Value Of Buffalo Bills Depends On Team's Location In 2020

[Fletch]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/07/16/value-of-buffalo-bills-depends-on-teams-location-in-2020/

How much are the Buffalo Bills worth? My partner in crime, Kurt Badenhausen, and I need to answer that question as we prepare our NFL team (http://www.forbes.com/companies/team/) valuations for publication in August.


The answer depends on where the team will be in six years–Buffalo, Los Angeles or Toronto. I am beginning to think the Bills will end up in Toronto.

[More at Link]

[Night Train]

The guy did zero research regarding the current situation.

It's an opinion piece, based on 5 Vodka tonics.

[jimmifli]

The trust (http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/what8217s-next-for-the-bills-for-now-the-team-will-be-controlled-by-a-trust-20140325) that has controlled the team since the death of Ralph Wilson is currently selling the NFL team and has a fiduciary responsibility to get maximum value.

They don't know that. The trust has a duty to follow whatever criteria the deceased provided. That's typically highest bidder, but we or the authors have no way of knowing. Unless they've got access to information that the public does not.

[coastal]

I think Gil pointed out some tax implications that may prevent a local discount.

not sure how that impacts things.

[OpIv37]

Nothing to see here.

First, it's an opinion piece. Second, it's stating the obvious. Yes, a football team is worth more if it is in a larger, wealthier city than a smaller transitional city.

Third, they kinda missed the boat on the lease issue. Yes, it will only cost $28 mill to move the team after 2019 and yes the team would be worth more in another city, but it's 2014. No one is going to pay what the team would be worth in Toronto or LA in 2020 to buy a team that's actually in Buffalo in 2014. He fails to make a connection between the team's value in another city to the cost to buy the team now.

[Topas]

I think Gil pointed out some tax implications that may prevent a local discount.

not sure how that impacts things.

Huh? I would be interested to see that.
What can happen if the trust has the responsibility to sell to the bidder to sell to the highest bid that keeps the Bills in town AND bids at least 75% of the highest bid. I know "keeps the Bills in town" is tough to define and put into a contract. And it could happen that none qualifies for both criteria. But just for the sake of the argument.

Why would there be tax implications that are a problem. Well other than that the fund gets less money in the end. But that is not really a tax problem. Actually the fund would have to pay even less tax, so thats a plus :-)

[coastal]

Huh? I would be interested to see that.
What can happen if the trust has the responsibility to sell to the bidder to sell to the highest bid that keeps the Bills in town AND bids at least 75% of the highest bid. I know "keeps the Bills in town" is tough to define and put into a contract. And it could happen that none qualifies for both criteria. But just for the sake of the argument.

Why would there be tax implications that are a problem. Well other than that the fund gets less money in the end. But that is not really a tax problem. Actually the fund would have to pay even less tax, so thats a plus :-)
It has something to do with a fair market value assessment of the franchise's worth.

If the Bills are sold for $800 million but are really valued at $1.1 billion, the estate will be taxed on the sale at the $1.1 billion amount.

its probably in the tax law to prevent the rich from paying a less than full amount on the estate tax by preventing pre-mortem discount sale arrangements.

[trapezeus]

until the team is sold, i am guessing fletch will continue to post his hopes that the bills move so he can say "he called it!" ANd if they are sold and they stay put, i am guessing we'll hear less from him.

these stories are unbelievable. there are a lot of factors that go into it and we simply don't know.

the idea that buffalo simply can't support it is false and the idea that this team is safe if purchased locally is also false.

[Fletch]

They don't know that. The trust has a duty to follow whatever criteria the deceased provided. That's typically highest bidder, but we or the authors have no way of knowing. Unless they've got access to information that the public does not.

Usually when a trust is involved, in the case of a sale, it's typical that the goal is getting the maximum amount of money for it. Keep in mind here, this isn't just a couple of Wilson's "children," it's a board.

[Fletch]

Nothing to see here.

First, it's an opinion piece. Second, it's stating the obvious. Yes, a football team is worth more if it is in a larger, wealthier city than a smaller transitional city.

Third, they kinda missed the boat on the lease issue. Yes, it will only cost $28 mill to move the team after 2019 and yes the team would be worth more in another city, but it's 2014. No one is going to pay what the team would be worth in Toronto or LA in 2020 to buy a team that's actually in Buffalo in 2014. He fails to make a connection between the team's value in another city to the cost to buy the team now.

Pretty much everything to date is opinion besides that the team's going to go up for sale and who some of the interested potential buyers are. Pretty much everything else is speculation although there are reasons to believe some things, such as that the state won't be willing to put much into a new stadium for example and that the county or surrounding counties aren't in a position to contribute much either.

I also disagree that the selling price will not be impacted by the future intentions of the owner. For example, let's say that an owner is interested in moving the team, say Toronto but it doesn't matter for the sake of discussion, it would make sense that this potential owner has had a back room discussion with Goodell or someone else at the league about it and whether or not it's a possibility.

Here's the thing, the NFL has been blowing its "international" horn for years. Either they're serious or they're not. I happen to think that they are despite the fact that I don't like the idea. As I always say, it doesn't matter what I or anyone else prefers in matters like this. Assuming that they're serious, the only two real possibilities for a team to be based "internationally" are Canada (Toronto) and England (London). Right now London appears to simply be a place for some teams to play a game every season but nothing more. So Toronto is the primary logical choice. Given the notion that the team and NFL has already made forays into Toronto, this makes more sense than anything.

Lastly, everyone seems to discounting the notion that the $400M moving fee is insurmountable. I don't think that it would be difficult at all for interests intent on hastening a move there to pull together that amount of funding, and it likely wouldn't have to be that amount since the team would in every likelihood make much more money there, so any new owners might be happy with half or slightly more than that by those willing to chip in to make it happen.

Either way, if Pegula and Golisano are willing to overpay to keep the team here, it's hardly beyond reason to think that another owner might be willing to pay to get out of a lease to cement his spot and legacy as Canada's, and the world's, owner of the first non-US NFL team.

[Fletch]

Huh? I would be interested to see that.
What can happen if the trust has the responsibility to sell to the bidder to sell to the highest bid that keeps the Bills in town AND bids at least 75% of the highest bid. I know "keeps the Bills in town" is tough to define and put into a contract. And it could happen that none qualifies for both criteria. But just for the sake of the argument.

Why would there be tax implications that are a problem. Well other than that the fund gets less money in the end. But that is not really a tax problem. Actually the fund would have to pay even less tax, so thats a plus :-)

Talk about speculation. Either way, here's why I don't think that there's anything written anywhere that stipulates any such things. First, I think that if Wilson had been that concerned he'd have sold the team himself to whomever he pleased. Secondly, at some point something like that becomes a little more complicated than simply sales figures. Last, I think any such information would have been released (or leaked) by now. Remember, the more stipulations in something like this, the greater the chances of the whole thing ending up in court and making this look ridiculous.

[better days]

Usually when a trust is involved, in the case of a sale, it's typical that the goal is getting the maximum amount of money for it. Keep in mind here, this isn't just a couple of Wilson's "children," it's a board.

But also keep in mind this is not a typical case of a sale.

It is well known that Ralph HATED the idea of teams moving.

There is no way of knowing what criteria Ralph instructed the trust to use.

[Fletch]

until the team is sold, i am guessing fletch will continue to post his hopes that the bills move so he can say "he called it!" ANd if they are sold and they stay put, i am guessing we'll hear less from him.

these stories are unbelievable. there are a lot of factors that go into it and we simply don't know.

the idea that buffalo simply can't support it is false and the idea that this team is safe if purchased locally is also false.

Yeah, thanks. I always enjoy when people speak for me.

