Karraker: St. Louis Should Be Rams’ Permanent Home, Plain and Simple

[LesBaker]

I'm not arguing with you because I actually agree with most of what you are saying. But why would Stan be renting if he built on HIS property? I know what you are saying about cost and recouping but someone is going to have to pay the piper in order to take the LA market. By what you are saying, it would make zero sense for ANYONE to put a team there.

The value of a revitalized Inglewood with the already remodeled Forum and a 320 acre jewel that not only could house a football team (or two), practice facilities, a soccer team, world class sporting events, the Superbowl, a possible return of the Olympics, etc... would potentially be a HUGE money maker and Stan and his associates have the background and rating to make it happen. Maybe you have a reason why you think Stan would not own the building/complex in LA but would in St Louis. I just don't see it.

Add to that the lure of Hollyweird, the price of those luxury suites for not only football but every other event that is sure to come there, the value of the hotels, retail space, condos, the potential HUGE tax base being generated for that region for everything including football and beyond, the future value for all of Stan's future heirs, etc... I can't see where there is not money to be made for many generations of Kroenkes.

It seems to me you are making a few assumptions that I would agree have little to no chance of paying off. 1 - that Stan wouldn't own the venue, 2 - that it would be pretty much a football only (with maybe soccer added) venue, and 3 - that it would only be on that 60 acres.

Plainly said, its too expensive. Stadium estimates are 1.2 bil at least and likely will be 1.5 bil or even higher. New Jersey, much less expensive to get land and build in, came in at a cost of 1.6 billion. A similar venue in LA would cost 20% MORE. Franchise fee of 700 million same as HOU (fat chance its that small but lets use that) and we are between 2.2 and 2.8 billion. That'll take an awful lot of time to make up.

He can spend 800 million and make a huge amount of profit in STL.

 

[-X-]

Plainly said, its too expensive. Stadium estimates are 1.2 bil at least and likely will be 1.5 bil or even higher. New Jersey, much less expensive to get land and build in, came in at a cost of 1.6 billion. A similar venue in LA would cost 20% MORE. Franchise fee of 700 million same as HOU (fat chance its that small but lets use that) and we are between 2.2 and 2.8 billion. That'll take an awful lot of time to make up.

He can spend 800 million and make a huge amount of profit in STL.

It can't be that cut and dried though, Les. If Stan wants a team and stadium in L.A., he'll find a way to soften the financial blow.
That said, staying put makes more sense in a lot of ways, and he's given no indication that he even wants to leave.

 

[LesBaker]

It can't be that cut and dried though, Les. If Stan wants a team and stadium in L.A., he'll find a way to soften the financial blow.
That said, staying put makes more sense in a lot of ways, and he's given no indication that he even wants to leave.

I know its not as simple as what I say but I'm just presenting it in a simple form. As far as softening the blow it'll be WAY harder to do that in LA than STL.

2.2 billion or more takes a long time to make up. Plus if he stays in STL he can get G4 money, and thats 300 million I think.

So half a billion or two and a half billion. It doesn't seem that difficult of a call to me.

The throw in the NFL wanting two teams in LA.......

I don't see SK pulling up stakes and heading west.

 

[Boffo97]

Actually this is totally irrelevant since the NFL shares the revenue

Actually, no.

Yes, revenue from TV deals and normal ticket sales is shared, but I'm talking value of the franchise itself, which includes the value of the property they're on and the private suite revenue. An L.A. team is going to be worth more than a St. Louis team.

 

[LesBaker]

Actually, no.

Yes, revenue from TV deals and normal ticket sales is shared, but I'm talking value of the franchise itself, which includes the value of the property they're on and the private suite revenue. An L.A. team is going to be worth more than a St. Louis team.

Value of the team doesn't produce cash flow, and that's what matters. SK doesn't buy and sell for a profit, he buys and owns the venues for profit and cash flow. Suite sales are big, but not as big as being able to collect rent for dozens and dozens of other events and selling all the beer and getting paid for parking. Plus when you are hosting other events you can sell suites short term for Final Fours or whatever and that actually ends up making you more over a year than just selling them for your own teams football games like he would in LA.

The value would actually be higher in STL if he owns the venue and parking. But overall that doesn't seem to matter to Kroenke since he doesn't sell teams he buys them.

