The club signed a binding contract with the County to remain there for 7 years (IIRC), then a buyout clause for the last 3 years. I can't see that covenant disappearing just because the club is held in trust. No?Originally Posted by OpIv37
The club signed a binding contract with the County to remain there for 7 years (IIRC), then a buyout clause for the last 3 years. I can't see that covenant disappearing just because the club is held in trust. No?
Fiat justitia ruat caelum. Noli timere. Laus Deo.
Too bad he can't access any of that money.
Topas (08-31-2014)
Yes, the lease is binding but it's not permanent. The new owners will be free to buy out the lease during the option year, leave at then end of the lease or renew. What he said was that the trust can't sell to anyone who wants to move the team even when the lease is up or if they buy it out.
He's said it numerous times but has never posted a source or link. Plus, the trust keeps giving the Toronto group chance after chance. If they can't sell to the group legally, why are they even bothering?
GOOGLE it. It was REPORTED by a number of sources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And I never said the team could never be moved, but the trust can't sell to anyone that is known to have intentions of moving the Bills before the end of the lease.
Not the year of the buy out, the end of the lease.
Now if Pegula wanted to move the Bills during that buy out year, he would be able to do that because he has shown no intention thus far of planning to move the Bills.
It is well documented the Toronto group on the other hand has made plans to move the Bills to Toronto.
I'm not going to google it. You made the claim so the onus is on you to provide the supporting evidence. Otherwise, all you did was make a statement that is unsubstantiated bull****.
Provide evidence, or retract your claim. You don't get to make a statement then attempt to force others to gather information to support it.
It's pretty well-documented that the trust has language indicating that selling to a new owner that plans to keep the team in Buffalo, and those plans are a top priority. It's also obvious, based solely on the twice-rejected Toronto bid, that they are looking for and reviewing specific plans to keep the team local, not just a 'I promise, cross my heart, hope to die' declaration. If you've missed it, or prefer to squat in the middle of the room and hold your breath until your face turns blue and not believe it, that's your issue, not better days'.
YardRat Wall of Fame
#56 DARRYL TALLEY #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS
better days (08-31-2014)
I don't know if its "well documented" there are rumors that is true. Buffalo News got a copy of Ralph Wilson's will and it didn't say anything that the trust couldn't sell to who they wanted. I think the language for selling to a non Buffalo team appears in the lease that they can't sell to anyone with KNOWN intentions to move the team I believe.
BS, if you didn't read about it when it was readily available to read, that is on you not me.
You should already know all about this as a Bills fan.
It is very easy to GOOGLE. MULTIPLE Newspapers REPORTED on it. MOST others don't need to gather that information, they already have that information
This is not like your BS posts that say the Bills should have signed this guy or that guy that were not available to be signed.
This was reputable newspapers reporting.
The language is in the trust, not the will.
better days (08-31-2014)
Reputable Newspapers such as the Toronto Sun, the Toronto Star & the Buffalo News reported on this matter.
It was reported by these papers that the trust can not sell to anyone with known intentions of moving the team prior to the end of the lease.
Like I said, GOOGLE is your friend for anyone that was too lazy to read about it at the time it was reported.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote