic Park about a week into the Olympics.

Money seems to be the biggest reason. According to TIME magazine (article linked to post title), the USOC and the IOC are grappling over money; and how much the USOC should be able to collect from television revenue and corporate sponsors. The USOC has a certain percentage in mind and the IOC thinks it's a bit too much.

So, the USOC decided to withdraw any bids for the 2020 Games. New York and Dallas had thrown their hats into the ring for 2020, as well as Las Vegas. But, with the latest move by the USOC, the US will be waiting a long time to host the Summer Olympics on its soil. If the US wins the 2024 bid, it will have been a 28-year wait for the Summer Games to return.

That's not too bad. The US waited 52 years between the 1932 and the 1984 Los Angeles Summer Games. And, of course, nestled in there were the 1980 Winter Games in Lake Placid, NY.

Wells Fargo, debit cards and you

We've paid $3 for a gallon of gas. We pay almost the same amount for a gallon of milk. Now, you could be paying $3 to use your debit card.

A big story that has gotten some attention recently is Wells Fargo charging customers $3 a month to use their debit card. Yes, $3 to use your own money. Don't get too worried yet, Wells Fargo is trying it out in four states (click the title for the story); and it seems that it will only be for new customers.

Hold on, put yourself in the shoes of the PR professional assigned to that one. I can see it now: "Sign up with Wells Fargo, and pay only $3/mo to use your debit card." How many people do you think that PR campaign will draw in? I can't believe too many.

Banks are finding new ways to make money. With online banking becoming so popular, direct deposit and debit, online bill pay and so forth, they need to recoup some losses. TCF Bank here in the Twin Cities doesn't offer "free checking" anymore. There's a little caveat on that, though. It's free, if you maintain a minimum balance.

Not only online banking, but new regulations are also forcing the hand of Wells Fargo to do this. New financial regulations limit the amount of money banks can collect in fees when people use their debit cards.

So, what's happening here? We're already in an era where checks are shunned from so many retailers and restaurants. And, if people have to pay to use their debit cards which are attached to their own money, what's left? Go back to cash-only? Well, we could. But then the Fed Reserve would have to print more money, which would create more inflation.

Facebook and PR

Once again, thanks to the PRSA daily email, Issues and Trends, I stumbled across another article about Facebook (article linked to title of post). I'm not quite sure how I feel about the article's content: using Facebook for PR.

I read the article, from the PR Newswire blog, and part of me wondered if I was using Facebook "wrong." In my opinion, I never thought of Facebook as a "professional" site. I think most people see Facebook as a personal, catch-up, play games and other stuff kind of site. I thought to myself, "should I be thinking of Facebook differently?"

Truth be told, I don't spend a great deal of time on Facebook. All the games and other "applications" on my Facebook page have gone virtually unused. I post links to blog posts. The article suggests placing an ad on Facebook. I have to be honest, while they aren't as evasive as they are on other sites; I tend to get somewhat annoyed by them.

On the other hand, the article also suggests that Facebook may not always be the right medium to use when it comes to PR. The author of the article, Sarah Skerik gave some suggestions. Skerik suggests to first find out who your audience is. And, on Facebook, that's hard to do. Of course, you can post poll questions on Facebook; however, you may not get the responses you're looking for nor responses from the right people.

If you do use Facebook for PR, what do you desire to gain out of it? Are you looking for traffic to your site? Seeking to gain awareness (which has become somewhat of a big deal on Facebook recently), or just to forge relationships? For me, anyway, I do post links to my new blog posts on Facebook, in hopes of generating more traffic. However, I really have no way of figuring out how many people click on to my blog directly from Facebook.

The bottom line, Skerik writes, is that it is OK to use Facebook for promotion. If it's used for more than that, be mindful of two things: your audience and your message.

I've tried to do those things recently with this blog. I've changed the title of this blog-as well as the focus of the articles, to hopefully generate a bigger audience. I'll always be interested in writing about sports and its correlation with marketing and PR.

Realizing that was a pretty slim audience prompted the name change and article change. But, I still wonder, is it enough to generate traffic from Facebook? Is Facebook really the new "word of mouth"? Is social media proactive enough in relation to PR? I'm curious.

