PSL Rights???

[fancents86]

http://m.thepostgame.com/daily-take/201601/st-louis-rams-psl-fans-tickets-los-angeles-stadium-nfl

Hope the people with PSL's make some decent loot off of'em.

 

[lordbannon]

I like it. I certainly hope the STL faithful can at least walk away with that. Both making a profit off the PSL, and denying Kroenke said profit. It's not much solace, but its something - and it doesn't particularly hurt the LA fans. Call it a win win.

 

[Mackeyser]

That would be GREAT for the PSL owners. Not in the spirit of divisiveness and bitterness, but Return on Investment.

I've never liked the idea of PSLs and I don't mind if the PSL thing bit them on the butt. I wouldn't like it if it turned out that it led to a ticket broker's wet dream where a significant portion of season tix were always for sale and at premium prices so that the local fan base couldn't get into it.

The game already caters enough to casual money as it is.

So I guess I have mixed feelings on this, come to think about it...

 

[bluecoconuts]

I'm going to assume that wont be the case, the NFL has a lot of lawyers and this seems like a really big loophole for them to overlook.

 

[jjab360]

It'd be nice, but I don't see a PSL for a specific seat in the Edward Jones Dome having anything to do with a seat in the LA stadium..

 

[OldSchool]

I'm sure the PSL would be good for the next St Louis Rams game in the EJD.

 

[Ballhawk]

PSL holders are technically part owners of the team and deserve to quadruple their investment just like Stan. Wouldn't it be ironic if the LA fans had to purchase tickets to the worlds largest Walmart from the Saint Louis fans?

 

[12intheBox]

I actually read the PSL language about a year ago to see if PSL holders could sue the Rams for breach of contract.

As cool as this idea is, I dont think there is anything there.

Would be a pretty good PR move by Stan to at least buy them back - might help the healing process start. Expensive, but he can afford it.

The league wouldn't. It would create an expectation for the rest of them to do the same.

 

[NJRamsFan]

Lol good luck...whether or not they have any legal grounds is not the point. You cant sue someone who is astronomically richer than you.

Lets say legally speaking the PSL holders do have a case but Stan decides im not gonna give you anything and simply sell PSLs for LA. The former PSL holders will have to sue Stan and take him to court. At which point stans team of lawyers he has on retainer (that are far better than whatever lawyer opposing him) will find every single loophole in the law to allow them to delay the trial and keep pushing it back and back and back...at which point it becomes who's gonna run out of money first and who's gonna continue to pay their lawyer. How long until the PSL holders decide its not worth the court fees anymore?

And thats only if they have a case to begin with...which im sure they dont...im sure the NFL wouldnt allow this to happen

 

[fancents86]

What a bunch of negative Nancy's. Lol. It's def worth a look since the license says nothing about a stadium. People have sued larger corporations and won so I don't buy the mentality that the wealthier never lose.

 

[rdlkgliders]

"WANTED" PSL rights to 2-3 seats No nose bleed and No high dollar just some good average tickets. Thanks

 

[jjab360]

I actually read the PSL language about a year ago to see if PSL holders could sue the Rams for breach of contract.

As cool as this idea is, I dont think there is anything there.

Would be a pretty good PR move by Stan to at least buy them back - might help the healing process start. Expensive, but he can afford it.

The league wouldn't. It would create an expectation for the rest of them to do the same.

That's what I was thinking too, that PSL holders might have a case for breach of contract, but there is undoubtedly language that accounts for that, Stan's lawyers would leave no stone unturned.

But what these guys are talking about with by definition a PSL being a license for a specific seat, it doesn't make any sense for that PSL to magically transfer to another stadium. It's a nonstarter imo

 

[LosAngelesRams]

If that's the case and anyones got 2 seats, let me know.

 

[Legatron4]

"WANTED" PSL rights to 2-3 seats No nose bleed and No high dollar just some good average tickets. Thanks

That'll be $20,000. Where should I send them?

 

[rdlkgliders]

That'll be $20,000. Where should I send them?

Thanks Leg I always new you had my back

 

[RamFan503]

That'll be $20,000. Where should I send them?

If this were to hold up, that actually might be a little low.

A few things maybe someone who has a PSL can answer:

• I am suspecting that there is wording that gets the Rams out of something like this or maybe a timeline.
• I wonder how many that are still being held had the original wording without the "exact seats" language
• I thought there was a timeline for PSLs - is this not true?
• Is there any wording that specifies that it is for the Dome and not any stadium? I get the fact the Rams played in Busch stadium before moving to the Dome but it was always known that the PSLs pertained to the Dome - not Busch

I'm guessing there is something in the wording to prevent the transfer to another stadium in another city but I'm just assuming. If there is no such language, then what the hell. That is a mistake made by the Rams (likely Shaw BTW) and that is on them. They may have to allow those original PSL holders to sell their PSLs to the highest bidder. And more power to them. Anyone know what that number might be? If I'm holding first section 50 yard line PSLs, I'm thinking I'm holding some pretty valuable real estate.