You'll hear less from me if the new owner doesn't replace the front office. If he keeps Brandon, Whaley, and the rest of those dinosaur fixtures and friends and cronies of Wilson's in there, you'll rarely hear from me. Like I've said before, if a new owner doesn't shed Wilson's way of doing business, then we should expect nothing but another 20 years of what we've seen over the last 14. I realize that might sound appealing to you, but it doesn't to me.

I'm hoping that they stay, clearly, but I just don't see it in the modern era. Instead of opining like a child, why don't you do what I've done, ask yourself if Buffalo did not have a team already, would it even make the short list of potential places for either a new team or to move one to? I haven't heard anyone address that other than to simply throw out their opinion that Buffalo's the best financial place for this team but without laying out any basis for it besides longshot speculation.

The answer on either is no, it wouldn't. So then how you or anyone else can sit here and insist that Buffalo is just as viable a market as any other is foolishness.

If it's not just as viable, it's less viable. If it's less viable, then there are other more viable markets. If there are other more viable markets, then they're definitely in play now. Period. To think otherwise is to ignore reality. We can all sit here and talk about how there's no chance the team will move, whistle "over the rainbow" together, and congratulate each other on what great fans we are because we don't believe that the team will move, but that wouldn't alter reality and the facts. Would it?

I don't think that there's a person that posts here or in any Bills forum that wants the team to move, for any reason. To say that just shows how limited you are in your discussion skills.

I will admit that if the new owner doesn't install a new front office then I really don't care whether they move or not, but that's hardly to say that I hope that they do, it would simply mean that I'd be ambivalent over it.

I want a winner, or at least an owner that understands what it takes to build a winner and one that puts his money in the right spots, not the wrong ones like overpaying big names when the fans are on the fringes of apathy. I'd like one that spends some bucks on a good GM who in turn hires the right head coach that turns around and hires competent assistants. But you know what, if we can't have competence in that way, then my level of caring diminishes drastically. I'm tired of being a whipping boy amongst people for my allegiance to a team that insults us as fans by their personnel moves and treats us a financial supporters instead of fans that expect competence by people getting paid millions to have some.

[Fletch]

But also keep in mind this is not a typical case of a sale.

It is well known that Ralph HATED the idea of teams moving.

There is no way of knowing what criteria Ralph instructed the trust to use.

Understood, but there is only so much that one can build into a trustee sale such as this. Again, if Wilson were so concerned about the team moving, then he could easily have seen to it himself, particularly since it was clear that he wasn't going to live to see 100, and sold the team for whatever amount of money he wanted to whomever he chose. If there was a problem with that then, then there's a problem with it now. If not, then I question how ardently he really tried to see to it that the team wouldn't move. Either way, it is what it is and he has no more control posthumously.

To me it's pretty evident, the team can clearly make both more revenues as well as greater profits elsewhere. What it's going to come down to is whether the cost of moving the team will be worth the $400 out clause plus any difference in bids generated by overbidding on the parts of bidders that are willing to overpay to keep the team here. Everyone assumes that Golisano and Pegula are both willing to overpay to keep the team here even if it means that they'd sustain financial losses for the foreseeable future. But we haven't read that anywhere. All we've seen is how "aggressive" one or more of them will be in the bidding. So all this talk about how they're willing to pay whatever it takes to see to it that the team stays here is mere opinion. I'd love it, but I also wouldn't count on it.

Having said that, if a new owner can increase his revenue by several hundred million and his profits by 20 or 30M by moving the team and eating that $400M, I don't think that it's a hurdle that we should cavalierly dismiss, that's all.

[better days]

If Green Bay did not already have a team would they get one today?

Toronto failed to go see the NFL when the Bills played up there.

Why would anyone think a NFL team would be successful in Toronto just because that City is filled with rich hockey fans & poor soccer fans?

LA is a proven College football town. It did not support the NFL in the past & any Stadium built there would have to be built with private money.

[better days]

Understood, but there is only so much that one can build into a trustee sale such as this. Again, if Wilson were so concerned about the team moving, then he could easily have seen to it himself, particularly since it was clear that he wasn't going to live to see 100, and sold the team for whatever amount of money he wanted to whomever he chose. If there was a problem with that then, then there's a problem with it now. If not, then I question how ardently he really tried to see to it that the team wouldn't move. Either way, it is what it is and he has no more control posthumously.

To me it's pretty evident, the team can clearly make both more revenues as well as greater profits elsewhere. What it's going to come down to is whether the cost of moving the team will be worth the $400 out clause plus any difference in bids generated by overbidding on the parts of bidders that are willing to overpay to keep the team here. Everyone assumes that Golisano and Pegula are both willing to overpay to keep the team here even if it means that they'd sustain financial losses for the foreseeable future. But we haven't read that anywhere. All we've seen is how "aggressive" one or more of them will be in the bidding. So all this talk about how they're willing to pay whatever it takes to see to it that the team stays here is mere opinion. I'd love it, but I also wouldn't count on it.

Having said that, if a new owner can increase his revenue by several hundred million and his profits by 20 or 30M by moving the team and eating that $400M, I don't think that it's a hurdle that we should cavalierly dismiss, that's all.

Well, for one thing, Ralph loved the Bills & wanted to die owning them.

And I am not a tax expert, but I believe if Ralph sold the Bills while he was alive, he would have been taxed on that sale & then there would have been estate taxes after he died.

In other words, the money from the Bills would have had double taxation.

[better days]

It has something to do with a fair market value assessment of the franchise's worth.

If the Bills are sold for $800 million but are really valued at $1.1 billion, the estate will be taxed on the sale at the $1.1 billion amount.

its probably in the tax law to prevent the rich from paying a less than full amount on the estate tax by preventing pre-mortem discount sale arrangements.

The Bills worth has been established by the banks already.

[jimmifli]

It has something to do with a fair market value assessment of the franchise's worth.

If the Bills are sold for $800 million but are really valued at $1.1 billion, the estate will be taxed on the sale at the $1.1 billion amount.

its probably in the tax law to prevent the rich from paying a less than full amount on the estate tax by preventing pre-mortem discount sale arrangements.

Sure. But rich people have lawyers too. Usually smarter than government lawyers.

So Ralph's lawyers add a qualifying clause that says in order to speed up the process and protect the value all bidders must have ties Buffalo and a proven ability to complete the terms of the lease. Rumours of moving could substantially hurt revenue during the period while it is owned by the trust and thus damage the resale value. It would be tough for the IRS to prove that wasn't the case and that the qualifying clause did in fact lead to the highest valuation.

Presto, all bidders are Buffalo based and the trust picks the highest bidder among them.

[TedMock]

LA is a proven College football town. It did not support the NFL in the past & any Stadium built there would have to be built with private money.

I do not believe our team will move to LA, but I think the "lack of support" thing, which is a wildly popular theory, is a bit misguided. The lack of support was not from the fans - at least that is my understanding.

The Rams left because of an issue with the county over non-shared revenue which was way less than what other NFL cities agreed to.

The Raiders left because the City refused to help out with stadium renovations.

Both were lack of local government spending. Things are different now. There have been some hiccups with an LA team recently, but the overall support is there.

Last year, the LA City Council voted UNANIMOUSLY in favor of bringing a team to LA as it was "in the city's best interest."

Last year (or the year before, I can't remember) the LA City Council approved a plan by a private entity (AEG) to build a $1.5 billion stadium contingent upon the city being rewarded a team. There have been some issues around this since then, but I think it shows the overall support and determination necessary to get a deal done. I really hope it is not the Bills and I do not believe it will be.

[Fletch]

If Green Bay did not already have a team would they get one today?

Toronto failed to go see the NFL when the Bills played up there.

Why would anyone think a NFL team would be successful in Toronto just because that City is filled with rich hockey fans & poor soccer fans?

LA is a proven College football town. It did not support the NFL in the past & any Stadium built there would have to be built with private money.