Facebook and job recruiters

If the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is right, Facebook could become a major recruiting tool for employers. WSJ said in a recent article that Facebook could give "traditional job boards" a run for their money in 2012 (link to article embedded in title of this post).

The WSJ says that new hires directly from Facebook is a very small percentage of overall hires. But, given time, that could change.

I haven't done it often, but sometimes when I'm in chat with someone on Facebook, I'll ask if they've heard of any job openings in the PR field. In a couple occasions, I've used Facebook to get more information about a job opening I've seen. In a way, Facebook might bring a new twist to the "word of mouth" means of finding out about jobs.

The WSJ article mentioned a new app on Facebook from Monster called BeKnown. According to the article, BeKnown now has close to 800,000 users (including yours truly). Matt Mund, a top executive with Monster.com was quoted in the article as saying, "I wish every company used Monster [but] social is a solution many people are using."

I have found that the major job search engines, Career Builder, Monster, et.al. seem to point job seekers to jobs that are sort of close to what they are looking for. And, sometimes, jobs will pop up that really aren't remotely close to what job seekers are looking for.

If the WSJ is right, and Facebook does surpass the major job search engines in 2012, what will that look like? Will it stay legitimate; or will it become a gathering place for hackers and spammers? In either case, if Facebook does become a major recruitment tool, remember: you might want to double check your Facebook profile, just to make sure there isn't anything recruiters won't like.

1986 Fridley tornado - where were you?

I never really would have forgotten: July 18, 1986, and the tornado that swept through suburbs in the northern part of Minneapolis. A lot was different back then: my brother had just celebrated his first birthday. The stock market was way below the five digits it is today, oil prices were incredibly cheaper and NASA'a Challenger had exploded just a few short months before.

To give a little perspective on how long ago this really was: the Twins had not yet won a World Series in Minnesota. The Timberwolves were merely just a thought in Rudy Perpich's mind (the NBA awarded the expansion franchise the next year) and the North Stars were still here.

I was just reading a little bit on the internet before I noticed the story about the tornado on KARE's Web site (click the title of this post for the story), and thought to myself, "that's right, it's been 25 years already?"

Oddly enough, I had just watched our taped copy of KARE 11's special Unheard Sirens just a couple weeks ago. The video that Max Messmer had caught from Sky11 was a popular video for a while on news shows; and could probably be seen on some outrageous video shows on TV today.

Where were you on that July day when the tornado hit? All I remember was watching the video as quickly as it was coming to KARE 11 on live TV just a little after 5pm.

Minnesota PR Professionals - Are you going to the Alphabet Bash?

I got the email today, the Alphabet Bash is returning again this year.

Here's where I'd like to get some input from my fellow colleagues with the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA): do you feel this event is helpful or detrimental?

I've been the last couple years; and the venue is a nice place. As long as I can remember, the event has been at the Epic club in downtown Minneapolis. But, I've found some problems.

First, there are so many organizations that come to this event. I know last year, it was hard for me to find colleagues within the PRSA. Not to say I didn't find any, but they were hard to come by. When you're networking, it gets to be hard when you're a PR professional, and you run into lots of advertising and marketing people.

A colleague of mine told me last year that the PRSA typically has one of the lowest attendances of all the organizations at the ABC Bash.

Second, it seems to me to be a tad loud for quality networking. More than once I've almost felt like I had to yell at the people I was talking to, just to be heard. Well, "yell" might be a little harsh, but you get the idea.

I know that our chapter of the PRSA has semi-monthly networking events, but when I found out about the ABC Bash a few years back, I thought that it might be much more fruitful with a large event to find even more people in the PR industry. I don't think that's the case. Maybe that's just me.

Finally, the cost seems to be a bit high. MNPRSA events are a fraction of the cost of the ABC Bash.

It's nice to meet lots of people, but, when you're looking to get connections with public relations people, I found that the ABC Bash just wasn't the right fit. I will probably find myself at more of the MNPRSA networking events in the future.

Newspapers and TV news...rebounding?

This was quite a surprise: perusing the internet tonight, I came across something that piqued my interest: apparently, newspapers and TV news are making a comeback, according to a recent Gallup poll.

