If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Ralph is dying. His estate will sell the Bills to the highest bidder. the team is only bound to RWS for one more year. The Bills may have to move to a state far far away. Worse yet... 13 years without a meaningful home game in Hoth like conditions.
It's maybe a mercy that they don't make the county and region bear the cost of building a new stadium just to have it vacant. We all hate to hear it, but the fate of the Bills in Buffalo is hanging by a thread.
It's maybe a mercy that they don't make the county and region bear the cost of building a new stadium just to have it vacant. We all hate to hear it, but the fate of the Bills in Buffalo is hanging by a thread.
I'm sure Ralph's estate can sell to whoever they want to. I can't imagine Ralph being able to limit the sale post mortem to an ownership group that would keep the team in Buffalo without a whole mess of legal complications.
And I can't imagine a deal already being in place considering the status of a long term stadium lease extension. Couple that with difficult economic times for governments at every level of this and the conclusion you come to is...
I'm sure Ralph's estate can sell to whoever they want to. I can't imagine Ralph being able to limit the sale post mortem to an ownership group that would keep the team in Buffalo without a whole mess of legal complications.
On any other business I think that would be perfectly legitimate. The issue AFAIK is not the family but the other 31 owners, who have to approve potential buyers. If a Buffalo group can't out bid a Los Angeles group (and they likely wouldn't), then the league is going to chase the $$$ and put a team in LA.
On any other business I think that would be perfectly legitimate. The issue AFAIK is not the family but the other 31 owners, who have to approve potential buyers. If a Buffalo group can't out bid a Los Angeles group (and they likely wouldn't), then the league is going to chase the $$$ and put a team in LA.
Well, the league does have a say in teams moving. Aside from that the Cost to do so would be VERY expensive. The cost to buy the Bills, pay relocation fees & the cost of a new stadium would most likely be too expensive for anyone to do so.
a move like this could actually force us blind idiots that root for this inept team year after year to actually go out and find a more successful team to root for. I hate myself for saying that!
Where else would you rather be than right here right now?
Well, the league does have a say in teams moving. Aside from that the Cost to do so would be VERY expensive. The cost to buy the Bills, pay relocation fees & the cost of a new stadium would most likely be too expensive for anyone to do so.
Why would you assume that? The Bills themselves are worth about $805 million (http://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations...on:asc_search:) and the vast vast majority of that value is in their license to be in the NFL. The relocation fees are minimal because we don't have a long-term stadium lease, and the NFL could (and would) waive any fees owed to it in connection with the move. Further, Farmer's Field is estimated to cost 1.2 billion to build (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmers_Field) so that leaves us with a ~$2 billion price tag to move a team to LA. That's what Magic Johnson's group just paid to own the LA Dodgers, so clearly that kind of money exists.
And that's before you consider that the cost of the stadium can be defrayed by splitting costs with USC or UCLA or a 2nd NFL franchise. And that a team in LA would significantly improve the NFL's TV contract next go around.
Why would you assume that? The Bills themselves are worth about $805 million (http://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations...on:asc_search:) and the vast vast majority of that value is in their license to be in the NFL. The relocation fees are minimal because we don't have a long-term stadium lease, and the NFL could (and would) waive any fees owed to it in connection with the move. Further, Farmer's Field is estimated to cost 1.2 billion to build (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmers_Field) so that leaves us with a ~$2 billion price tag to move a team to LA. That's what Magic Johnson's group just paid to own the LA Dodgers, so clearly that kind of money exists.
And that's before you consider that the cost of the stadium can be defrayed by splitting costs with USC or UCLA or a 2nd NFL franchise. And that a team in LA would significantly improve the NFL's TV contract next go around.
Well, you are wrong. ANY team that moves to LA will pay the owners of the other teams a hefty sum to do so. You are crazy to think the 31 other owners would not want to be PAID & PAID WELL. It is in EVERY owners best interest to have no team in LA so they can use LA as leverage when negotiating with the city they are in.
As for the TV deal, LA already gets good ratings. Lost viewers of the Buffalo Bills fans from all over the Country would be much greater than any additional viewers in the LA market. It would actually significantly hurt the NFL when they negotitiate a new contract to not have a team in Buffalo.
And the MANY Bills fans spread throughout the Country pay for the Sunday Ticket or go to sports bars to watch the Bills. If the Bills moved that would be lost revenue. In addition to that, LA is populated by transients. Many of which also pay for the Sunday ticket & go to Sports bars to watch their home town team. If they stop doing that to watch the LA team for FREE on TV, that is more lost revenue.
Any person that bought the Bills paid for the cost of the team, the relocation fee & the stadium cost he would be as old as Ralph before he saw any return on his investment.
