[quote]
This theater is again in severe financial straits, but the City of San Jose is trying to extend it a lifeline: View link
[/quote]
I’m posting a little over a month after the above post. Does anyone happen to know whether the city was able to extend the lifeline mentioned?
Speaking as a taxpayer, I’m conflicted; I like the Camera Cinemas guys. OTOH, the City of San Jose’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA) contributed $4.6 million to the $11 million theater project when the UA tried to make a go of it. Then, when the Camera Cinemas took over, the RDA loaned -them- another $3.2 million, making a total of $7.8 million in taxpayer funds poured into a theater that, according to DKelley’s post above, “face[s] over 150 screens in direct competition within a 10 miles radius.”
I have to ask: am I missing something here? Or is the idea of pouring more taxpayer funds into a theater that’s been a money-losing proposition for more than a decade under two different owners as bad as it appears?
I also couldn’t help but notice that the Mercury News article made no mention of any RDA plans to perform a cost/benefit analysis so that the city has at least a vague idea of how much cash Camera 12 brings into the surrounding businesses. In other words: the RDA is simply -guessing- that Camera 12 serves as an “anchor” for the businesses in the area, but are either unable or unwilling to express the impact that Camera 12 has in terms of a dollar amount.
I know this is going to sound unkind, but: if the RDA is unable to quantify the financial impact that a business has, then how do they have any way of knowing what they are talking about? Ask yourself: wouldn’t a bank want to know this kind of information before extending -another- loan to someone who can’t pay back their original loan or make their rent?
This from a city that is running “a second consecutive budget deficit of more than $100 million.” Maybe it’s just me, but that sure doesn’t sound like a city that can afford to keep making poor financial decisions. ¬_¬
[Does anyone know how to contact the Stanford Theatre Foundation, or maybe the webmaster of the Stanford Theatre website? No info online, that I can find. I’d like to propose to them that they link their site to my blog…or that I manage a blog for them about their theatre and classic film in general….]
The best way (in fact, the only way I know of) to get in touch would be to write (yes, snail mail) David Packard c/o the Stanford Theatre:
221 University Ave
Palo Alto, CA 94301-1712
I ’m not sure what the chances are of your proposal being adopted, but you can ask.
I can certainly understand your desire to have them link to your blog. The kicker with such an arrangement is that it often implies affiliation, (even if you tell people your site is “just a fan site”) as people often can’t/won’t read disclaimers.
Anyhow, my last name isn’t “Packard,” so you’ll have to write him and see what he thinks. :)
[quote]
This theater is again in severe financial straits, but the City of San Jose is trying to extend it a lifeline: View link
[/quote]
I’m posting a little over a month after the above post. Does anyone happen to know whether the city was able to extend the lifeline mentioned?
Speaking as a taxpayer, I’m conflicted; I like the Camera Cinemas guys. OTOH, the City of San Jose’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA) contributed $4.6 million to the $11 million theater project when the UA tried to make a go of it. Then, when the Camera Cinemas took over, the RDA loaned -them- another $3.2 million, making a total of $7.8 million in taxpayer funds poured into a theater that, according to DKelley’s post above, “face[s] over 150 screens in direct competition within a 10 miles radius.”
I have to ask: am I missing something here? Or is the idea of pouring more taxpayer funds into a theater that’s been a money-losing proposition for more than a decade under two different owners as bad as it appears?
I also couldn’t help but notice that the Mercury News article made no mention of any RDA plans to perform a cost/benefit analysis so that the city has at least a vague idea of how much cash Camera 12 brings into the surrounding businesses. In other words: the RDA is simply -guessing- that Camera 12 serves as an “anchor” for the businesses in the area, but are either unable or unwilling to express the impact that Camera 12 has in terms of a dollar amount.
I know this is going to sound unkind, but: if the RDA is unable to quantify the financial impact that a business has, then how do they have any way of knowing what they are talking about? Ask yourself: wouldn’t a bank want to know this kind of information before extending -another- loan to someone who can’t pay back their original loan or make their rent?
This from a city that is running “a second consecutive budget deficit of more than $100 million.” Maybe it’s just me, but that sure doesn’t sound like a city that can afford to keep making poor financial decisions. ¬_¬
[Does anyone know how to contact the Stanford Theatre Foundation, or maybe the webmaster of the Stanford Theatre website? No info online, that I can find. I’d like to propose to them that they link their site to my blog…or that I manage a blog for them about their theatre and classic film in general….]
The best way (in fact, the only way I know of) to get in touch would be to write (yes, snail mail) David Packard c/o the Stanford Theatre:
221 University Ave
Palo Alto, CA 94301-1712
I ’m not sure what the chances are of your proposal being adopted, but you can ask.
I can certainly understand your desire to have them link to your blog. The kicker with such an arrangement is that it often implies affiliation, (even if you tell people your site is “just a fan site”) as people often can’t/won’t read disclaimers.
Anyhow, my last name isn’t “Packard,” so you’ll have to write him and see what he thinks. :)
[i wonder what film is being projected here? C. Aubrey Smith is actor
at left, Jerome Cowan at right:]
I believe (but am not 100% positive) that the film being shown is East Side of Heaven (1939).
Does anyone know if this theater had “double” seats in its heyday?
(They’ve been described as small loveseats.)
Does anyone know if the Ambassador featured some “double” seats?
(They’ve been described as small loveseats.)