I don't know how much you know about how SK operates since we haven't been posting on the same board for a long time and I have no idea how accurate the info you have read is, but if you look at his history it'll tell you a lot about what he wants to do with the Rams.

 

[Boffo97]

Well, Les, I'll just say this: Ultimately, there are good arguments on both sides. And I've said all along that they'll LIKELY stay in St. Louis, though much can change.

We're just going to have to see how it plays out. Personally, I'd like to see them return to L.A., but I'd be pretty bummed for the good St. Louis fans if that happened.

 

[CoachO]

Things happen like that sometimes.

A few years back, Jeff Gordon said in one his chats that, basically, he was a St. Louis guy and thus did not care about the Rams' Los Angeles history.

Which made it really weird when he joined the rest of the P-D staff in protesting how it was supposedly such a violation of history when Todd Hewitt got fired. My personal theory is that Hewitt was an "anonymous source" for the paper and that was at least part of the reason why he got fired and why the paper got so mad. I can't prove it though.

The Todd Hewitt firing is exactly what you say it was. He was Jim Thomas' "inside informer", and that was a HUGE reason for why he was fired. And if you go back and read the stuff that has come from JT since, the entire tone of his "coverage" of the Rams has done a 180.

People are often critical of JT, or the P-D in general for their lack of coverage about this organization. My opinion, is they are just too lazy to actually do any REAL work to get the information from the organization in a professional manner.

Just last month, Demoff publically ripped the paper for their constant negative twist on "reporting" things that concern the team. This was in reference for them stirring the pot over the T. Austin photo op with the "LA RAMS fans', and trying to make something more of it than needed to be.

For all his editorial commentary on anything Rams, in the 3 years I have been attending training camp, I have NEVER seen Bernie Miklasz there. But yet, he likes to make us think he is in tune with all things Rams. When is the last time you saw JT break ANY story concerning the Rams? Rather than just regurgitating things that more often than not, some of the National media releases and saying he "is yet to confirm".

While I won't defend Karraker for the "dead Rams fans" comment, I would like to say this. Every chance he gets, Jack Youngblood loves to rip the STL Rams organization, and how they have turned their back on the LA Rams. Yet, by his own admission, he has chosen NOT to come here when invited in the past. Fred Dryer makes statements how he will "never" come to support the STL Rams. And yet, they complain when someone says something derogatory about them, or the LA Rams players.

During this past season, they honored players from ALL eras, and had over 30 former players in attendance. But yet, no J. Youngblood. He couldn't be bothered to show up and honor Deacon when they honored him, both this year, and when they retired his number.

So it works both ways. For every ill-thought out comment from the Randy Karraker's of the world, there have been just as many shots over the bough from former LA Rams regarding their organization.

 

[iced]

Actually, no.

Yes, revenue from TV deals and normal ticket sales is shared, but I'm talking value of the franchise itself, which includes the value of the property they're on and the private suite revenue. An L.A. team is going to be worth more than a St. Louis team.

Not when you consider the cost + how much extra they're going to have to spend because they won't be entitled to such things like G4 Loan (thats about or lil over $200 mill right there)... let alone buying the land, then building the stadium, + moving the team (high end of hundreds of millions).

It'll cost 2, 3x What the franchise is worth to move it and build a stadium.

plus he won't get any tax breaks that kroenke already gets now in MO, so whatever LA's tax - add on to that... and I know California ain't cheap lol... i was stationed in camarillo for 5 years (Right outside of LA) , I call that my "doin my 5 year stretch"

 

[LesBaker]

Well, Les, I'll just say this: Ultimately, there are good arguments on both sides. And I've said all along that they'll LIKELY stay in St. Louis, though much can change.

We're just going to have to see how it plays out. Personally, I'd like to see them return to L.A., but I'd be pretty bummed for the good St. Louis fans if that happened.

Honestly most of what I've heard that would fall into the "pro move" column is either nonsensical, fabricated or inaccurate. There isn't a lot of stuff that can be backed up, thee is a lot of supposition and speculation and not much else.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Value of the team doesn't produce cash flow, and that's what matters. SK doesn't buy and sell for a profit, he buys and owns the venues for profit and cash flow. Suite sales are big, but not as big as being able to collect rent for dozens and dozens of other events and selling all the beer and getting paid for parking. Plus when you are hosting other events you can sell suites short term for Final Fours or whatever and that actually ends up making you more over a year than just selling them for your own teams football games like he would in LA.

