New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[blue4]

Mark Davis. A man who realized that being rich can also be fun. A whole lot of fun.

 

[den-the-coach]

Mark Davis. A man who realized that being rich can also be fun. A whole lot of fun.

 

[blue4]

View attachment 5510

One look at him and Stan and you realize that a large chunk of their money must be savings from not giving a shit about appearance.

 

[ChrisW]

View attachment 5510

Reminds me of that skit Chris Farley did on SNL all those years ago.

 

[ZigZagRam]

One look at him and Stan and you realize that a large chunk of their money must be savings from not giving a crap about appearance.

"You talkin' to be, bub?"

 

[bluecoconuts]

Stadium economics: How building a venue in Inglewood makes financial sense - LA Times
It's not every day that a real estate developer considers walking away from $400 million in tax money.

But for St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke, it just might make sense.

Moving his team to his 80,000-seat stadium in Inglewood will boost the Rams' profits and greatly increase the value of the franchise, sports economists say. And there is even more money to be made in the massive real estate development around it.

All that helps explain how Kroenke might profit from building the most expensive stadium ever in the U.S. — with no public money.

Inglewood city officials unanimously approved zoning changes Tuesday night for a $1.86-billion stadium at the old Hollywood Park racetrack. That vote gave Kroenke a clear head start in the NFL-to-Los Angeles derby that intensified last week with the unveiling of a competing stadium in Carson that would be shared by the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders. That plan could yet derail Kroenke's ambitions.

The real estate baron's partnership with the developers of Hollywood Park reflects how profits from modern-day stadiums come from more than just the stadium.

The Rams owner bought a stake in Hollywood Park Land Co., which is turning a nearly 300-acre racetrack site into homes, office buildings, a big shopping center and now potentially an NFL stadium. It's the kind of thing that Kroenke can't do in St. Louis, which is proposing a publicly owned riverfront stadium surrounded mainly by parking lots.

The Inglewood plan follows a model increasingly popular among stadium owners, said Rodney Fort, a sports economist at the University of Michigan.

"You've got to spend money to make money, and he can make a lot more off his own development in L.A.," Fort said. "It's more like a real estate development than a stadium."

The terms of Kroenke's arrangement with Stockbridge Capital — the Bay Area investment firm that's been financing the redevelopment of the Hollywood Park property for a decade — haven't been disclosed. But Chris Meany, a senior vice president for the project, confirmed that Kroenke has bought a stake in Hollywood Park Land Co. and that his involvement extends beyond the stadium.

That means the deal would not be "unwound," even if the Rams don't move to L.A., Meany said. The Inglewood stadium proposal still must navigate the Byzantine politics of winning NFL approval should Kroenke formally request to move the Rams.

Even without the development deal, some economists see a strong case for moving from a smaller market to Southern California.

Although NFL franchises split about two-thirds of the league's revenue — including television contracts worth $4.9 billion last year — local factors could give a big boost to Kroenke's profits, said John Vrooman, a Vanderbilt University economist who studies the NFL.

He estimates that the Rams could earn $100 million more each year on sponsorships, marketing and premium seating than the team could in a new stadium in St. Louis. Further, a move could increase the team's value about 40%, to an estimated $2.5 billion.

"The move to L.A. is an economic no-brainer," even if the Rams pay for their own stadium, Vrooman said.

Others disagree, including Neil DeMause, editor of Field of Schemes, a website that tracks stadium subsidies. Even for Kroenke — who Forbes estimates is worth $5.7 billion — and his deep-pocketed partners at Stockbridge, paying for a stadium is a big undertaking. The $1.86-billion construction estimate doesn't include a likely "relocation fee" paid to the NFL; those estimates run as high as $1 billion.

"That's an awful lot to spend out of your pocket," DeMause said. "It's a huge, huge risk."

One way to make that investment back is to use the stadium for more than just pro football.

The Dallas Cowboys' AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, and the San Francisco 49ers' Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, Calif., are helping to pay down their 10-figure price tags by hosting big-name concerts, international soccer matches, motocross and pro wrestling matches.

It's a way to make more money from $10 beers, $40 parking spaces and luxury suites, said Victor Matheson, a sports economist at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Mass.

"You want to use these things as much as you can," he said. "But there's just not that many 60,000-plus person events."