In the last few years, I have only heard how traditional media, like newspapers, have been on a steady decline. So much so, some golden standards in the newspaper industry switched to a Web-only format (i.e.Seattle Post-Intelligencer), and some closed altogether (i.e. Rocky Mountain News).

With all the advances in technology, cell phones, iPads, Kindle, print newspapers were all but dead. Of course, I'm still an old-fashioned kind of guy, and I still like my printed edition of the newspaper every once in a while.

A blog called Hot Air noted that the increase in confidence wasn't substantial; but that the increase was at least noticeable enough for Gallup to make a news item out of it.

Let's not get too excited though, the findings appear to have a political undertone to them. There doesn't seem to be any age demographic noted for the increase. The only age group that Hot Air mentions is the 18-29-year-old demographic; but, the problem there is that confidence in newspapers declined 10 points with that age group.

Hot Air also notes that the uptick in newspaper confidence seems to be with Democrats. Conversely, conservative Republicans still remain wary of both media.

Winnipeg Jets are back

It's been a lot of years, 16 to be exact, but the Winnipeg Jets are back in the National Hockey League (NHL).

The name was announced yesterday at the Xcel Energy Center during the NHL Draft. It's funny, because there were a ton of people saying that the Jets' name would not be resurrected. The original Jets moved to Phoenix and became the Coyotes in the 1996-97 season.

Which means, that all the history, color schemes, uniforms, logos and everything attached to the Jets in some fashion moved with the team to Phoenix in 1996. Even the mayor of Winnipeg said that the Jets name wouldn't come back.

Unless they had been smart, like Cleveland was. When Art Modell took the Cleveland Browns (NFL) to Baltimore, the city of Cleveland retained the rights to everything: history, logos, team colors, uniforms, etc. Essentially, Modell was bringing an expansion team to Baltimore. Two years later when Cleveland was awarded another NFL franchise, it was as if the team never left.

But, the newest installment of the Jets won't have too much history. Eleven years, all of which were in Atlanta. The Thrashers weren't the best team, winning only a handful of games every season. So, the short history the Jets will have once they make it up to Winnipeg won't be looked upon fondly, if at all.

Some teams don't really even acknowledge the history of the team once they've moved. Case in point, the Minnesota Twins. Relocated to the Twin Cities from Washington DC in 1960, the Twins technically have been a franchise since the early 1900s. Incidentally, the Twins technically have won three World Series, their first coming in 1924, but as the Washington Senators.

As for the Jets, they'll somewhat be starting all over again: a new logo, color scheme, corporate identity, etc. will be chosen in the months ahead. As for the folks in Atlanta, they might be scratching their heads trying to figure out how they've lost two NHL franchises, both to Canada. Atlanta lost the Flames to Calgary in 1980.

It will be nice to see "Winnipeg Jets" back in the standings next season.

Clever tactic, or invasion of privacy?

I'm sure it's been written about online before, but I saw an article in my email edition of Advertising Age today that caught me a bit off-guard. The article (linked to the title of this post) talked about how, just in a search engine, Google can target consumers with ads, based on what they search.

On one hand, that's all well and good. We all hate pop-up ads, and most of us probably have pop-up blockers on our computers. However, if those pop-up ads appeal to us, would we be more likely to turn off the blocker and actually pay attention to what they're trying to sell us?

Say I'm doing a search on Google for a synopsis on a movie. All of a sudden, an ad pops up for Netflix; or a small little advertisement for Red Dot. That's actually clever. Of course, I already subscribe to Netflix; so the ad would have fallen subject to being "x'd out." I was just looking for a synopsis on a movie.

Or, I could be doing some sort of product research. An ad pops up for just that product and maybe a "click to save 50 cents" sort of thing. That probably appeals to consumers.

But, on the other hand, what about the unusual searches? Sometimes, people search for the oddest things on Google. Price even said in the interview that the internet was becoming more "personalized," so he's trying to adapt ads to meet that personalization. Might that approach become too personal in some cases? Almost like a case of Big Brother knowing what we're doing on the internet?

If that's the case, will it turn consumers off?