The value would actually be higher in STL if he owns the venue and parking. But overall that doesn't seem to matter to Kroenke since he doesn't sell teams he buys them.

I don't know how much you know about how SK operates since we haven't been posting on the same board for a long time and I have no idea how accurate the info you have read is, but if you look at his history it'll tell you a lot about what he wants to do with the Rams.

Sorry, I'm confused, why would a stadium in LA only be used for football and not other venues?

 

[LesBaker]

Sorry, I'm confused, why would a stadium in LA only be used for football and not other venues?

Because there are a million venues to choose from I that region......in STL there are about 3.

And that's critical by the way.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Because there are a million venues to choose from I that region......in STL there are about 3.

And that's critical by the way.

But wouldn't a stadium that was brand new, costs billions of dollar's & was state of the art be at the top of the list or at least be up there on the list as a premier spot for big venues?

 

[RamFan503]

Plainly said, its too expensive. Stadium estimates are 1.2 bil at least and likely will be 1.5 bil or even higher. New Jersey, much less expensive to get land and build in, came in at a cost of 1.6 billion. A similar venue in LA would cost 20% MORE. Franchise fee of 700 million same as HOU (fat chance its that small but lets use that) and we are between 2.2 and 2.8 billion. That'll take an awful lot of time to make up.

He can spend 800 million and make a huge amount of profit in STL.

Except that from my understanding, the construction costs in NJ vs LA is much different. And I'm not sure about St Louis. In NJ you have a much more difficult union scene than in LA. So I would think a stadium in LA would actually cost less than something built in NJ. When I was looking at transit and road construction costs, even with the much higher earthquake standards in CA, the cost of construction was astronomical in NY/NJ vs CA.

Houston is a new franchise, as was Cleveland. You can't be sure that the same franchise fee would apply. And I haven't actually seen anything besides one poster insist that the G4 money actually would not be available. I don't recall it being in Shane's article either.

I also still don't get where you are getting the idea that Stan would own the facility in St Louis but NOT in LA. Why?

 

[bluecoconuts]

Because there are a million venues to choose from I that region......in STL there are about 3.

And that's critical by the way.

Staples Center is split between 4 different teams, 3 leagues, and 2 sports and they do concerts there and they pile a bunch of dirt in there for the XGames, and they do award shows there. There are plenty of other venues that they can play in, but they use that one because it's the best one. If Stan were to put an new stadium in LA there's nothing that says it would only be used for football and nothing else, just because there's other places nearby. I have no idea where you're getting that from.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Staples Center is split between 4 different teams, 3 leagues, and 2 sports and they do concerts there and they pile a bunch of dirt in there for the XGames, and they do award shows there. There are plenty of other venues that they can play in, but they use that one because it's the best one. If Stan were to put an new stadium in LA there's nothing that says it would only be used for football and nothing else, just because there's other places nearby. I have no idea where you're getting that from.

that's what I was thinking.

 

[Thordaddy]

My dog is LA. He has no fleas.

Does your dog bite?

 

[mr.stlouis]

Stan was an advocate in moving the Rams to STL. Why would he wanna go back?

Absurd.

 

[RamFan503]

Stan was an advocate in moving the Rams to STL. Why would he wanna go back?

Absurd.

Probably one of the biggest pieces of evidence that he wants the team in St Louis NOT LA. I really don't buy that he couldn't make more money in LA. I DO think though that he really wanted a team in St Louis and that has not changed.

 

[Boffo97]

Stan was an advocate in moving the Rams to STL. Why would he wanna go back?

Absurd.

I think Stan's loyalty to his pocketbook outstrips his reported loyalty to St. Louis.

Again, I would have to think that otherwise, he'd come out and say "We're staying in St. Louis, let's get this done." instead of being as cagey as he's being.

I think they probably will stay in St. Louis, but if the Missouri contingent either takes that for granted or goes the "Not one more penny!" route, they'll lose the team.

 

[mr.stlouis]

I think Stan's loyalty to his pocketbook outstrips his reported loyalty to St. Louis.

Again, I would have to think that otherwise, he'd come out and say "We're staying in St. Louis, let's get this done." instead of being as cagey as he's being.

I think they probably will stay in St. Louis, but if the Missouri contingent either takes that for granted or goes the "Not one more penny!" route, they'll lose the team.

Nah, he's an "honorable" business man who just wants a fancy new stadium. Nothing wrong with that...