And the stadium would be entering a crowded market. The Rose Bowl and the Los Angeles Coliseum have long-term contracts with UCLA and USC football, respectively, and have been branching out to attract more concerts and soccer. Dodger Stadium, Stubhub Center in Carson and Staples Center also compete for some of the same events that might fill seats in Inglewood.

"There are events for stadiums, but it's not an infinite number," said Darryl Dunn, general manager of the Rose Bowl.

A state-of-the-art stadium could draw new events, said David Simon, president of the L.A. Sports Council. Today, the Southland can't host a Super Bowl because it doesn't have an NFL team. Nor can L.A. host an NCAA basketball Final Four, because it doesn't have a large enough indoor arena.

The Inglewood stadium is being designed with those sort of opportunities in mind, Meany of the Hollywood Park Land Co. said. It would be covered with a roof made of a clear plastic film — allowing it to host "indoor" basketball events — with open-air sides to let in the Southern California climate.

"This will accommodate basketball, soccer, concerts," he said.

Hollywood Park plans would make the football stadium the hub of a larger sports and entertainment district with a performing arts center and a broader development that would include six or seven office buildings, a shopping center 1 1/2 times the size of the Grove in West L.A., and about 2,500 new homes.

The Inglewood stadium would sit relatively low in the ground, and face the shopping center at its narrowest point, with an open plaza, instead of a broad expanse of concrete. It would include 12,000 on-site parking spaces for tailgaters on game days, plus more at the neighboring Forum.

That's a different approach than the one being pitched in St. Louis or the Carson project that involves the Chargers and Raiders, who last week released a video of a bowl ringed with vast tailgating lots on their 168-acre site.

The Inglewood development underscores why big-time sports aren't just about sports anymore, said Fort, the University of Michigan sports economist. The sports are often the anchor of a larger enterprise.

"It's getting tough to tell whether they're baseball teams or sports networks, basketball teams or part of a real estate development," he said. "That changes the perspective. The stakes have gone up."

I think the ideas that it's about prestige of being the guy who brought the NFL back to LA, as well as more for his kids than himself is more true than not in terms of the money. He can't go out and spend 5 billion dollars anyway, so I don't think it's totally all about making a profit.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

"You talkin' to be, bub?"

Say what you want about Stan but he knows how to dress. He's supposedly a gym freak, he climbs mountains with Al Michael's. Given his age he looks like he's in prime shape.

 

[ZigZagRam]

I think the ideas that it's about prestige of being the guy who brought the NFL back to LA, as well as more for his kids than himself is more true than not in terms of the money. He can't go out and spend 5 billion dollars anyway, so I don't think it's totally all about making a profit.

Oh yeah? What else has Stan told you?

 

[bluecoconuts]

Oh yeah? What else has Stan told you?

The same exact as he's told you about it apparently being about making a profit.

 

[Prime Time]

This is a real stretch but read it if you're interested.
*******************************************
http://www.agsaf.org/how-to-terminate-the-inglewood-stadium-project

How to Terminate the Inglewood Stadium Project



The most likely way to prevent an NFL team from relocating to Los Angeles is to squash the new stadium proposal in Inglewood, California. Information contained in this article and the agsaf.org website does serious damage to the moral credibility of Rams owner Stan Kroenke. It will also become necessary to disclose the National Football League’s “dirty, little secret” as I demonstrate a level of either mesmerizing incompetence or professional subterfuge. Either makes Kroenke an exceedingly poor candidate to oversee a billion dollar development project.

The major news out of the NFL is the possibility of a franchise relocating to Los Angeles. Kroenke is leading the charge with a stadium development proposal for Inglewood. Several teams are rumored to be in the relocation mix: San Diego Chargers, Los Angeles Raiders and the St. Louis Rams.

Sports writers are naturally drawn to stories about player indiscretions (drunk driving, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.), but the overarching themes usually involve money. The NFL is the most profitable sports league in the world. Future revenue streams always make for a compelling story line. And nothing is bigger, both literally and figuratively, than the construction of a brand spankin’ new stadium.