Atlanta Thrashers relocation approved

The National Hockey League (NHL) unanimously approved the sale and relocation of the Atlanta Thrashers. The Thrashers will be moving to Winnipeg, Manitoba next season. Atlanta has now lost two NHL teams; and both have been to Canada. Atlanta lost the Flames in 1980 to Calgary.

Winnipeg has been without NHL hockey for 15 years. Their previous team, the Jets, moved to Phoenix in 1995. Now, with a new arena, Winnipeg is ready to re-enter the league. But, a few snags exist that will require, in my opinion, a great deal of good PR and marketing strategy.

The arena in Winnipeg, the MTS Centre, only seats 15,000. It will be the smallest arena in the NHL. The NHL required the group that purchased the team, True North, to sell 13,000 season tickets, which they have done. The Thrashers were in the bottom 5 in attendance last season. There are 30 teams overall in the NHL. The Thrashers were bringing in, on average, about 13,200.

Here's a problem: that number won't change. The only difference is, 13,200 is closer to a sellout in a 15,000-seat arena. That same number equated to an arena that was about 60% full in Atlanta. My thinking is that the critics will say, "What's changed? They're still getting the same attendance, just in a different city."

Then, there's the issue of how to brand the team. Should they bring the Jets back? The mayor of Winnipeg says that won't happen. Problem there is that the Winnipeg Jets' team history, colors, logos and such moved with the team in 1995 to Phoenix. Just like what happened with the North Stars when they moved in 1993 to Dallas. For lack of a better phrase, it stinks to see Bill Goldsworthy's retired number hanging in the rafters at American Airlines Center in Dallas. He wasn't a Dallas Star, he was a Minnesota North Star. But, the franchise and its long history moved.

The Jets (we'll call them that for now) have a great deal of work ahead of them in the months ahead. A new name, logo and color scheme have to be decided upon. That's just the start. And, re-entering a market that has been without hockey for so long will be a difficult PR challenge as well.

StarTribune.com Gets a Makeover

You may have already seen it: the Star Tribune did a massive renovation on its Web site. I have to say, it was long overdue.

You will almost be surprised when you first get to the site, it's like reading the E-edition of the Tribune. The interface very much has the look of the actual paper; and, at least for me, the site is much more user-friendly.

The site has a much cleaner look. The other site seemed so cluttered, lots of information, just on the homepage. Also, I think what really helped is they took the green color out of the Web site. Just my opinion, but there was a great deal of color on the old site which added to the clutter.

It's a great re-design, and you'll very likely be impressed when you first see it. It's something the Pioneer Press (aka twincities.com) should definitely look into doing.

The NCAA Tournament - Opinion

I do like this time of year - especially with the NCAA basketball tournament. But, I was thinking the other day: it's certainly not the same tournament that it was 20 years ago.

Hang with me on this one. First, 20 years ago, there were no "play-in" games. It was 64 teams, period. The NCAA selection committee chose the field of 64, and that was it. Now, it's up to 68 or 69. According to Wikipedia, there are 346 member Division I schools.

Twenty years ago, regional games were frequently played, although not always, in college arenas. Not so much anymore. Most of the regional matchups are in large, downtown arenas that house professional teams. I remember days when regionals were played at college arenas like The Pit at the University of New Mexico; or Thomson-Boling Arena at the University of Tennessee. It's been quite some time since I've seen either of those venues on the tournament lineup.

And, how about the Final Four itself? The 1985 Final Four, for instance, was at Rupp Arena at the University of Kentucky. The 1983 Final Four, which had one of the best game endings I've ever seen (who can forget the last-second NC State dunk by Lorenzo Charles to win the game) was at University of New Mexico's University Arena (aka "The Pit").

Several years ago, after the ticket debacle at the 1996 Final Four in East Rutherford, NJ, the NCAA made a decision that traditional arenas could no longer accomodate the Final Four. The 1996 Final Four was at the Meadowlands Arena (gone through several names over the years) which sat about 18,000.

After all the other tickets were handed out, there were only about 1,100 tickets for general public sale.

Since 1997, Final Fours have been played exclusively in domed stadiums. Back then, the "minimum" seating capacity to host a Final Four was 33,000. Which essentially rules out any traditional basketball arena.