It's statements like these that originally made me put you on my ignore list as its sole occupier.

Your statement on Green Bay isn't germane to this discussion. They're not for sale. Besides, and please, do your homework, but they draw from the Milwaukee MSA which is twice the size of Buffalo's, and Madison's as well.

Toronto didn't host their own team, it was ours. This team has been ours for over 50 years since its inception, and when I posted a poll as to who would follow it if it merely went an hour away to Toronto very few said yes like they would if it were their own team. Yet, you expect more from Canadians?

[Fletch]

Well, for one thing, Ralph loved the Bills & wanted to die owning them.

And I am not a tax expert, but I believe if Ralph sold the Bills while he was alive, he would have been taxed on that sale & then there would have been estate taxes after he died.

In other words, the money from the Bills would have had double taxation.

Yeah, it's tough to live on $250M contrasted with $500M. I don't know how he and his extended family could have gotten along.

Again, the money clearly meant more. I'll buy that, but it's not going to mean less now that he's gone. You're arguing that it was about the money while he was living butg now that he's gone it's not. That makes no sense nor is it logical. If anything his heirs, none of which want to have anything to do with the team, nor any of which have any particularly loyalty to the region, will want more.

[Fletch]

Sure. But rich people have lawyers too. Usually smarter than government lawyers.

So Ralph's lawyers add a qualifying clause that says in order to speed up the process and protect the value all bidders must have ties Buffalo and a proven ability to complete the terms of the lease. Rumours of moving could substantially hurt revenue during the period while it is owned by the trust and thus damage the resale value. It would be tough for the IRS to prove that wasn't the case and that the qualifying clause did in fact lead to the highest valuation.

Presto, all bidders are Buffalo based and the trust picks the highest bidder among them.

And why not just put it in the terms that they have to stay in Buffalo for the next hundred years. That's ridiculous.

No owner is going to buy an NFL franchise being handcuffed by idiotic whims of the prior owner.

[stuckincincy]

If Green Bay did not already have a team would they get one today?

Toronto failed to go see the NFL when the Bills played up there.

Why would anyone think a NFL team would be successful in Toronto just because that City is filled with rich hockey fans & poor soccer fans?

LA is a proven College football town. It did not support the NFL in the past & any Stadium built there would have to be built with private money.


You are right. I recall folks here crabbing about the Toronto games, saying things like there were more Fin jerseys in the stands that Bills jerseys. There is the matter of the viability of the CFL Argos to consider...Canada is not alien to protectionism. And AFAIK, Canadians get to watch all the NFL they can stand on tv already.

Toronto is one of the world's great cities - no end of venues to spend the entertainment buck.

[trapezeus]

Yeah, thanks. I always enjoy when people speak for me.

You'll hear less from me if the new owner doesn't replace the front office. If he keeps Brandon, Whaley, and the rest of those dinosaur fixtures and friends and cronies of Wilson's in there, you'll rarely hear from me. Like I've said before, if a new owner doesn't shed Wilson's way of doing business, then we should expect nothing but another 20 years of what we've seen over the last 14. I realize that might sound appealing to you, but it doesn't to me.

I'm hoping that they stay, clearly, but I just don't see it in the modern era. Instead of opining like a child, why don't you do what I've done, ask yourself if Buffalo did not have a team already, would it even make the short list of potential places for either a new team or to move one to? I haven't heard anyone address that other than to simply throw out their opinion that Buffalo's the best financial place for this team but without laying out any basis for it besides longshot speculation.

The answer on either is no, it wouldn't. So then how you or anyone else can sit here and insist that Buffalo is just as viable a market as any other is foolishness.

If it's not just as viable, it's less viable. If it's less viable, then there are other more viable markets. If there are other more viable markets, then they're definitely in play now. Period. To think otherwise is to ignore reality. We can all sit here and talk about how there's no chance the team will move, whistle "over the rainbow" together, and congratulate each other on what great fans we are because we don't believe that the team will move, but that wouldn't alter reality and the facts. Would it?

I don't think that there's a person that posts here or in any Bills forum that wants the team to move, for any reason. To say that just shows how limited you are in your discussion skills.

I will admit that if the new owner doesn't install a new front office then I really don't care whether they move or not, but that's hardly to say that I hope that they do, it would simply mean that I'd be ambivalent over it.

I want a winner, or at least an owner that understands what it takes to build a winner and one that puts his money in the right spots, not the wrong ones like overpaying big names when the fans are on the fringes of apathy. I'd like one that spends some bucks on a good GM who in turn hires the right head coach that turns around and hires competent assistants. But you know what, if we can't have competence in that way, then my level of caring diminishes drastically. I'm tired of being a whipping boy amongst people for my allegiance to a team that insults us as fans by their personnel moves and treats us a financial supporters instead of fans that expect competence by people getting paid millions to have some.

you don't listen to any conflicting data about TV contracts, the general area being on better footing, getting government support via NYS and dedicated fan base. you don't listen when people say, "the owners agreed to the iron clad lease" and they didn't have to do that. they were past a lease. that would have been the easiest to sell and move. no restrictions and an aging owner. instead they signed that lease with at least 24 of 32 owners agreeing.

yet you keep talking about the move. So it's not a discussion. its you saying the same thing over and over again.

and i'm the loudest critic of brandon. he's a know nothing, smithers type that only cares about a modelled profit. and that requires a small payroll and not filling the seats. he's too nervous to put out a winner because he know he can't do it.

winning cures most of the bills small market image issues. they put out a fun team and people will watch them. may not be fans of them, but they'll be excited to see that game. as the bills have been run, no one wants to see the bills but the most dedicated fan base.

[cookie G]

Usually when a trust is involved, in the case of a sale, it's typical that the goal is getting the maximum amount of money for it. Keep in mind here, this isn't just a couple of Wilson's "children," it's a board.

Jimmi's post pretty much went over your head. The trustees, or the board of trustees, is governed by the terms of the trust documents, whatever they may be.

His point is that the trust documents most likely have certain restrictions in them favoring a purchaser who will keep the team local. The trustees are required to work within those parameters.

[cookie G]

It has something to do with a fair market value assessment of the franchise's worth.

If the Bills are sold for $800 million but are really valued at $1.1 billion, the estate will be taxed on the sale at the $1.1 billion amount.

its probably in the tax law to prevent the rich from paying a less than full amount on the estate tax by preventing pre-mortem discount sale arrangements.

That's very true.

The IRS uses teh classic definition of the term "fair market value". It is "the price at which the property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts."

They treat most cases as unique, and provide few hard and fast regulations to meet that definition. The sale of an NFL franchise..which doesn't happen very often, is most definitely unique. IF there is a bona fide dispute with the IRS over valuation in this sale..I'd love to read the briefs and transcripts..because I'd love to see the factors involved when considering the sale.

But break the definition down..

willing buyer;
willing seller;
no compulsion
reasonable knowledge of relevant facts.

Since Ralph's lawyers and bean counters knew the Bills couldn't just say, "we're selling it local no matter what the price", they did the next best thing...

...they made the franchise less attractive for someone who wants to move it. The penalty for moving is severe enough to dissuade the outside owner from moving...enough to offset additional revenue they might receive through additional corporate sponsorships.

What does that do? It makes for a less "willing" buyer if they intend to move the team, or eliminates willing buyers altogether. And..they did with the help of the county and state governments.

The lease was a pretty clever move. The lease, and whatever trust restriction may be in place, are some of the "relevant factors" which a willing buyer would have reasonable knowledge. And they get to use the county/state as the bad guy "they made us do it..we wouldn't have had a place to play without it".

If the IRS says, "the franchise would be more valuable in LA"...the Bills counter with, "yes, that's true, but for the lease and the $400 million relocation fee. Others considered buying the team but realized that waiting 7 years to move the team was too long to wait for the increased revenue."