As I’ve stated, the press usually focuses on money. However, this isn’t about a $100,000+ political contribution to the campaign of Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts from the same company tasked with the stadium construction (Hollywood Land Co. based out of San Francisco). Small world, eh? This isn’t about the NFL which currently operates as a tax-exempt organization under section 501 (c-6) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Conveniently labeled and organized as a not-for-profit trade/industry association despite the NFL front office hauling in record profits of nearly 10 billion this year with an admitted goal of reaching $25 billion by 2027. And this isn’t about Stan Kroenke who happens to be married to a Walmart heiress. It’s not about the second wealthiest NFL owner desperately trying to increase his leverage and fortune.

I lied. It’s about Mr. Kroenke a/k/a the 6 BILLION Dollar Man. It’s all about him.




The NFL’s most alarming problem involves divulging the truth. And not only will the truth set you free, it is free. It wouldn’t cost Kroenke a dime. But in this case, he refuses to publicly convey vital information about stadium safety. Kroenke reminds me a little of Jack “you can’t handle the truth” Nicholson. Well, not quite.

So finally, what’s the dark secret? I will tell you. It is the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede” and the potential for a dominipede (multiple, simultaneous stadium stampedes likely impacting the 1 o’clock slate). The agsaf.org website does a sufficient job of elaborating on the mechanics. Three books and 70+ articles on the subjects of outdated emergency evacuation protocol and advancements in asymmetric generational warfare (killing without weapons).

Still, I’ll summarize. Roger Goodell’s vision for every NFL stadium is maximum wireless connectivity. There’s little reason to believe the Inglewood project would deviate from this mission statement grounded in hyper-connectivity. It’s all part of the “Stadium WiFi Initiative” established back in 2012. You might recall it being hailed as the “living room” experience.

Now last time I checked, virtually everyone in the stadium has an active cell phone. With the Inglewood project, that would be 80,000+. These mobile devices are capable of disseminating false information. The overwhelming concern here is a real-time saturation of bomb threats and phony emergency evacuation orders, both unintentional and deliberate.

Since the vast majority of fans have never given this matter any consideration, it leaves you with two distinct choices. You either tell people about it and substantially increase their level of situational awareness… or you let them remain completely ignorant and oblivious.

Let me ask you a straightforward question. Is it reasonable to assume that Stan Kroenke has never been briefed on the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede?” It’s simply the modern, technological version of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. Middle school kids can carry on an insightful conversation about this stuff. Comprehending the notion of a cellular-induced panic doesn’t require a doctorate in Physics from Stanford.

Why is it that not a single person affiliated with the NFL has ever publicly spoken of this — a potential downside to all these cell phones in any of their stadiums? Why is any discussion about wireless hacking and social media hoaxes off limits? Why won’t they tell the truth about evacuation protocol? Allow me to explain. And please take note. Because in the aftermath of a national tragedy, a deliberate act of silence could be regarded as a felonious act of criminal omission.

I understand the dilemma of being proactive. It would be a voluntary admission that a specific scenario exists which could render a stadium unsafe. Hmmm, and such an admission would be in direct conflict with all that money flooding in. Once again, common sense safety issues take a back seat. We’ve previously seen this narrative unfold with the prolonged concussion lawsuit settlement and the league’s recent domestic violence troubles.

Profit has an uncanny knack for keeping people tight-lipped. Revenue has a tendency to impose its will on morality. But in this case, the solution is really simple. Just explicitly inform fans that LEGITIMATE emergency stadium evacuation orders would NEVER be delivered via their personal cell phones.

If an evacuation’s absolutely necessary, they use the public address system in tandem with the video monitors. Because it’s necessary to present a clear, unified directive. This is Evac Protocol 101. You don’t send out a blitz of text alerts. This is not rocket science. Out of roughly 200 NFL and NCAA stadium incident Commodes, I defy you to find just ONE who would disagree with the assessment above.

But in the end, it’s always about money. I understand that. However, this particular safety issue is hovering around a fifth grade comprehension level. And when every politician, every government agency (DHS, FCC, NSC, etc.), every sports writer in journalism and broadcasting, every billionaire NFL owner and every stadium manager adamantly refuse to acknowledge the possibility that something like this could at the very least be attempted, let alone happen. Well… call me naive, but that spells trouble. Eventually someone will test the cracks in the system.

