New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[WillasDad]

I agree with him. When I read this statement, that was my first my thought



And the same reason those two owners are willing to foot the bill for it is the same reason Kroenke wants to move - a Larger market.

Is Kroenke willing to take public money, let alone build in St.Louis? We know he's footing the whole Bill for inglewood, so yea, I would think this applies to him as well..

Imagine Kroenke building his football mecca in St. Louis. Want to kill the Edmund Jones Dome convention business, because that's how you do it. Old dome is expecting $23 million in revenue this year. Small price to pay to keep the team, I guess.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Not this last minute thing again.

I'll continue to say that because I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.

Where is this written? If he's half owner of the stadium, he should get some split of those profits, no?

He's not half owner, it was said the owner would be the Stadium Authority, meaning the city.

I'm not sure what you mean by design limitations? It appears to me that the design actually opens doors. Do you know how hard it is to find a 60k+ seat stadium with real grass? The soccer world will love this. The CONCACAF federation just played a tournament on grass laid on top of turf. IF an MLS team comes into the fold, that will extend the amount of home games played in the stadium by 16.

Its unlikely they get a Super Bowl, especially without a roof. No final four or anything like that, conventions, etc. That is okay for the city of St Louis, because they have the Edwards Jones Dome for those revenue streams. So what does Kroenke have?

And why would Kroenke or the NFL be happy about the MLS? If the league/Kroenke is worried about getting steady money from the market, and are having issues with the competition with the Cardinals, AND the Blues are losing money despite having a good team, why would they want another team to compete with in the market?

 

[blue4]

I'll continue to say that because I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.



He's not half owner, it was said the owner would be the Stadium Authority, meaning the city.



Its unlikely they get a Super Bowl, especially without a roof. No final four or anything like that, conventions, etc. That is okay for the city of St Louis, because they have the Edwards Jones Dome for those revenue streams. So what does Kroenke have?

And why would Kroenke or the NFL be happy about the MLS? If the league/Kroenke is worried about getting steady money from the market, and are having issues with the competition with the Cardinals, AND the Blues are losing money despite having a good team, why would they want another team to compete with in the market?

I've a feeling nothing could convince you otherwise.

 

[dbrooks25]

I'll continue to say that because I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.



He's not half owner, it was said the owner would be the Stadium Authority, meaning the city.



Its unlikely they get a Super Bowl, especially without a roof. No final four or anything like that, conventions, etc. That is okay for the city of St Louis, because they have the Edwards Jones Dome for those revenue streams. So what does Kroenke have?

And why would Kroenke or the NFL be happy about the MLS? If the league/Kroenke is worried about getting steady money from the market, and are having issues with the competition with the Cardinals, AND the Blues are losing money despite having a good team, why would they want another team to compete with in the market?

I linked an article about a month or so ago that stated that the Stl Task force has been working on this thing for much longer than many here originally though, including yourself. I'm not gonna go back through all of this clutter to dig it up, however. It wasn't last minute, and that argument is getting old anyway.

 

[RAGRam]

This still going on?

 

[blue4]

I linked an article about a month or so ago that stated that the Stl Task force has been working on this thing for much longer than many here originally though, including yourself. I'm not gonna go back through all of this clutter to dig it up, however. It wasn't last minute, and that argument is getting old anyway.

That won't stop people from claiming it was last minute every 4th day or so.

 

[Rmfnlt]

He doesn't own it, doesn't get PSL money, doesn't get money from other events, the design limits options, etc.

Where does the revenue streams come from? The NFL has told every city to keep working because why tell them to stop? I'm not saying the amount of public money is the issue, but if he's supposed to invest that much, he's probably going to want to get more. Do you expect the NFL to make him stay with the promise that revenue streams will be discussed later? With the promise that the group that hasn't worked with him before will suddenly go ahead and do so?

I have a hard time seeing them do that.

You seem to have a hard time seeing them do anything positive toward Kroenke.. yet, it appears they have not shut him off or broken off communications at all. Quite the opposite... they've said many times that they reached out to him... crickets.

It's Kroenke that has shut them off (and everyone else) and sends his mouthpiece (Demoff) to do his talking.... which has been? Really nothing.

Seeing as Kroenke hasn't negotiated with the city on the new stadium, there's no telling what revenue streams they would work with him on... and you're mixing up groups... the folks tied to the Ed Dome didn't work with him, but the task force appears to have been very open to discussions... it's Kroneke that's decided to stay in his foxhole.

Who really knows? Heck, they might just hand everything over to Kroneke and tell him it's all his to take over and make it as much his own as he wants. He has the money to do that, right?

Nothing's off the table BECAUSE THE MAN HASN'T SAID ONE WORD ABOUT ANY OF THIS... PERIOD.

 

[Rmfnlt]

I linked an article about a month or so ago that stated that the Stl Task force has been working on this thing for much longer than many here originally though, including yourself. I'm not gonna go back through all of this clutter to dig it up, however. It wasn't last minute, and that argument is getting old anyway.

Yes, it is well documented.