Well, you are wrong. ANY team that moves to LA will pay the owners of the other teams a hefty sum to do so. You are crazy to think the 31 other owners would not want to be PAID & PAID WELL. It is in EVERY owners best interest to have no team in LA so they can use LA as leverage when negotiating with the city they are in.
Yeah, that was true 10 or 15 years ago. But look at how many stadiums have been built or majorly renovated since: Denver, Seattle, Arizona, Dallas, Houston, New England, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tampa, Tennessee, and probably a few I missed. Plus San Francisco and Minnesota each have one in the pipeline. The league is down to only a handful of realistic movers: San Diego, Jacksonville, and us. We're well past the tipping point where more owners benefit from having a team in LA then not having one.
As for the TV deal, LA already gets good ratings. Lost viewers of the Buffalo Bills fans from all over the Country would be much greater than any additional viewers in the LA market. It would actually significantly hurt the NFL when they negotitiate a new contract to not have a team in Buffalo.
That's a rather silly claim to make. There are 10 times as many people in the LA area than the Buffalo area, and there are correspondingly even more dispersed Angelinos. Buffalo does well for it's size, but we're still #20 out of 32 in terms of team popularity (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...782758620.html). You're also assuming that those Buffalonians would turn off the NFL and never come back if the Bills left. Many would, but your own example about Los Angeles proves that isn't true.
And the MANY Bills fans spread throughout the Country pay for the Sunday Ticket or go to sports bars to watch the Bills. If the Bills moved that would be lost revenue. In addition to that, LA is populated by transients. Many of which also pay for the Sunday ticket & go to Sports bars to watch their home town team. If they stop doing that to watch the LA team for FREE on TV, that is more lost revenue.
And the many new LA fans would buy merchandise and tickets for their new hometown team.
Any person that bought the Bills paid for the cost of the team, the relocation fee & the stadium cost he would be as old as Ralph before he saw any return on his investment.
And if he went to Los Angeles he'd have the #2 market in the country all to himself, he'd host a Super Bowl at least once a decade, he could sell out his luxury boxes to the substantially more numerous Fortune 500 companies, and he'd instantly be one of the glamour owners in all of sports.
Yeah, that was true 10 or 15 years ago. But look at how many stadiums have been built or majorly renovated since: Denver, Seattle, Arizona, Dallas, Houston, New England, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Tampa, Tennessee, and probably a few I missed. Plus San Francisco and Minnesota each have one in the pipeline. The league is down to only a handful of realistic movers: San Diego, Jacksonville, and us. We're well past the tipping point where more owners benefit from having a team in LA then not having one.
That's a rather silly claim to make. There are 10 times as many people in the LA area than the Buffalo area, and there are correspondingly even more dispersed Angelinos. Buffalo does well for it's size, but we're still #20 out of 32 in terms of team popularity (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...782758620.html). You're also assuming that those Buffalonians would turn off the NFL and never come back if the Bills left. Many would, but your own example about Los Angeles proves that isn't true.
And the many new LA fans would buy merchandise and tickets for their new hometown team.
And if he went to Los Angeles he'd have the #2 market in the country all to himself, he'd host a Super Bowl at least once a decade, he could sell out his luxury boxes to the substantially more numerous Fortune 500 companies, and he'd instantly be one of the glamour owners in all of sports.
Just as the Ralph has gotten old, so will all those new Stadiums. The Rams want their Stadium remodeled NOW. In the same way all those owners will want a remodel sooner rather than later. What I said is TRUE, it is in the best interest of ALL owners to have no team in LA.
Yes LA has a large market, but it is composed of TRANSIENTS. NY & Chicago are mostly composed of diehard fans that were born & grew up in those Cities. They are filled with HARD CORE Giants, Jets & Bears fans. LA would have the same problem attracting fans that Tampa & Miami do, two other Cities with a large transient population. As a Bucs fan, I have to watch their home games OTA on Ch36.1 Ft Myers rather than over the Sat from Tampa on Directv because they can't sell out even though they are playing well.
I did not make a silly claim. Yes the LA market is large, but as I said, they are already watching NFL football on Sunday. I don't think a New team in LA would add as many new viewers to the NFL as it would lose if the Bills ever moved. And the people that would buy tickets & merchandise to the new LA team already buy merchandise & the Sunday ticket for their home teams so that would be a wash at best.
A new owner would have the #2 market in LA, but that market is FOOLS GOLD. It is full of transients & always will be. LA is not an NFL City, the fans there prefer College football, basketball & baseball to the NFL & did even when LA had two NFL teams. As I said, anyone that bought the Bills & moved them to LA would be as old as Ralph before he saw any return on his investment.
Tweet
Comment