Some will make the argument that this is a broader societal problem. Hey, this affects the sports industry across the board: NCAA, MLB, NASCAR, etc. Why doesn’t one of those organizations step up? And why aren’t you casting aspersions on the inaction of politicians and complacence of government? Shouldn’t they shoulder the blame as well? Short answer yes. Long answer no. The legal explanation doesn’t pan out because it’s a hypothetical. So all we’re left with is a moral quandary and the circular catch-22. You acknowledge a problem, you own it… and if something bad happens, you’re screwed.

So why Kroenke? Here’s your answer. Some degree of moral accountability is necessary at the highest levels of authority. Even if you’re afforded the luxury of not having to play by the rules. Even when you’re a multi-billionaire. Every rational human being still makes judgments of “right and wrong” when it comes to matters of “life and death.” If we can’t trust Kroenke with such an elementary stadium security issue, then how on earth could we possibly find him ethically competent to preside over a billion dollar stadium development project?

A lot of things are driven by profit, but freedom of speech is a hot commodity these days. Sometimes it’s necessary to speak up. If you disagree with my analysis, here’s a million dollar challenge. Forget that. Let’s call it the billion dollar challenge. Just try asking Stan Kroenke about this issue in a live, televised forum. See if you can find a reporter with the guts. Best of luck. That person won’t be a reporter for long. Hero? Yep. Reporter. Nope.

* AGSAF (Artificially Generated Stampede Awareness Foundation) is currently seeking a spokesperson, preferably a high profile athlete or celebrity/musician, who’s willing to tell Americans that “legitimate venue emergency evacuation orders do NOT come from their personal cell phones.” Regrettably, not a single member of Congress appears interested. Many know about the problem but willfully choose to steer clear. Not much of a surprise. After all, there’s no money in it.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Stan Kroenke finishes what he starts; will finish line be in L.A.? - LA Times
In the mountains high above the Sonoran Desert in Tucson, Ariz., Al Michaels and Stan Kroenke were hiking a tough trail near a health and fitness resort.

Michaels, a longtime sportscaster for NFL games, joked that the steep incline they faced amid the pine trees may as well have been Tucson's Mt. Everest. He was exhausted and hoped that Kroenke wanted to turn back.

But Kroenke, the billionaire owner of the St. Louis Rams, would not relent.

"I think I reached the point where I didn't care whether I was alive or died," Michaels said about that hike. "When Stan sets out to do something, he wants to complete it."

Five years later, Kroenke is focusing that mind-set on an ambitious plan to build a stadium in Inglewood, which could return the NFL to the Los Angeles area after a two-decade absence. Some see the project as a ploy to get a better stadium deal in St. Louis, that L.A. is being used as leverage once again. Friends and business associates say, however, that once Kroenke decides on a course of action, he is hellbent on finishing.

"He just doesn't do things on a whim," Michaels said.

Kroenke, who declined to be interviewed for this story, is a real estate developer whose penchant for privacy draws as much attention as the business dealings that amassed a fortune Forbes estimated at $5.8 billion.

Interviews with numerous current and former business associates describe a man who shuns headlines in favor of working behind the scenes with a restrained, methodical approach that is focused on long-term success.

Most of them believe that the stadium project is typical of the patience Kroenke, 67, used to build his professional sports empire, gain control of millions of square feet in retail space and become the ninth-largest landowner in the U.S., according to The Land Report magazine's annual rankings.

The properties include the 540,000-acre Q Creek Ranch in Wyoming's Shirley Mountains and Screaming Eagle, the cult winemaker in Oakville, Calif., whose vintages routinely fetch more than $1,000 per bottle.

"He plays his cards real close to the vest," Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said. "He's information gathering. He's listening. He's observing. He's evaluating. But then make no mistake about it, there's nothing quiet about him when he goes."

The extensive holdings contrast with Kroenke's modest upbringing. As a youngster, he kept the books and swept floors at the Mora Lumber Company, a lumber yard and hardware store owned by his father in tiny Mora, Mo.

Don't expect Kroenke to say much about those days or, really, about anything at all. Magazine and newspaper stories over the years repeatedly cast him as "Silent Stan" and "reclusive" and "secretive."

Those who have worked for Kroenke see a demanding boss with no interest in self-aggrandizement.

"He doesn't like people putting themselves above the team," said David Ehrlich, former Kroenke Sports Enterprises executive vice president and chief operating officer.