 

[bubbaramfan]

St. Louis breached their contract. The CVC reneged on upgrading the Dome. SK doesn't have to say anything, he is not obligated to, he's not under any contract except a year to year lease with the Dome.

 

[iced]

You seem to have a hard time seeing them do anything positive toward Kroenke.. yet, it appears they have not shut him off or broken off communications at all. Quite the opposite... they've said many times that they reached out to him... crickets.

It's Kroenke that has shut them off (and everyone else) and sends his mouthpiece (Demoff) to do his talking.... which has been? Really nothing.

Seeing as Kroenke hasn't negotiated with the city on the new stadium, there's no telling what revenue streams they would work with him on... and you're mixing up groups... the folks tied to the Ed Dome didn't work with him, but the task force appears to have been very open to discussions... it's Kroneke that's decided to stay in his foxhole.

Who really knows? Heck, they might just hand everything over to Kroneke and tell him it's all his to take over and make it as much his own as he wants. He has the money to do that, right?

Nothing's off the table BECAUSE THE MAN HASN'T SAID ONE WORD ABOUT ANY OF THIS... PERIOD.

this can't be emphasized enough. Hard to pick apart details when one hasn't come to the table to negotiate, let alone call back.

 

[OldSchool]

and the NFL has just backed them on their concerns - so is the NFL bad mouthing San Diego now too?

Or Maybe perhaps, there's some substance to what we've heard out of the Charger camp - and not just "shooting down" their plan...

Meanwhile Kroenke has been dead set on leaving for inglewood and not negotiated with the task force...

I didn't mean to rehash an old argument about how long the task force has been communicating about the need to do something. My point was and still is that Spanos, and his father, have been shooting down San Diego proposals for a decade or more because they ask for him to pay a lot of the money. And in spite of this he's seen as a good guy around here who is willing to work with a city that won't work with him. He's seen around here in a favorable light. Same with Davis.

@iced you say Kroenke is dead set on leaving but to quote many from the St Louis area he hasn't said he's leaving. Unlike Spanos, who's point man Fabiani has done nothing but run his mouth and insult San Diego and their work, Kroenke's point man Demoff has been polite and complimentary about the St Louis work. Demoff has even done the work of presenting the task forces proposal at two owners meetings. Yet we're led to believe all of this casts Spanos and Davis in a positive light with the other owners and Kroenke in a bad light. Do you see what I'm struggling with here? Or is the hate too strong for Kroenke to allow any logical thought on the situation.

 

[OldSchool]

I linked an article about a month or so ago that stated that the Stl Task force has been working on this thing for much longer than many here originally though, including yourself. I'm not gonna go back through all of this clutter to dig it up, however. It wasn't last minute, and that argument is getting old anyway.

Yes, it is well documented.

Yes we know they were talking in emails and discussing it over martini's on business lunches.

 

[ChrisW]

I'll continue to say that because I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.



He's not half owner, it was said the owner would be the Stadium Authority, meaning the city.



Its unlikely they get a Super Bowl, especially without a roof. No final four or anything like that, conventions, etc. That is okay for the city of St Louis, because they have the Edwards Jones Dome for those revenue streams. So what does Kroenke have?

And why would Kroenke or the NFL be happy about the MLS? If the league/Kroenke is worried about getting steady money from the market, and are having issues with the competition with the Cardinals, AND the Blues are losing money despite having a good team, why would they want another team to compete with in the market?

I'm not sure how the MLS team would be competing with the Rams. They wouldn't play at home on the same day. We're talking game day at the fields, and not on TV. Anytime they sell tickets to an event, they make money. So if you increase the number of events = more money.

You're right he won't be listed as owner. But as an investor of that size, you can believe that he's getting a fair share of profit.

 

[rick6fan]

St. Louis breached their contract. The CVC reneged on upgrading the Dome. SK doesn't have to say anything, he is not obligated to, he's not under any contract except a year to year lease with the Dome.

Nope--There was no "breach" of contract. There was no "reneging". The lease escape clause was triggered. "Breach" and "renege" imply illegality, both sides operated well within their legal rights. You are correct that Stan is not obligated to talk, but that doesn't mean that he shouldn't.

 

[MrMotes]

The CVC failed to meet the lease requirements that would've kept the Rams legally bound to St. Louis. Because of that, they're now free to leave.

 

[iced]

I didn't mean to rehash an old argument about how long the task force has been communicating about the need to do something. My point was and still is that Spanos, and his father, have been shooting down San Diego proposals for a decade or more because they ask for him to pay a lot of the money. And in spite of this he's seen as a good guy around here who is willing to work with a city that won't work with him. He's seen around here in a favorable light. Same with Davis.

Everything we have heard from Fabiani or their camp has been issues with the proposal - and that letter from the NFL sure sounds like they have legit concerns. If Kroenke had come out and said the same thing about winning in court, would that be slamming the city? No. It's issues with the deal.

they're held in a favorable light because they have been trying for - for over a decade. A half assed proposal that has tons of issues does nothing to change that.

@iced you say Kroenke is dead set on leaving but to quote many from the St Louis area he hasn't said he's leaving.

really? As if we've never heard "Inglewood is being built anyway" and people haven't been writing off as the Rams in LA are a foregone conclusion or a done deal?

