Monetizing Genesis

One of the larger ongoing non-Trump grifts in the US today is the “Ark Encounter” in Williamstown, Kentucky. It’s been open for nearly ten years. I don’t know whether or not it’s hit its evangelistic benchmarks, but it has never met the financial benchmarks promised to Kentucky taxpayers.

“When Creationist Ken Ham and his team at Answers in Genesis were looking for a location for their $100+ million attraction, they pitched it as a way to create jobs. One projection (from the state) said Ark Encounter was “expected to annually generate… a minimum of 3,000 new full-time equivalent jobs.”

 

*snip*

“Besides that, the city of Williamstown, which desperately wanted to be the home of the Ark, offered Ham’s team $62 million in junk bonds if they built the “Ark” in their backyard. Grant County, which Williamstown is in, gave Ham’s team 98 acres of land for $1.

“They also said that, over a 30-year period, 75% of Ark Encounter’s real estate taxes would go toward repayment of the interest-free loan. So instead of that money going to the city and the citizens, it would be used to repay those bonds.

 

“Also, 2% of all employees’ paychecks would go back to Ark Encounter to help them pay off the loans, so neither the government nor the employees were getting everything they deserved.

 

“Why would a city and county do all this? Because they hoped that the attraction would be so popular, it would increase tourism, liven up what was in many ways a dying town, create well-paying jobs, and be good for all surrounding businesses. 

 

“The state of Kentucky even promised Ark Encounter a tax incentive worth up to $18.25 million over the next decade based on attendance and sales.”

And yet the money changers in the “Ark” temple never made budget.

“They assured everyone that they would bring in between 1.2 million and 2 million visitors in the first full year of business.

“Ken Ham openly bragged about this on the website for Ark Encounter at the time.

“That same report assumed a 4% increase in attendance every year over the next decade—a number that could rise to 10% after they expanded. By their math—and Creationists are truly numerical wizards—the money line would always be going up and to the right.”

And what happened with the involuntary tithes from Kentucky taxpayers?

“The attendance has never even come close to hitting that estimated average of 1.6 million visitors. Even when you factor out the year COVID shut these parks down, things have just gone downhill.”

*snip*

“Because they’re not hitting the projected attendance numbers, it means the city isn’t attracting tourists in the volume they had hoped, which is bad news for local stores, hotels, and even schools that rely on property taxes.”

Both the stories in Genesis and the money machine built around them turn out to be myths.

https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/ark-encounters-decade-long-disaster

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Yes, the CDC can change its mind

The Nobel Laureate economist Paul Samuelson famously acknowledged in a Meet the Press interview: “Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?” This observation applies to the advice from medical authorities such as the CDC and WHO during the COVID pandemic. Some members of the public are fond of pillorying these agencies for having published different guidelines at different times, as though health officials are in the business of issuing ex cathedra dogma rather than responding to incomplete and ambiguous information. Science doesn’t deal in proof, it deals with the weight of evidence. A scientific hypothesis is one that is capable of being tested and falsified by experiment. I get it. I used to teach problem-based learning to first year medical students, and they often struggled with what to do with incomplete and ambiguous information, which is what physicians in clinics do every day. Sometimes, one cannot wait for all the tests to be completed and all the data analyz...
Read more

I agree with RFK Jr.

Though it feels weird to say it, RFK Jr and I agree on something: curtailing direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceuticals. “ The Trump administration is discussing policies that would make it harder and more expensive for pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to patients, in a move that could disrupt more than $10 billion in annual ad spending.   Although the US is the only place, besides New Zealand, where pharma companies can directly advertise, banning pharma ads outright could make the administration vulnerable to lawsuits, so it’s instead focusing on cutting down on the practice by adding legal and financial hurdles, according to people familiar with the plans who weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter.   “The two policies the administration has focused in on would be to require greater disclosures of side effects of a drug within each ad — likely making broadcast ads much longer and prohibitively expensive — or removing the industry’s ability to d...
Read more

About that Trump lawsuit

So Trump is suing Rupert Murdoch for defamation because of the release of a salacious doodle. Nothing remarkable about Donald J. Trump weaponizing the legal system against his opponents, I know. But there are some things that do bear remark here: “ . . . he's suing Rupert Murdoch personally. But you know who he's not suing? Lachlan Murdoch, who's actually the chairperson of News Corp and Fox, who's actually the decision-maker. Rupert Murdoch has no official role there anymore. He's an adviser.   “So, I thought that was revealing in a lot of ways, because it isn't just about going after the entity. It's sort of this expansion spillover, trying to send as much of a message as you possibly can. He's sort of hitting every potential lever, not just against Murdoch and that empire, but then all the other media properties in the future. It's also about sending an example.” “HAYES: Yeah. That, to me, is the point here, is that these lawsuits are not lawsuits...
Read more