Kroenke's distaste for attention isn't new. In a Bloomberg Businessweek story six years ago, he recalled shooting a key free throw during a ninth-grade basketball game in front of a large crowd.

"My knees were knocking," Kroenke said. "I missed the free throw and was useless the whole tournament."

He earned a bachelor's degree and a master's in business administration at the University of Missouri in Columbia. He met Ann Walton,the daughter of Wal-Mart co-founder Bud Walton, in 1971 while skiing in Aspen, Colo. They married three years later. Forbes calculates Ann Walton Kroenke's net worth — separate from her husband's — at $5.6 billion.

Stan Kroenke started building his fortune through real estate in the mid-1970s, developing shopping malls and Wal-Marts. A longtime partnership with Missouri developer Raul Walters ended in 1985 with protracted litigation. Michael Staenberg was Kroenke's partner for two decades in a company they co-founded in 1991 — To Have Fun Realty — that controlled millions of square feet in retail space. That, too, ended in multiple lawsuits.

Staenberg declined to comment because of the ongoing litigation. Walters died in 2009.

Kroenke's sports ventures haven't always gone smoothly. In 1993, he emerged from the corporate shadows as a last-minute investor for St. Louis' bid to land an NFL expansion team. After his presentation to NFL owners and an uneasy news conference, newspaper accounts compared him to the "Droopy Dog" cartoon character, saying that dealing with the media "obviously terrifies him."

"He came out of nowhere," longtime friend Bob Stull said. "People were trying to figure out who in the heck he was."

Kroenke faced another chilly reception in 2007 after he bought a minority stake in the English Premier League's Arsenal soccer club.

"Call me old-fashioned, but we don't need Kroenke's money and we don't want his sort," Peter Hill-Wood, then Arsenal's chairman, said at the time.

Kroenke didn't respond — he's not known for losing his temper. Four years later, he became the club's controlling shareholder. He kept the club's governing board in place and remained in the background. Last year, Forbes valued Arsenal at $1.3 billion.

Kroenke acquired 40% of the Rams in 1995, the year the team moved to St. Louis from Anaheim. When he became the majority owner in 2010, some in St. Louis feared he would return the franchise to L.A.

"I'm born and raised in Missouri," Kroenke told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch at the time. His full name — Enos Stanley Kroenke — was inspired by St. Louis Cardinals legends Enos Slaughter and Stan Musial.

"I've been a Missourian for 60 years," Kroenke continued. "People in our state know me. People know I can be trusted. People know I am an honorable guy."

Kroenke is often described as "regular" and "normal." Associates say the man with a mustache and tousled hair who wears cowboy boots with his suit doesn't act like a billionaire.

Ehrlich would discuss business with his boss over bison burgers at My Brother's Bar in Denver more often than they met in conference rooms.

Kroenke's competitiveness is legendary among those who know him. When fly-fishing with Paul Andrews, one of his former executives, he tracks who catches what. That attitude extended to games of H-O-R-S-E and pickup basketball on the practice court of the NBA's Denver Nuggets, one of Kroenke's teams. The owner sank three-pointers from NBA range with little difficulty.

"He was not joking around," Ehrlich said. "He was a little bit intense about it . . . and in life."

When the NHL's Colorado Avalanche, another of Kroenke's teams, won the Stanley Cup in 2001, the same intensity seemed to radiate off the owner during games. He didn't yell. But Ehrlich, sitting nearby, could feel the stress.

Kroenke, a fitness zealot who is particular about his diet, drank from the Stanley Cup after the series win — and took ill for several weeks.

"I think that's the only time in his life that Stan has been sick," Michaels said.

The Avalanche and Nuggets are just part of Kroenke's sports kingdom. He owns Pepsi Center, the Denver arena that the teams share with his professional lacrosse franchise, the Colorado Mammoth. He controls the regional sports network that broadcasts their games, along with those of the Colorado Rapids, his Major League Soccer team that plays at his Dick's Sporting Goods Park in Commerce City, northeast of Denver.

He owns a company that sells tickets for the teams. He owns Altitude Authentics to hawk club apparel.

Kroenke also has a 12,000-square-foot penthouse at Pepsi Center, reachable by private elevator, that includes a theater, gym and unobstructed mountain views.

