The Free Press article basically says financing hasn't been secured for either of the two developments, with 'conventional' debt possibly being the solution for Hudsons. Wondering just how bad it is to take 'conventional' debt.

The main question of what happens to the incentives should the A. building not be built [[likely Monroe) or B. building built much differently than proposed isn't answered though. I would love to see that from the Free Press, but its a good piece regardless.

Looks like our thank you gift to Dan for all he's done for Detroit isn't materializing too well right now. I would have preferred the state/downtown development authority act more like investors [[because they are) than philanthropists. Then projects would be more vetted and taxpayers would get real returns. If the state and city can't be serious about their ROI, then they shouldn't be serious about incentives. Its not a question of doing incentives or not, but how you do them.....