Now, the NCAA requires a minimum seating capacity of 70,000. That pretty much rules the Metrodome out for future Final Fours. Click "The NCAA Tournament - Opinon" for a link to a Flickr photo I found for last year's Final Four, and what the setup looks like.

It seems to me the whole NCAA tournament is becoming more about TV dollars and selling tickets. Hence, the bigger arenas, more teams, etc. Take a look at this year: now we have games on four TV networks. That's great for people who want to see every game; but the entire tournament used to be on just one TV station: CBS.

The NCAA tournament is falling victim to neutralization all around. If you watch the games this year, all the floors in all the cities look exactly the same. The NCAA must have spent a fortune having a hardwood floor made for every city that hosted a game. The NCAA is plastering it's black and blue color scheme everywhere, from the floors to the banners to almost anything and everything that says "NCAA Tournament". About 20 years ago, all the NCAA would do was put a few decals over the home court logos. That was it.

And, advertising. If you go to an NCAA tournament game, you'll notice that blue tarps are placed over arena and stadium advertising. They probably don't do that as much anymore, since the advent of the LED digital "ribbon board" that can change advertisements. But, some of the older arenas that have permanent ads, are still covered up. One good thing is that it covers up beer ads - and alcohol is not sold at NCAA tournament events. But, this one really got to me, I had read about this in the Detroit Free-Press back in 2009. The 2009 Final Four was held at the new home of the Detroit Lions, which seats somewhere in the neigborhood of 66,000.

As with many new stadiums, the seats all have cupholders on them. At Ford Field, Aquafina "sponsored" all the cupholders. During the preparation for the Final Four, crews went to EVERY seat and put a blue sticker over the Aquafina logos. I guess Aquafina isn't an "official" NCAA sponsor. But, are TV cameras really going to pick up a little sticker? Seemed a little odd and a colossal waste of time to me.

People love college basketball because you don't have collective-bargaining agreements, or player contracts, owner lockouts or endorsement deals. College basketball wasn't supposed to be about the money. But, the way the NCAA is running the tournament these days, money seems to be the number one priority. I miss the old days.

'CCO Radio loses the Gophers

WCCO Radio, which has broadcast Minnesota Gophers football, basketball and hockey games since World War II, lost it's broadcast rights to Gophers sports today. The Gophs can now be heard on 1500 AM, ESPN Radio; and also KTLK 100.3 FM, according to news reports today.

'CCO Radio has lost its hold on many of the Twin Cities sports teams: The Twins left several years ago for 1500 AM. The Vikings moved several years ago to Clear Channel-owned KFAN. And now, the Gophers.

Part of it was in order to move the Gophers to an all-sports radio format, which WCCO is not. But, WCCO has been pretty popular in the Twin Cities. It is funny though, 'CCO Radio seems to be on a downturn; yet WCCO TV is pushing up in the ratings. Matter of fact, just a few days ago, I had heard that WCCO's newscasts now rank higher in the ratings than KARE 11.

I remember back in the 80s, WCCO Radio seemed to be so popular. I can remember many a time driving up to the cabin on the weekends, listening to the Cannon Mess; or the on-the-hour sounder for the news report. It was a fun station to listen to. Now, it's not even on my car presets.

Funny story about the Cannon Mess: I never actually knew the name of the show until I was at Brown Institute for broadcasting. When I was a kid, I always thought the show was called the "Cannon Nest." Never dawned on me - I just thought that's what the show was called. Until my best friend emailed me one day when I was at Brown Institute, and told me about how his radio show in college was called the JD Mess, patterned of course, after the Cannon Mess.

I thought - oh, that was it! The Cannon Mess....

Might Target Stadium be next?

I'm still rather undecided about the possibilities for a new Vikings stadium. Honestly, I don't like the idea of my taxes going up; which of course they will regardless of where it's built (unless of course, the Vikes come up with a county partnership like the Twins did).

Lately, there has been more and more chatter about the possibility of building a new Vikings stadium just west of Target Field. If you know where Mary's Place is, just off of 7th Street, that's where the Vikings are looking to set up camp. I don't like the idea of making Mary Jo Copeland relocate. I so appreciate the work she does for the community; and making her move to make way for a new sports palace, in my mind, is wrong.