One reason the L.A. stadium initiative doesn't surprise many who know him: it's more than a sports deal, it's also a real estate play.

About 18 months ago, Kroenke met with Terry Fancher, executive managing director of Stockbridge Capital, to discuss adding a football stadium to Fancher's Hollywood Park development in Inglewood. For one session, Kroenke brought a sandwich in a brown bag for lunch.

Though Kroenke has not committed to moving the Rams to Southern California, this deal has opened a door out of St. Louis. A clause in the team's 30-year lease for the Edward Jones Dome required that the stadium rank among the top eight in the NFL in several categories after 20 years. St. Louis and the Rams couldn't agree on improvements and a neutral arbitration panel ruled in favor of the Rams' $700-million plan in January 2013. St. Louis rejected the plan six months later, which allowed the Rams to convert the lease to year-to-year.

Kroenke's portfolio in L.A. includes a 9,000-square-foot home off Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu and, in 2012, he was among three finalists to buy the Dodgers.

The first hints of the L.A. plan became public in January 2014, after Kroenke bought 60 acres of vacant land at Hollywood Park from Wal-Mart for an estimated $101 million. At the time, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell dismissed the purchase as a routine transaction.

"There are no plans, to my knowledge, of a stadium development," Goodell said.

Fancher and Kroenke continued to work on a deal to transform the proposed mixed-use project in Inglewood into a hub of sports, retail, offices and entertainment. In late spring, Kroenke engaged HKS Inc., the firm that drew up plans for the billion-dollar AT&T Stadium that houses the Cowboys, to design the stadium.

"This is something that's going to be in place and in his family long after he's gone," said Fancher, who declined to detail terms of the partnership.

Kroenke's daughter, Whitney, 37, lives in L.A.; his son, Josh, 34, is president of the Nuggets and Avalanche.

That hints at another issue Stan Kroenke faces. NFL rules bar owners from owning professional teams outside their market. He had until last December to transfer ownership of the Avalanche and Nuggets, but the league granted a one-year extension.

Last March, eight months after the initial meeting, Fancher and Kroenke had a handshake agreement to be partners for a privately-financed stadium.

"If he's going to realize this opportunity, he's not going to realize it based on emotion and short-term stuff. He looks at this as a long-term investment," Ehrlich said.

Don Elliman, past president of Kroenke Sports Enterprises, said: "I absolutely guarantee there isn't a half-cocked bone about it."

Daysafter the stadium plans became public earlier this month, St. Louis proposed a new stadium that could cost up to $985 million.

As questions swirl about the next move in L.A., Kroenke's quiet belies the scope of what's at stake.

"Other people will have the ultimate say with who goes in the stadium," Fancher said. "There are lot of things that have to happen that aren't in Stan's control or our control. . . . But he's determined and he's got the resources to do it."

nathan.fenno@latimes.com

Twitter: @nathanfenno

Times staff writer Sam Farmer contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times

 

[ZigZagRam]

The same exact as he's told you about it apparently being about making a profit.

Mind telling me the post you're referring to?

 

[ZigZagRam]

This is a real stretch but read it if you're interested.
*******************************************
http://www.agsaf.org/how-to-terminate-the-inglewood-stadium-project

How to Terminate the Inglewood Stadium Project



The most likely way to prevent an NFL team from relocating to Los Angeles is to squash the new stadium proposal in Inglewood, California. Information contained in this article and the agsaf.org website does serious damage to the moral credibility of Rams owner Stan Kroenke. It will also become necessary to disclose the National Football League’s “dirty, little secret” as I demonstrate a level of either mesmerizing incompetence or professional subterfuge. Either makes Kroenke an exceedingly poor candidate to oversee a billion dollar development project.

The major news out of the NFL is the possibility of a franchise relocating to Los Angeles. Kroenke is leading the charge with a stadium development proposal for Inglewood. Several teams are rumored to be in the relocation mix: San Diego Chargers, Los Angeles Raiders and the St. Louis Rams.

Sports writers are naturally drawn to stories about player indiscretions (drunk driving, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.), but the overarching themes usually involve money. The NFL is the most profitable sports league in the world. Future revenue streams always make for a compelling story line. And nothing is bigger, both literally and figuratively, than the construction of a brand spankin’ new stadium.