Think of it in terms of a deed restriction on land.

Example...

A farmer has some land outside a city. The land is valuable for farming, but is more valuable for commercial purposes, such as a warehouse. The problem is...there is a deed restriction that the land may only be used for agricultural or residential purposes.

Is it worth more if a warehouse was on it? Yes.
Will a developer pay for it with the deed restriction in place? No.
Are these relevant facts to consider when determining FMV? Absolutely.
Can the IRS base its decision without considering the deed restriction? Maybe..but it will lose eventually in Tax Court or a higher court..

In any event, with Pegula and Galisano involved in the bidding and the interest they are showing..I'm not as worried about the hometown discount factor. A new owner that wants to move them has to overcome both, plus a restrictive lease, plus waiting 7 years to move them, plus moving them to cities without a decent stadium in place or definite plans for construction of a new stadium.

When the trustees are talking about a quick sale..I'm sure that is one of the factors involved...not waiting for LA or Toronto to provide concrete plans for a new facility.

And, I suspect the purchase price is well above $800 million. I'd be surprised if they went for less than 1.2 billion..and close to 2 billion wouldn't shock me.

[jimmifli]

And why not just put it in the terms that they have to stay in Buffalo for the next hundred years. That's ridiculous.

No owner is going to buy an NFL franchise being handcuffed by idiotic whims of the prior owner.
I think you missed the argument. coastal (paraphrasing Gil) said that the IRS requires a sale to the highest bidder. I don't believe that to be the case, I believe in reality it is much more complicated and it's difficult to prove which bidding process would lead to the highest bid.

Business valuation isn't an exact science. It's a matter of opinion with LOTS of variance. If someone wants to use a multiple of revenue that's one valid method (among many). But what would happen to revenue if we knew this was the last season the Bills would be in Buffalo? The trust has a fiduciary duty to protect the value of the franchise, and that means protecting the revenue. Rumours the Bills are moving could substantially impact the valuation the franchise is sold for. So it isn't unreasonable to take action that would prevent a decline in revenue - action such as requiring all bidders to have an intention to stay in Buffalo.

A long sales process could also hurt the value. And so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have requirements that bidders are able to execute the sale in a timely manner. Moving the franchise is more likely to delay the process because it is likely to face more opposition from existing NFL owners. There are lots of legitimate methods that could be used to restrict the bidding pool to local buyers. There aren't a lot of NFL teams being sold, and the circumstances surrounding each one is substantially different. The value is as much determined by current economic conditions as it is by value. As such there isn't really much precedent the IRS could use to claim they were cheated out of tax revenue.

The lease is an effective method to restrict bidders. It seems like it was designed for that purpose, and if that is the case, it's reasonable to think there may be other requirements that are also designed to restrict the bidding process to "Buffalo based" bidders.

We don't know if there are other requirements that might make also further restrict out of town bidders. I don't know if that's the case. Nobody does. But the IRS and the tax ramifications of selling to a restricted list of buyers isn't going to necessitate a sale to the highest bidder. We just don't know. The board of trustees have a duty to follow Ralph's wishes. So far, only they know what those wishes are.

[better days]

Yeah, it's tough to live on $250M contrasted with $500M. I don't know how he and his extended family could have gotten along.

Again, the money clearly meant more. I'll buy that, but it's not going to mean less now that he's gone. You're arguing that it was about the money while he was living butg now that he's gone it's not. That makes no sense nor is it logical. If anything his heirs, none of which want to have anything to do with the team, nor any of which have any particularly loyalty to the region, will want more.

I don't expect the trust to give the Bills to Pegula for nothing.

He will pay a fair price for them. That price has already been determined by the banks the Bills hired when they put the team up for sale.

And Pegula has already liquidated assets to have cash on hand to buy the team.

[SpikedLemonade]

There is the matter of the viability of the CFL Argos to consider...Canada is not alien to protectionism. .

No one gives a crap about the Toronto Argos any more. That was almost 35 years ago.

The issue in Toronto with respect to supporting the Bills was that Toronto people don't identify with the Bills or Buffalo. Both are laughed at.

The biggest obstacle to Toronto getting a NFL team is a NFL stadium. There is no appetite for public funds to be used on that any longer. Those days are over.

A Toronto team would be very successful but you need an owner willing to spend $2.5B between the price of the team, the NFL relocation fee and an expensive domed stadium.

That is a decade or two away.

[better days]

No one gives a crap about the Toronto Argos any more. That was almost 35 years ago.

The issue in Toronto with respect to supporting the Bills was that Toronto people don't identify with the Bills or Buffalo. Both are laughed at.

The biggest obstacle to Toronto getting a NFL team is a NFL stadium. There is no appetite for public funds to be used on that any longer. Those days are over.

A Toronto team would be very successful but you need an owner willing to spend $2.5B between the price of the team, the NFL relocation fee and an expensive domed stadium.

That is a decade or two away.

Why would anyone expect an NFL team would be successful in Toronto when NOBODY in Toronto showed up to watch NFL football?

And yes we know Toronto people don't identify with the Bills or Buffalo, well what team does London or Mexico City identify with?

NFL fans from both those Cities show up to watch NFL football regardless who is playing.

[SpikedLemonade]

Why would anyone expect an NFL team would be successful in Toronto when NOBODY in Toronto showed up to watch NFL football?

And yes we know Toronto people don't identify with the Bills or Buffalo, well what team does London or Mexico City identify with?

NFL fans from both those Cities show up to watch NFL football regardless who is playing.

It was barely NFL football -- it was the Buffalo Bills.

They would have sold more tickets in Toronto if they rotated random NFL teams like they do in London and the Bills were never there.

Crap! With all the manufactured sell outs in Buffalo over the past few years and tickets 1/5th the price that they were in Toronto, it can be argued that people in Buffalo aren't showing up to watch the Bills in Buffalo.

Let's see how these next 6 years go as the price of tickets rise quickly in Buffalo.

I will try to make it over the border for a game or two per year but it is really people in the Buffalo area that need to put their money where their mouth is.

[better days]

It was barely NFL football -- it was the Buffalo Bills.

They would have sold more tickets in Toronto if they rotated random NFL teams like they do in London and the Bills were never there.

Crap! With all the manufactured sell outs in Buffalo over the past few years and tickets 1/5th the price that they were in Toronto, it can be argued that people in Buffalo aren't showing up to watch the Bills in Buffalo.

Let's see how these next 6 years go as the price of tickets rise quickly in Buffalo.

I will try to make it over the border for a game or two per year but it is really people in the Buffalo area that need to put their money where their mouth is.

Ralph Wilson Stadium has seating for over 70,000 people.

With the MANY RICH people of Toronto they could not even fill up a 40,000 seat stadium.

I do not buy that it was because the Bills were one of the teams playing.

If the Bills were to play in London or Mexico City, I have no doubt those Stadiums would sell out.

I think it is because the NFL is not required watching by the VAST MAJORITY of people in Toronto.

[SpikedLemonade]

Ralph Wilson Stadium has seating for over 70,000 people.

With the MANY RICH people of Toronto they could not even fill up a 40,000 seat stadium.

I do not buy that it was because the Bills were one of the teams playing.

If the Bills were to play in London or Mexico City, I have no doubt those Stadiums would sell out.

I think it is because the NFL is not required watching by the VAST MAJORITY of people in Toronto.

WTF do you know about Toronto or the Toronto people of today?

The Bills games were just not the place to be in Toronto. Terrible atmosphere and no interest in the Bills. Any Bills fan like me went to one of the Toronto games and never went again. Much prefer to see the Bills in Buffalo.

If the time comes that Toronto gets its own team, it will be very successful. That is not happening any time soon.

Buffalo is no more than a wart on Toronto's ass.