Then, there would be the issue of naming rights for the new place. Should it be Target Stadium? You'd have Target Field, Target Center and Target Stadium. In all likelihood, that will not happen.

Here's what I think will play out: as much as I don't like it, the Vikings end up with the Mary's Place property. Target Corp. will back out of the Target Center naming rights deal, which is set to expire in June. Target Corp. having its name on a shiny, new, 72,000-seat stadium is more appealing than a renewing on a 21-year-old basketball arena.

If in fact, the Vikings do end up with that property, the new naming rights deal with Target will occur almost overnight. It's much easier for the Vikings to sell season tickets, suites, advertising and so forth to "Target Stadium" than it is to "New Minneapolis Stadium, future home of the Minnesota Vikings, title sponsor pending."

Think about what Farmers Insurance did. They inked a naming-rights deal with the yet-to-be-built, yet-to-be-groundbroken stadium in LA. LA doesn't even have a team yet, but they have a name for the new stadium. It's really a marketing thing.

Rumors are also circulating that the Vikings are soon to announce their plan to the state Legislature. We shall see what happens over the next few months.

Metro Council needs your help!

Wow, second blog entry in a month! Can you believe it?

Reading the paper this morning, a big headline in the Metro section told readers that the Metropolitan Council, which oversees Metro Tranit, is looking for simpler names for its "burgeoning" transit system in the Twin Cities.

Right now, you just have the Northstar rail and the Hiawatha light rail - but Metro Transit will be adding Bus Rapid Transit lines and new light rail lines (if funding isn't severely cut), and possibly another commuter rail line. Eventually, it'll get pretty confusing, especially to visitors to our Twin Cities.

But, according to the Metropolitan Council, this new name will only apply to rapid bus transit and light rail. Then, they will color code the separate lines - for instance, lets say the Met Council decides to call it the "T" (which still is an iconic logo for Metro Transit). Then, the Met Council might change the Hiawatha light rail to "The Blue Line," the Central Corridor light rail to "The Red Line," and so forth.

So, what would you call the new rapid transit system around here? The Met Council wants to hear from you. Through 5 pm on March 18, you can send suggestions to: data.center@metc.state.mn.us. Peronally, I like the "T," but, apparently, Pittsburgh uses that moniker for its transit. For the full article from today's Pioneer Press, click "Metro Council needs your help!"

Lottery funds = Vikings Stadium?

I wrote more about this on Allvoices.com (click Lottery Funds = for the article), but I discovered today the Vikings are now considering using lottery funds to help finance a new stadium.

It sounds like a good idea on the surface, and it doesn't seem the NFL would have any problem with gambling dollars being used to finance a new stadium, as it's been done in Baltimore. But, wasn't the Minnesota State Lottery money supposed to go for...environmental concerns?

Of course, I doubt the "environmental concerns" have gotten ALL of the proceeds of the state lottery that's been in existence since 1988. But, I do wonder whether the Vikings would have to go through any red tape to re-appropriate some of the lottery money.

The racino idea didn't seem to go over so well; and certainly, the public doesn't want to put up a huge chunk of the money of a stadium that's probably going to cost over $1 billion when all is said and done. And, Governor Dayton has concerns about the lottery dollars being a "reliable" source of revenue.

However, the Vikings' scratch-off game was the highest selling lottery game in the state last year. It might actually be worth looking into.

Twolves to move to Saint Paul?

I had read a small little tidbit from Charley Walters this morning in the Pioneer Press about the possibility of the Twolves moving across the river to the Xcel Energy Center.

Well, essentially what he said is that the Xcel Center would welcome the Wolves over in Saint Paul if they ever became dissatisfied with the Target Center. It's been 20 years, and the Wolves haven't really complained very much about the Target Center.

But, the arena is getting older. It's not as young as it used to be. However, I had some thoughts of my own about a possible move of the Wolves over to the Target Center. Click on "Twolves to move to Saint Paul?" to see the full article.

Hope all of you had a great holiday season, and here's to a wonderful 2011.