Playing this game of "what Kroenke has said and hasn't said" doesn't mean squat - the man hasn't said anything at all; taskforce can't even get him to speak to him.

Unlike Spanos, who's point man Fabiani has done nothing but run his mouth and insult San Diego and their work, Kroenke's point man Demoff has been polite and complimentary about the St Louis work. Demoff has even done the work of presenting the task forces proposal at two owners meetings. Yet we're led to believe all of this casts Spanos and Davis in a positive light with the other owners and Kroenke in a bad light. Do you see what I'm struggling with here? Or is the hate too strong for Kroenke to allow any logical thought on the situation.

Looks like to me the NFL has just backed all of Fabiani's "mouth running" and "insulting San Diego" by pointing out flaws in the plan...

but hey I guess somehow supposed to believe two owners who have been trying to work with the city is somehow better than an owner who has refused too...right... Talk about logical thinking

 

[RAMbler]

The CVC failed to meet the lease requirements that would've kept the Rams legally bound to St. Louis. Because of that, they're now free to leave.

Correct. The CVC gambled that the Stan would follow his heart (Missouri man). And that still may be his play. But they seemed to forget about the business side of the man who got to be a billionaire by following his head.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I linked an article about a month or so ago that stated that the Stl Task force has been working on this thing for much longer than many here originally though, including yourself. I'm not gonna go back through all of this clutter to dig it up, however. It wasn't last minute, and that argument is getting old anyway.

I know that, but they did it in secret for political reasons. They still let the 05 deadline lass without doing a thing, they left arbitration and didn't say a thing, then suddenly, AFTER Kroenke buys land in LA and gets that process rolling they announce it.

They should have been working with him as soon as he took over, they should have seen the deadlines and sat down with them to get the process rolling. Instead they ignored the problem for political reasons, and now say he's the only one at fault. Sorry, not buying it. Both parties are at fault and I'll continue to say so.

You seem to have a hard time seeing them do anything positive toward Kroenke.. yet, it appears they have not shut him off or broken off communications at all. Quite the opposite... they've said many times that they reached out to him... crickets.

It's Kroenke that has shut them off (and everyone else) and sends his mouthpiece (Demoff) to do his talking.... which has been? Really nothing.

Seeing as Kroenke hasn't negotiated with the city on the new stadium, there's no telling what revenue streams they would work with him on... and you're mixing up groups... the folks tied to the Ed Dome didn't work with him, but the task force appears to have been very open to discussions... it's Kroneke that's decided to stay in his foxhole.

Who really knows? Heck, they might just hand everything over to Kroneke and tell him it's all his to take over and make it as much his own as he wants. He has the money to do that, right?

Nothing's off the table BECAUSE THE MAN HASN'T SAID ONE WORD ABOUT ANY OF THIS... PERIOD.

I have a hard time seeing tons of great things for Kroenke because they are building a stadium that is great for St Louis and that's about it. I do understand that it's difficult to plan when Kroenke doesn't say much, and there's only so much the city can afford to offer, but there are themes from the stadiums he has designed they could take from. Its obvious be wants a dome for example, but the city went another direction.

Which is not on the table, nor is he owning it, or PSLs or any number of things. The Rams have made a few tweaks here and there to the design, but there's not much they can do really.

I'm not saying that Kroenke is some innocent little flower who has been wronged or anything like that. I'm saying that St Louis isn't fault free on this entire process either. Kroenke is designing a stadium that benefits him greatly, its where he wants it, and designed how he likes it. He is not worried about what any city says (LA or St Louis). St Louis is doing the same thing, they're designing a stadium that benefits them greatly, not Stan, its where they want it and how they like it. The big difference is Stan is willing to pay for his design alone, St Louis needs him to fund most of theirs.

*Edit* Also, it might be the task force now, but afterwards, its the Stadium Authority again. That's who he has to work with long term.

 

[RAMbler]

Oops... sorry, not sure what happened there.....

 

[bluecoconuts]

I'm not sure how the MLS team would be competing with the Rams. They wouldn't play at home on the same day. We're talking game day at the fields, and not on TV. Anytime they sell tickets to an event, they make money. So if you increase the number of events = more money.

You're right he won't be listed as owner. But as an investor of that size, you can believe that he's getting a fair share of profit.

Perhaps, but not as much as he would in conventional investing.

And the reason why they don't want to compete with the MLS is because there isn't unlimited money to go around. If the market studies are saying there's not a big pool to draw from, and that it's hard to beat the Cardinals for fans, that's essentially saying that the market is like a big pie.

Most of that pie is going to the Cardinals right now. So the Rams need to get some now. Enter the MLS and now there are four other teams (Mizzou, which I know is in Columbia, Cardinals, Blues, MLS) to compete with for fans/money. If the NFL can't be the only show in town they either want to be top dog easily, or have a big enough pool to draw from that it doesn't matter. I don't think St Louis can offer any of that, so while an MLS team is great for the city, its pretty unlikely it gives the NFL or Kroenke the warm and fuzzies.