[better days]

WTF do you know about Toronto or the Toronto people of today?

The Bills games were just not the place to be in Toronto. Terrible atmosphere and no interest in the Bills. Any Bills fan like me went to one of the Toronto games and never went again. Much prefer to see the Bills in Buffalo.

If the time comes that Toronto gets its own team, it will be very successful. That is not happening any time soon.

Buffalo is no more than a wart on Toronto's ass.

I have relatives that live in Toronto & have visited them many times, although not lately.

I talked to a woman from Toronto down on vacation a few weeks ago.

She told me the City has turned into a dump.

And no interest in the NFL is more like it, not just the Bills.

What makes you think an NFL team would be successful in Toronto?

Just because it has a large population? Much of that population is immigrants & soccer is their sport.

Hockey is the passion of Canada, Not the NFL & the NFL will never be the passion of Canada.

And I know something about Canada, my father was born in Winnipeg & I have had a vacation home in Canada in the past.

[SpikedLemonade]

I have relatives that live in Toronto & have visited them many times, although not lately.

I talked to a woman from Toronto down on vacation a few weeks ago.

She told me the City has turned into a dump.

And no interest in the NFL is more like it, not just the Bills.

What makes you think an NFL team would be successful in Toronto?

Just because it has a large population? Much of that population is immigrants & soccer is their sport.

Hockey is the passion of Canada, Not the NFL & the NFL will never be the passion of Canada.

And I know something about Canada, my father was born in Winnipeg & I have had a vacation home in Canada in the past.

LOL!!!!!

[better days]

LOL!!!!!

At anyone thinking that Toronto would support an NFL team.

They couldn't even fill a 40,000 seat Stadium. We are talking 40,000 seats!

Hell the Leafs would have no problem filling that many seats, but there are not even 40,000 NFL fans in all of Toronto!

[Fletch]

I think you missed the argument. coastal (paraphrasing Gil) said that the IRS requires a sale to the highest bidder. I don't believe that to be the case, I believe in reality it is much more complicated and it's difficult to prove which bidding process would lead to the highest bid.

My point was that regardless, the trust I'm sure has, as someone else stated, a fiduciary responsibility to sell to the highest bidder as is typically the case. Trusts act in the interests of a person(s). Wilson's family has already made it beyond clear that they really don't want to have anything to do with the team anymore. To my knowledge none of them even live in Buffalo, but either way, there is no reason why they should even care if the team remains here unless they care on behalf of their recently deceased father, but I don't think that's going to be a factor. Having said that, there can only be so many restrictions for any new owner. One is the $400M stipulation to move the team, but that doesn't make moving the team impossible, it merely puts a price tag on moving the team, for six more seasons.

So my point is that I cannot imagine any more than that in any stipulations for any new owner. Why would a new owner buy a team that he can't do A, B, and C with, and must do D, E, and F with if he wants to buy it? Any new owner will own the team and be able to do with it what he wants within the constraints of league permission, rules, and bylaws. This notion that has been floated, even if only implicitly, that there's any more in this deal that would restrict a future owner borders on the ridiculous.

I cannot imagine a scenario where a board is in a position to sit there and argue, with massive potential for disagreement, and having the lattitude to do that. Such thinking makes no sense. It's likely going to go to the highest bidder. Again, if Wilson wanted to keep the team here he could very easily have sold it prior to his passing to Golisano, or Pegula, or to whomever he wanted, without a highest bidder process, and for an amount that would facilitate keeping the team here. He chose not to do that. So I challenge the extent to which he really cared about keeping the team here as he could have seen to it that it would happen. At this point a new owner is going to have to pony up the kind of money for which the team could have revenues and make profits in a city like Toronto or any number of other cities with greater MSAs and greater TV markets.

So if an owner that wants to keep the team here long term bids, he's going to be up against sticker prices that make sense in markets much bigger than Buffalo's. But the team obviously cannot make a profit like that here, that's the whole point of this. Make sense?


Business valuation isn't an exact science. It's a matter of opinion with LOTS of variance. If someone wants to use a multiple of revenue that's one valid method (among many). But what would happen to revenue if we knew this was the last season the Bills would be in Buffalo? The trust has a fiduciary duty to protect the value of the franchise, and that means protecting the revenue. Rumours the Bills are moving could substantially impact the valuation the franchise is sold for. So it isn't unreasonable to take action that would prevent a decline in revenue - action such as requiring all bidders to have an intention to stay in Buffalo.

First of all, valuation is much mor of a science than you say. It depends upon the industry, type of business, service or product, etc. A hair salon for example is only as valuable as the stylists working it. If someone buys a hair salon, they'd better buy the stylists, because the brick and mortar part of it is worth nothing on its own. Same for many service industry companies. For many three times profits is a good "scientific" valuation. NFL teams, or any pro sports teams, are somewhat different in that there are huge emotional elements and they step outside of their business parameters and steal money from the public in the form of tax money to pay their expenses. There's also enormous ego factors for potential owners, and I think in our case uberwealthy owners that have uberwealth and may not mind taking a loss simply to keep the team around. I mean really, what's a $20M annual loss to an owner that's worth billions and has it to lose.

The trust's fiduciary duty is to whomever the proceeds go to, not to the NFL. The trust is acting on the part of Wilson's heirs, which I presume to be his family members, immediate or extended. As such, expect the team to be sold to the highest bidder. I wouldn't think that there could be a formal stipulation that any new owner validate his intention of keeping the team in Buffalo, I'm not sure how that would be enforced. I mean let's consider this, just suppose that an owner buys, with a formal stipulation that the team stays in Buffalo for the foreseeable future, let's say 20 years. But four years in the team is losing money now for one reason or another, which could very well include the lack of a new stadium, and the new owner doesn't want to build one here because it doesn't make financial sense. Now the future holds only losses for the next 16 years. So you're saying that such an owner would be obliged to stay here and lose money in a delapidating stadium? I don't envision any scenario whatsoever that would bind any new owner as such nor do I see any owner, including Pegula or Golisano, agreeing to such terms. It would be sheer idiocy.

Every potential owner is going to say that he's keeping the team in Buffalo indefinitely. Only a fool would not, and to be honest, right now there's no reason to not say that. If a stadium gets built, if things work out and the team can continue to remain economically viable here, it may be foolish to move the team at any time under such circumstances. The problem for us is that that set of circumstances isn't likely to materialize. But no owner is going to say that they're moving the team because it just wouldn't be good business for the next 6 seasons or for however long the team would be here. I would expect any such news to break late in a season or at the end of one with either an immediate move to locale that has either a viable stadium or a temporary one to play in in their new city, or the announcement that one is being built and that the next season would be the last in Buffalo.


A long sales process could also hurt the value. And so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have requirements that bidders are able to execute the sale in a timely manner. Moving the franchise is more likely to delay the process because it is likely to face more opposition from existing NFL owners. There are lots of legitimate methods that could be used to restrict the bidding pool to local buyers. There aren't a lot of NFL teams being sold, and the circumstances surrounding each one is substantially different. The value is as much determined by current economic conditions as it is by value. As such there isn't really much precedent the IRS could use to claim they were cheated out of tax revenue.

I disagree with a number of your points. We don't know how many owners would oppose a move and it would likely depend upon where that move might be to. Kraft (I think it was him) was in the news talking about how the NFL should have a team based in London over the next few years. Jones has already been on record as implying that he would support a move of the Bills out of Buffalo. If it means more money for these guys, even a little, most would sell their own families for it. They're not concerned about nostalgia and history.

As to the rest, the IRS is going to have nothing to do with the sale other than stealing the money of the sellers after the sale.

