Sunday, August 30, 2009

Just brimming over with stupid, fucking wrongability.

Blogging Tory "Canadian Cincinnatus," in a vain attempt to be all pundity and everything, does what every Blogging Tory does and fucks up every single detail:

Canadian Taxpayers Foot the Bill for Toronto Lefty-Love-in

Oh, this should be good. Where do we start?

They intended to sell 25,000 tickets [for Bill Clinton], but when that looked hopeless they changed to a smaller 10,000 seat venue so that it wouldn't look so empty, and still they were 3000 short of a sell out. The choice tickets cost $50, but yesterday they started practically giving them away at the door for $5 a pop.

Really? They "changed to a smaller 10,000 seat venue?" I don't think so:

But when The Globe and Mail revealed that ticket sales were lagging at 7,000 sold with only two days before Mr. Clinton's arrival, the CNE slashed ticket prices, reconfigured the stadium and cut attendance expectations by 60 per cent.

The move was somewhat effective, with 12,000 people taking in the speech – a 30-minute affair about multiculturalism, climate change and fighting poverty.

So they didn't "change the venue" -- they reconfigured the existing venue. And they got 12,000 people, a number which isn't really compatible with moving to a 10,000 seat venue, is it? Or "3,000 short of a sellout." Then there's this:

The choice tickets cost $50, but yesterday they started practically giving them away at the door for $5 a pop.

As the organizers made clear, the $50 tickets were the ones that sold out first. And the $5 Clinton admission was available only to fairgoers who had already paid for fair admission. (In fact, the $5 Clinton admission represented the price only for those people who wanted a $20 ticket, since fairgoers were getting credit for the $15 they'd already paid to get into the CNE. So if you wanted a $40 ticket, you'd still pay the difference of $25 ($40 -$15). In short, claiming that the organizers were simply dumping Clinton tickets for $5 is eye-rollingly dishonest. Really, you just can't let wankers do math because they will absolutely fuck it up every time.)

Ah, but here's the douchebaggiest part, where Cincy seems to suggest that Clinton's appearance was a major blow to the Canadian taxpayer's wallet:

But what made all this very unfunny is that we're paying for it. Yup, our federal stimulus money put up a cool $3 million to this little left-wing love-in. Canadians from Vancouver to St John's are paying for Toronto lefties to go and hang out with Bill Clinton. I bet Toronto Mayor David Miller and all his councillors even bought tickets with their city expense accounts.

Really? Bill Clinton's speech cost us $3 million? Oh, wait, that's a totally fucking stupid thing to say since the entire CNE received that stimulus money, not Clinton's single speech, whose appearance is costed thusly:

Officials aren't saying how much Mr. Clinton will earn for the appearance, though his fee is typically around $175,000.

$175,000? So let's do some math, shall we, in which we assume (pessimistically) that every single one of those 12,000 Clinton attendees paid the absolute minimum charge ($5) to see Clinton, which brings in some $60,000, which actually goes a fair way to covering Clinton's appearance fee, and keep in mind that that's an absolute minimum which doesn't take into account that all of those $50 tickets were, in fact, sold, and we might conclude that most of Clinton's appearance fee might have been covered by ticket sales, but here's the most brain-damaged part of Cincy's ignorant diatribe:

So let's do the math: the first 7000 tickets were sold at prices ranging from $20 to $50, but we'll just say they all sold for $50. That's $350,000 dollars. The remaining tickets finally all sold for $5 each, so there's another $15,000. Let's assume all that union labor at the CNE donates their time. Yeah, right! Grand total from ticket sales: $365,000. This is the absolute upper bound.

But Teflon Bill isn't donating his time. He's being paid somewhere between $175,000 and $300,000. So we'll assume he did Toronto a favor and only charged $175,000. That means the lefty-love-in will only make $190,000 AT MOST. And that is impossible after accounting for real expenses. In reality the event probably lost money.

I suggest that the CNE, which is really just a toy of Toronto's left-wing city council, should be forced to pay back the entire $3 million to the federal government since they did not fulfill the condition of earning $1 million on the event.

Good thinking, Cincy, because doing a financial analysis of Clinton's appearance can immediately be extended to a financial analysis of the entire CNE because those two things are clearly exactly the same thing. The level of stupid it requires to have written that is almost unrepresentable in the English language.

(Do I really need to point out that, using Cincy's own figures, he proposes that Clinton's appearance might have cost as much as $300,000 (but most likely considerably less), yet the ticket sales for the event might have brought in $365,000, which means Clinton's speech would have made money for the CNE? This simple arithmetic appears to be utterly beyond the comprehension of Canadian Cincinnatus, easily one of the most retarded Blogging Tories ever to put forehead to keyboard.)

Oh, and we await with bated breath Cincy's rant against handing over $4 million of taxpayer cash to a private religious college in Edmonton. Unless, of course, that's different. Since it almost always is.


Ti-Guy said...

I couldn't get past that screeching cretin's belief that Clinton's a "lefty."

That's the sum total of the genius that goes into "Conservative" cost/benefit analysis though, which is why they always, always, always leave us with bigger debt and deficit.

Mike said...

The "let's do the math" part is where the "analysis" really, really becomes a trainwreck and an embarrassment. What a fool.

sooey said...

That's kind of a mean thing to do to kids - take them to the Ex to hear Bill Clinton speak. At least if it was George W. Bush they might have a few laughs at his expense, but Clinton - he's a hard sell for kids I would think.

liberal supporter said...

he's a hard sell for kids I would think.
Are you kidding? Though the speech was about 45 minutes, it was presumed to be likely an hour.

"I'm going to this speech for an hour, you kids be good on the midway."

Usually you got to go on the rides while parents went to the boring Horticulture building or the big yawn international stuff. That never seemed to be a whole hour. Then you'd go to the mildly interesting Better Living, and then the FOOD building.

sooey said...

Yabbut, now it's the sibling society and we want to go on rides WITH our kids.

Who the hell were these people who went to hear Bill Clinton speak at the Ex, anyway?!


Southern Quebec said...

Right on cue, Hunter picks it up...$3 million on Clinton!!!!!!!