 

[RamFan503]

Ooh. I just thought of something. If this is decided in the PSL holder's favor, what is to stop the Rams from numbering from the SRO sections down? So sections 113 and 114 become corner nose bleeds with no seat assignments? Or maybe they use numbers starting at the 4th level and use name designations for lower level seats.

I suppose my valuable real estate just became a Yugo instead of that new Porsche I was going to buy.

 

[Mackeyser]

That's what I was thinking too, that PSL holders might have a case for breach of contract, but there is undoubtedly language that accounts for that, Stan's lawyers would leave no stone unturned.

But what these guys are talking about with by definition a PSL being a license for a specific seat, it doesn't make any sense for that PSL to magically transfer to another stadium. It's a nonstarter imo

Actually, there is already a precedent for this. The Rams, when they initially moved did NOT play in the EJD, which was not ready for the beginning of the '95 season. The Rams didn't play in the EJD until November of '95 and the PSL rights TRANSFERRED from the temporary venue to the EJD. Moreover, the language in the PSL specifically states "All Future Games". No mention of venue is stated and because of the precedent of multiple venues, the precedent is set that the PSL stays with the team, not the venue.

Now, the question becomes how does Kroenke sever?

In no particular order...
- He can come up with something about how those PSLs while not venue specific are St. Louis specific thus making them worthless.
- He can assert that the PSLs are venue specific and force St. Louis PSL owners to sue him.
- He can refund the St. Louis PSLs.

Because the Rams are the first team to move that sold PSLs, any move that is taken won't just be at the whim of Kroenke, but the NFL League office and the League owners will all be informed and consenting because anything that happens with how the Rams deal with this will set a precedent for every other move for teams that have sold PSLs.

Anyone who thinks this is a small deal doesn't understand how much money is generated by PSLs.

 

[RamFan503]

Actually, there is already a precedent for this. The Rams, when they initially moved did NOT play in the EJD, which was not ready for the beginning of the '95 season. The Rams didn't play in the EJD until November of '95 and the PSL rights TRANSFERRED from the temporary venue to the EJD. Moreover, the language in the PSL specifically states "All Future Games". No mention of venue is stated and because of the precedent of multiple venues, the precedent is set that the PSL stays with the team, not the venue.

Now, the question becomes how does Kroenke sever?

In no particular order...
- He can come up with something about how those PSLs while not venue specific are St. Louis specific thus making them worthless.
- He can assert that the PSLs are venue specific and force St. Louis PSL owners to sue him.
- He can refund the St. Louis PSLs.

Because the Rams are the first team to move that sold PSLs, any move that is taken won't just be at the whim of Kroenke, but the NFL League office and the League owners will all be informed and consenting because anything that happens with how the Rams deal with this will set a precedent for every other move for teams that have sold PSLs.

Anyone who thinks this is a small deal doesn't understand how much money is generated by PSLs.

We have this going on two different threads. I may have to merge them.

Could you please tell me how a seat is decided within the PSL arrangement? I'm assuming if you paid $4,500 for a PSL, you did it knowing you were getting a particular seat in the Dome. The seats logically would not have the same configuration or # designation as they did in Busch. So what were you buying? My guess is that you bought a PSL that entitled you to section 113, Row D, Seat 22 in the Dome. If you paid high dollar for those seats in the dome, you were likely offered similar seats at Busch until the Dome could open. I'm only basing this on my logic not on what it actually says. But until I see the wording, I'm not buying that the PSLs were not indeed venue specific just because their owners got seats initially in Busch.

 

[jjab360]

We have this going on two different threads. I may have to merge them.

Could you please tell me how a seat is decided within the PSL arrangement? I'm assuming if you paid $4,500 for a PSL, you did it knowing you were getting a particular seat in the Dome. The seats logically would not have the same configuration or # designation as they did in Busch. So what were you buying? My guess is that you bought a PSL that entitled you to section 113, Row D, Seat 22 in the Dome. If you paid high dollar for those seats in the dome, you were likely offered similar seats at Busch until the Dome could open. I'm only basing this on my logic not on what it actually says. But until I see the wording, I'm not buying that the PSLs were not indeed venue specific just because their owners got seats initially in Busch.

I just find it extremely hard to believe the Rams wouldn't protect themselves from something like this happening. Most likely the language, in layman's terms, is something like "You are specifically and exclusively purchasing this seat in the EJD but for now we will seat you in this seat at Busch stadium." For the contract to be as vague as "wherever the Rams go, you will have exclusive rights to a seat there" is extremely hard to believe.