As to restrictions and requirements of the sale, whatever's in there is in there already. The board for the trust has their first obligation to Wilson's heirs, and I haven't heard a peep out of one of 'em that they care whether or not the team stays in Buffalo. Do any of them even live here besides Mary? Does she even live here? Irrelevant anyway. Whatever's been sent to the potential bidders is what it is. They have all the info. Once again, Wilson, "Mr. I'm doing everything I can to keep the team here" clearly lied to us. He could have sold it to anyone of his choosing and ensure that the team had every possible chance of staying here. All that Wilson did was to create a scenario that for six seasons from now, fewer if he had lived longer, that makes it financially inconvenient, but hardly impossible, to move the team. That's far from doing everything that he could. He lied to us.


The lease is an effective method to restrict bidders. It seems like it was designed for that purpose, and if that is the case, it's reasonable to think there may be other requirements that are also designed to restrict the bidding process to "Buffalo based" bidders.

We don't know if there are other requirements that might make also further restrict out of town bidders. I don't know if that's the case. Nobody does. But the IRS and the tax ramifications of selling to a restricted list of buyers isn't going to necessitate a sale to the highest bidder. We just don't know. The board of trustees have a duty to follow Ralph's wishes. So far, only they know what those wishes are.

See my prior response. The info packets have already been sent to those that have complied with the NDAs and met the financial criteria. Nothing's going to change now in the terms and conditions. The lease will not restrict bidders, it will simply deter them or defer them to simply waiting six seasons to move. And keep in mind, a new stadium is going to have to begin being built in the next three or four years or so, otherwise a new owner could easily time his exit from Buffalo with the building of a new stadium elsewhere that makes it more profitable to own the team.

Think about it, if there's no new stadium by the start of the 2017 season, then there is no more advantage to this area for keeping the team because it's going to take 24 months to build one here or elsewhere. Make sense? I would think that if they're going to build a new stadium, it's going to have to be in the next two or three seasons to tie the new owner to the area. Put another way, committing after the 2017 season, or maybe even the 2016 and quite possibly even the 2015 season, won't have many more advantages than committing to moving the team to a more profitable city.

As to restricting the bids to Buffalo based bidders, I don't think that they can do that. What if you bought a Buffalo business from someone that did nationwide business, would you expect to be told that once you bought it you couldn't locate it outside of Erie County? Of course not. It's nice and encouraging to think about, but I dont' see how they can legally put that in there, it would seem to me that any good attorneys would be able to shed that after the sale. The owner wouldn't be the owner, part of the ownership would be a nonexistent ... entity for lack of a better word. It's nothing but wishful thinking. As we know, the packets have already been sent out, they're not going to have multiple revision processes whereby the terms continually change. Also, I don't ever recall any other sports team's new owner being restricted to not being able to move a team regardless of how unprofitable it might become, that just makes no sense whatsoever.

[Fletch]

I don't expect the trust to give the Bills to Pegula for nothing.

He will pay a fair price for them. That price has already been determined by the banks the Bills hired when they put the team up for sale.

And Pegula has already liquidated assets to have cash on hand to buy the team.

This isn't a "here's the sticker price, take it or leave it" thing. It's a bidding process. The only thing that "the banks have determined" is how much credit each potential new owner has to borrow on top of his own money that he would pay. It sounds like both Pegula and Golisano have enough cash to be able to buy the team outright at any reasonable price though.

[Fletch]

A Toronto team would be very successful but you need an owner willing to spend $2.5B between the price of the team, the NFL relocation fee and an expensive domed stadium.

That is a decade or two away.

The cost would only be reduced by the amount of that relocation fee for the team to stay here. A new owner is going to have to build the same stadium here.

[Bill Cody]

As to restricting the bids to Buffalo based bidders, I don't think that they can do that. What if you bought a Buffalo business from someone that did nationwide business, would you expect to be told that once you bought it you couldn't locate it outside of Erie County? Of course not. It's nice and encouraging to think about, but I dont' see how they can legally put that in there, it would seem to me that any good attorneys would be able to shed that after the sale. The owner wouldn't be the owner, part of the ownership would be a nonexistent ... entity for lack of a better word. It's nothing but wishful thinking. As we know, the packets have already been sent out, they're not going to have multiple revision processes whereby the terms continually change. Also, I don't ever recall any other sports team's new owner being restricted to not being able to move a team regardless of how unprofitable it might become, that just makes no sense whatsoever.

400m is a lot of dough even for a multi billionaire. It WILL deter most outside bidders. And a bidder being open about his intention to move in 7 years would also be screwed because the fans would not support the team, he'd lose millions more. No, the real threat is the fake out guy- come in, pretends to be interested in staying, but drags the new stadium talks along slowly, making big demands of state government. All the while covertly planning a move. Likely? Probably not. Possible? Absolutely.

[Fletch]

Why would anyone expect an NFL team would be successful in Toronto when NOBODY in Toronto showed up to watch NFL football?

And yes we know Toronto people don't identify with the Bills or Buffalo, well what team does London or Mexico City identify with?

NFL fans from both those Cities show up to watch NFL football regardless who is playing.

It's different and novel for them, they don't have broadcast Bills games in their cities like Toronto does. Toronto is in the blackout zone for the Bills, but is it even blackedout because it's not in the US? I think that an NFL team in Toronto, of their own, would do better than it would in Buffalo from an attendance standpoint. Just on the size of the metro area alone which is what, 6, 8 times greater than Buffalo's?

This notion that they're a hockey/Leafs town is ridiculous. Our fans support the Sabres just as eagerly.

[Fletch]

I will try to make it over the border for a game or two per year but it is really people in the Buffalo area that need to put their money where their mouth is.

I'm not sure it's a matter of putting their money where their mouth is, I think it's more a matter of how many people in a very small MSA relatively speaking, have that kind of disposable income. Therein lies the core issue.

[Bill Cody]

I do agree that a local bidder is going to need to be if not the highest bidder, close to the highest bidder for tax and fiduciary reasons. Could a local group that's 5% low get the nod for whatever reasons the trust wants to use? Sure. But not way off. This is what Ralph wanted. How do we know? Because this is what he did and this is what he said he was going to do. I would rate the odds of staying at 75%, will be relieved if/when it's over and a local group wins.

[Fletch]

Ralph Wilson Stadium has seating for over 70,000 people.

With the MANY RICH people of Toronto they could not even fill up a 40,000 seat stadium.

Let me ask you a question, suppose we didn't have hockey in Buffalo and the Leafs played here twice a year. How many fans do you think would turn out?

Or if we didn't have a football team but Toronto did, and the tables turned they played one game per season here, what do you think attendance would be? I'm guessing that it would be worse than the pre-Polian days where 25K was a lot and you had your pick of seats in the end zones and upper decks for any given game. If that happened if the team moved to Toronto, and I'm guessing that it would for two reasons, one to try to keep Buffalo fans interested in the Toronto team, and secondly kind of an in-your-face move by Toronto to "show us" what it's like.

It's clearly much different if it's your team. The world-cup is hugely popular, but friendlies against some of the biggest name teams in the world don't come close to selling out at other times throughout the year.

[Bill Cody]

At anyone thinking that Toronto would support an NFL team.

They couldn't even fill a 40,000 seat Stadium. We are talking 40,000 seats!

Hell the Leafs would have no problem filling that many seats, but there are not even 40,000 NFL fans in all of Toronto!

Well to be fair the NFL couldn't sell out in the 40's when the league was new, it took time to take root and television was a game changer. Are NFL games presently broadcast in Canada? I don't know I'm asking. And having games in your city is not the same as having your own team now is it?

[Fletch]

I do agree that a local bidder is going to need to be if not the highest bidder, close to the highest bidder for tax and fiduciary reasons. Could a local group that's 5% low get the nod for whatever reasons the trust wants to use? Sure. But not way off. This is what wanted. How do we know? Because this is what he did and this is what he said he was going to do. I would rate the odds of staying at 75%, will be relieved if/when it's over and a local group wins.

I'm eager to end this dam thing and move on too and at least know, or be able to speculate, what the chances are of staying in Buffalo. More than that though, I'd like it to happen prior to mid-January to see how serious the new owner is about putting a competitive product on the field. If that turnover happens within the next 6 months and Whaley, Brandon, and the rest of the major front office fixtures are still here, I'm going to be even more disappointed than having to hear that the team is moving 7 seasons from now.

By the way, your statement assumes that the trust is acting on behalf of Ralph posthumously instead of on behalf of his heirs. I don't think that's a good assumption.

[Fletch]

And having games in your city is not the same as having your own team now is it?

Therein lies the key relating to Toronto. The Toronto MSA is 6 times the size of ours. So even if the interest were 1/6th of what it is here on a per capita basis, they should be able to bring as many people to games. And let's not forget, we're told that 5 to 10K Ontarians are already coming to games, so they'd continue to go presumably. I see interest being the same as it is in other east coast large metro areas, namely routine sellouts prior to the season beginning.

The arguments being floated as to why Toronto can't support a team from a fan perspective don't have much basis for them. I'm pretty sure that if Seattle moved to Vancouver they'd do fine too.

[better days]

Well to be fair the NFL couldn't sell out in the 40's when the league was new, it took time to take root and television was a game changer. Are NFL games presently broadcast in Canada? I don't know I'm asking. And having games in your city is not the same as having your own team now is it?

Yes the CBC broadcasts NFL games. And the cable company for my house in Canada televised Buffalo TV stations as well so I was able to watch the Bills.

Like I said games sold out at a 100,000 seat stadium in Mexico City. Preseason games at that, not regular season games.

London packs in more than 80,000 for a game. Toronto can't even fill half as many seats.

Rodgers started the Bills series in Toronto to show the NFL Toronto would make a good NFL City................well that was a HUGE FIASCO.

All that proved is Toronto is NOT an NFL City.

[Fletch]

London packs in more than 80,000 for a game. Toronto can't even fill half as many seats.

... with someone else's team on the field.

Finish your statement.

Again, if Toronto gets our team and "throws us a bone" with one game played here annually, do you really think that we'd sell that game out?

I can see it for a season or two with the recent move and us in regret mode, but not long after that. I see 20,000 fans there.

[Bill Cody]

By the way, your statement assumes that the trust is acting on behalf of Ralph posthumously instead of on behalf of his heirs. I don't think that's a good assumption.

I'm not assuming anything, that's the problem, no one knows. But Ralph did create the trust so there will be some instructions built into it. What they are is anyone's guess.

[SpikedLemonade]

Yes the CBC broadcasts NFL games.

Wrong again.

Never did.

Your information is once again wrong and dated grandpa.

[Bill Cody]

Yes the CBC broadcasts NFL games. And the cable company for my house in Canada televised Buffalo TV stations as well so I was able to watch the Bills.

Like I said games sold out at a 100,000 seat stadium in Mexico City. Preseason games at that, not regular season games.

London packs in more than 80,000 for a game. Toronto can't even fill half as many seats.

Rodgers started the Bills series in Toronto to show the NFL Toronto would make a good NFL City................well that was a HUGE FIASCO.

All that proved is Toronto is NOT an NFL City.

I'm not sure if it proved much of anything. The seats in Toronto were way overpriced. If you were an NFL fan in the area you could go to regular Bills games in Buffalo anytime for half the price. It's not like the novelty of a game in London or Mexico City that has never seen it and couldn't access it otherwise.

[better days]

... with someone else's team on the field.

Finish your statement.

Again, if Toronto gets our team and "throws us a bone" with one game played here annually, do you really think that we'd sell that game out?

I can see it for a season or two with the recent move and us in regret mode, but not long after that. I see 20,000 fans there.

If Toronto gets the Bills, I don't think 200 people would go to a game in Buffalo.

That would be like your ex wife coming over for dinner after she married your neighbor from across the street.

But before Buffalo got the Sabres, if the Leafs would have played some games in Buffalo, the Aud would have sold out.

[better days]

I'm not sure if it proved much of anything. The seats in Toronto were way overpriced. If you were an NFL fan in the area you could go to regular Bills games in Buffalo anytime for half the price. It's not like the novelty of a game in London or Mexico City that has never seen it and couldn't access it otherwise.

People outside the United States can get all the NFL games live if they want them & at a much cheaper price than the Sunday ticket.

[Bill Cody]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_on_Canadian_television

well there is some NFL coverage in Canada. I really don't know how the NFL would do in Toronto, it's an open question to me.

[Fletch]

I'm not assuming anything, that's the problem, no one knows. But Ralph did create the trust so there will be some instructions built into it. What they are is anyone's guess.

Why would a trust act on behalf of a dead person instead of that dead person's living heirs?

Throw in free ice cream cones for everyone at every home game in the future too then.

- - - Updated - - -


Wrong again.

Never did.

Your information is once again wrong and dated grandpa.

grandpa

LOL

[Fletch]

If Toronto gets the Bills, I don't think 200 people would go to a game in Buffalo.

That would be like your ex wife coming over for dinner after she married your neighbor from across the street.

But before Buffalo got the Sabres, if the Leafs would have played some games in Buffalo, the Aud would have sold out.

LOL

Interesting analogy. Maybe you're right, but we agree that it would be ugly. Sop my point is made.

Not sure I buy that about the Leafs in Buffalo.

- - - Updated - - -


People outside the United States can get all the NFL games live if they want them & at a much cheaper price than the Sunday ticket.

You can get them free now streaming online from numerous sources.

[better days]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_on_Canadian_television

well there is some NFL coverage in Canada. I really don't know how the NFL would do in Toronto, it's an open question to me.

There is a lot of NFL coverage in Canada. I was wrong about the CBC televising games, but I knew the NFL was televised in Canada.

And as I said, Buffalo stations are on Cable in Ontario so all Bills games are available to anyone with cable.....or a good antenna.

[Bill Cody]

Why would a trust act on behalf of a dead person instead of that dead person's living heirs?

Throw in free ice cream cones for everyone at every home game in the future too then.

I'm not sure you understand the basics of estate planning. The person who sets up the trust gets to make the rules. It is after all his stuff. So if Ralph wanted a trust that provided for free ice cream at home games he could have stipulated that, yes.

It's like when someone sets up a trust for the benefit of his minor children. He can make rules like they can't access the money until a certain age or he can't access the principal except for certain stated emergencies. Trust are very flexible instruments. Ralph could state in the trust agreement "preference should be given to any substantially equal bid from a local group". Did he do that? <shrug>

[better days]

LOL

Interesting analogy. Maybe you're right, but we agree that it would be ugly. Sop my point is made.

Not sure I buy that about the Leafs in Buffalo.

- - - Updated - - -



You can get them free now streaming online from numerous sources.

Well, I am so old, I used to go watch the Bisons of the AHL play at the Aud.

I really liked those Bisons Jerseys, a Pepsi bottle cap with Bisons or Buffalo printed where Pepsi would be.

Myself, my brothers & friends were all huge Leafs fans. I have no doubt the Leafs would have sold out the Aud.

[better days]

Why would a trust act on behalf of a dead person instead of that dead person's living heirs?

Throw in free ice cream cones for everyone at every home game in the future too then.

- - - Updated - - -



grandpa

LOL

Well, I am happy to be a grandpa. And if you all are lucky enough, someday you all will be as well.

[Dr. Lecter]

Why would a trust act on behalf of a dead person instead of that dead person's living heirs?

Throw in free ice cream cones for everyone at every home game in the future too then.




Because they are obligated to do so.

[Dr. Lecter]

Wrong again.

Never did.

Your information is once again wrong and dated grandpa.

You making a comment on somebody's advanced age is like Elton John calling Richard Simmons gay.

Certainly it is true, but..................

[better days]

You making a comment on somebody's advanced age is like Elton John calling Richard Simmons gay.

Certainly it is true, but..................

And I am happy to make it to this advanced age.

It beats the alternative.

[jimmifli]

Richard Simmons gay.

Mandatory

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/XIscLaYnECs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[cookie G]

Why would a trust act on behalf of a dead person instead of that dead person's living heirs?

Throw in free ice cream cones for everyone at every home game in the future too then.

- - - Updated - - -



grandpa

LOL

You're kidding, right?

[trapezeus]

I'm not sure you understand the basics of estate planning. The person who sets up the trust gets to make the rules. It is after all his stuff. So if Ralph wanted a trust that provided for free ice cream at home games he could have stipulated that, yes.

It's like when someone sets up a trust for the benefit of his minor children. He can make rules like they can't access the money until a certain age or he can't access the principal except for certain stated emergencies. Trust are very flexible instruments. Ralph could state in the trust agreement "preference should be given to any substantially equal bid from a local group". Did he do that? <shrug>

the fact this has been said repeatedly to fletch is why it seems like he wants this team to move. its a four man team operating the rules of the trust. they know and the bankers and lawyers on confidentiality know.

we have a number of reports that toronto bids are being excluded. so it seems like for the next few yeras the bills are in buffalo. and they'll be the buffalo bills, not the NYS bills or whatever other ridiculous ideas are floated about.



</shrug>

[SpikedLemonade]

You making a comment on somebody's advanced age is like Elton John calling Richard Simmons gay.

Certainly it is true, but..................

There is being old and thinking old.

[swiper]

Are there degrees of gayness?

[DraftBoy]

This article is about the Bon Jovi Toronto group submitting their paperwork to indicate their intention to bid, but I found this interesting;


Of about 60 nondisclosure forms sent out by Morgan Stanley in June, at least 10 of have been returned, two of the people told the AP. Among those also listed as returning their forms are Buffalo Sabres owners Terry and Kim Pegula and New York City real estate mogul Donald Trump.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11232562/jon-bon-jovi-group-submits-official-paperwork-expressing-interest-buying-buffalo-bills

[trapezeus]

i wonder if you needed to prequalify to get the packet. 60 bids is a lot and to only have 10 returned seems like something in the package turned off a large group.

1. if anyone with money is allowed to sign the confidentiality agreement and receive docs without any due diligence, maybe there is a big group of non-starters. but i find that unlikely
2. something like the trust has an obligation to stay in the area and smaller bids said, "i need this to be profitable fast, so no thank you"
3. the valued price was much higher than anticipated by buyers. the number is more like $1.5-$2BN to be in it to win it.

as for the bon jovi group, why is he so intent on going in with tennebaum. he's supposed to be this NJ who kind of likes the working guy. and he's all in with a big metropolitan city trying to steal a working man's team. he's a real ass. plus if he wanted token ownership, miami seems the place to go.

draftboy, what was your feelling on the quoted info above? you only said it was interesting. what caught your eye?

[DraftBoy]

i wonder if you needed to prequalify to get the packet. 60 bids is a lot and to only have 10 returned seems like something in the package turned off a large group.

1. if anyone with money is allowed to sign the confidentiality agreement and receive docs without any due diligence, maybe there is a big group of non-starters. but i find that unlikely
2. something like the trust has an obligation to stay in the area and smaller bids said, "i need this to be profitable fast, so no thank you"
3. the valued price was much higher than anticipated by buyers. the number is more like $1.5-$2BN to be in it to win it.

as for the bon jovi group, why is he so intent on going in with tennebaum. he's supposed to be this NJ who kind of likes the working guy. and he's all in with a big metropolitan city trying to steal a working man's team. he's a real ass. plus if he wanted token ownership, miami seems the place to go.

draftboy, what was your feelling on the quoted info above? you only said it was interesting. what caught your eye?

Similarly to you the 60:10 ratio seemed odd. 10-15 non-responses would seem normal, but 50? That indicates to me that something in the packet surprised some people. No idea what that could be but it seems like a high number of non-responders.

Could be just a lot of people who think the Bills would be "cheap" for a NFL team and then saw the valuation and said "uh-oh". Who knows though.

[jimmifli]

Similarly to you the 60:10 ratio seemed odd. 10-15 non-responses would seem normal, but 50? That indicates to me that something in the packet surprised some people. No idea what that could be but it seems like a high number of non-responders.

Could be just a lot of people who think the Bills would be "cheap" for a NFL team and then saw the valuation and said "uh-oh". Who knows though.
They didn't get the packet. To get the packet you needed to return the NDA, and only 10 did. That's how I read it anyways.

[Typ0]

I think you guys are reading it wrong. They sent out 60 non disclosure agreements to see who wanted to see the data on the club. The 60 they sent were just people they identified as able to fund such a venture ... they may not have even requested the forms. Sounds pretty normal to me they are fishing through qualified leads but the 50 people did not reject anything based on private information they received from Morgan Stanley.



Similarly to you the 60:10 ratio seemed odd. 10-15 non-responses would seem normal, but 50? That indicates to me that something in the packet surprised some people. No idea what that could be but it seems like a high number of non-responders.

Could be just a lot of people who think the Bills would be "cheap" for a NFL team and then saw the valuation and said "uh-oh". Who knows though.

[SpikedLemonade]

They didn't get the packet. To get the packet you needed to return the NDA, and only 10 did. That's how I read it anyways.

That's right.

They were trying to create a larger group of bidders by sending out the brochure to 60 that included a NDA.

10 were serious enough to ask for the big package with financials by signing and returning the NDA.

Of that 10, my guess is that 5-6 are serious enough to send in their Letter of Intent.

[Fletch]

Because they are obligated to do so.

Has there been a single report confirming this? I haven't read a thing.

I don't see it. Too many restrictions like that would only drive the price down, not up.

They're selling a business here, not a piece of art.

[Fletch]

I think you guys are reading it wrong. They sent out 60 non disclosure agreements to see who wanted to see the data on the club. The 60 they sent were just people they identified as able to fund such a venture ... they may not have even requested the forms. Sounds pretty normal to me they are fishing through qualified leads but the 50 people did not reject anything based on private information they received from Morgan Stanley.

I agree that people are reading it wrong. I haven't seen one definitive thing yet about the number of bidders or potential buyers. Very little has come out and what has come out has changed.

For example, at first we heard that it would take several years to sell the team, but then we were told that it would be sold by year's end.

We've heard for the longest time that Kelly has a buying group, but that was shot down recently. Not that someone won't have him along, but here it was reported that he's part of a group that's interested, which was clearly false.

Then we heard that the team can't possibly move before 2020, but then that changed to having a $400M penalty to move.

I suspect that we'll never know the full details of a new owner's business investment as the NFL seems to try to keep much of that stuff under wraps.

I'm not even sure that we'll be privy to who every losing bidder is. We have to remember that this process isn't about the fans.

[Fletch]

That's right.

They were trying to create a larger group of bidders by sending out the brochure to 60 that included a NDA.

10 were serious enough to ask for the big package with financials by signing and returning the NDA.

Of that 10, my guess is that 5-6 are serious enough to send in their Letter of Intent.

Besides presumably Pegula and Golisano, do we know how many of the other 5 (or 6) are likely to keep the team in Buffalo?

[Dr. Lecter]

Has there been a single report confirming this? I haven't read a thing.

I don't see it. Too many restrictions like that would only drive the price down, not up.

They're selling a business here, not a piece of art.

Yes there has been.

Have you read a damn thing Cookie has written?

The trust sells the team as per the instructions left by Ralph. That is how it works.