As I’ve stated, the press usually focuses on money. However, this isn’t about a $100,000+ political contribution to the campaign of Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts from the same company tasked with the stadium construction (Hollywood Land Co. based out of San Francisco). Small world, eh? This isn’t about the NFL which currently operates as a tax-exempt organization under section 501 (c-6) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Conveniently labeled and organized as a not-for-profit trade/industry association despite the NFL front office hauling in record profits of nearly 10 billion this year with an admitted goal of reaching $25 billion by 2027. And this isn’t about Stan Kroenke who happens to be married to a Walmart heiress. It’s not about the second wealthiest NFL owner desperately trying to increase his leverage and fortune.

I lied. It’s about Mr. Kroenke a/k/a the 6 BILLION Dollar Man. It’s all about him.




The NFL’s most alarming problem involves divulging the truth. And not only will the truth set you free, it is free. It wouldn’t cost Kroenke a dime. But in this case, he refuses to publicly convey vital information about stadium safety. Kroenke reminds me a little of Jack “you can’t handle the truth” Nicholson. Well, not quite.

So finally, what’s the dark secret? I will tell you. It is the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede” and the potential for a dominipede (multiple, simultaneous stadium stampedes likely impacting the 1 o’clock slate). The agsaf.org website does a sufficient job of elaborating on the mechanics. Three books and 70+ articles on the subjects of outdated emergency evacuation protocol and advancements in asymmetric generational warfare (killing without weapons).

Still, I’ll summarize. Roger Goodell’s vision for every NFL stadium is maximum wireless connectivity. There’s little reason to believe the Inglewood project would deviate from this mission statement grounded in hyper-connectivity. It’s all part of the “Stadium WiFi Initiative” established back in 2012. You might recall it being hailed as the “living room” experience.

Now last time I checked, virtually everyone in the stadium has an active cell phone. With the Inglewood project, that would be 80,000+. These mobile devices are capable of disseminating false information. The overwhelming concern here is a real-time saturation of bomb threats and phony emergency evacuation orders, both unintentional and deliberate.

Since the vast majority of fans have never given this matter any consideration, it leaves you with two distinct choices. You either tell people about it and substantially increase their level of situational awareness… or you let them remain completely ignorant and oblivious.

Let me ask you a straightforward question. Is it reasonable to assume that Stan Kroenke has never been briefed on the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede?” It’s simply the modern, technological version of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. Middle school kids can carry on an insightful conversation about this stuff. Comprehending the notion of a cellular-induced panic doesn’t require a doctorate in Physics from Stanford.

Why is it that not a single person affiliated with the NFL has ever publicly spoken of this — a potential downside to all these cell phones in any of their stadiums? Why is any discussion about wireless hacking and social media hoaxes off limits? Why won’t they tell the truth about evacuation protocol? Allow me to explain. And please take note. Because in the aftermath of a national tragedy, a deliberate act of silence could be regarded as a felonious act of criminal omission.

I understand the dilemma of being proactive. It would be a voluntary admission that a specific scenario exists which could render a stadium unsafe. Hmmm, and such an admission would be in direct conflict with all that money flooding in. Once again, common sense safety issues take a back seat. We’ve previously seen this narrative unfold with the prolonged concussion lawsuit settlement and the league’s recent domestic violence troubles.

Profit has an uncanny knack for keeping people tight-lipped. Revenue has a tendency to impose its will on morality. But in this case, the solution is really simple. Just explicitly inform fans that LEGITIMATE emergency stadium evacuation orders would NEVER be delivered via their personal cell phones.

If an evacuation’s absolutely necessary, they use the public address system in tandem with the video monitors. Because it’s necessary to present a clear, unified directive. This is Evac Protocol 101. You don’t send out a blitz of text alerts. This is not rocket science. Out of roughly 200 NFL and NCAA stadium incident Commodes, I defy you to find just ONE who would disagree with the assessment above.

But in the end, it’s always about money. I understand that. However, this particular safety issue is hovering around a fifth grade comprehension level. And when every politician, every government agency (DHS, FCC, NSC, etc.), every sports writer in journalism and broadcasting, every billionaire NFL owner and every stadium manager adamantly refuse to acknowledge the possibility that something like this could at the very least be attempted, let alone happen. Well… call me naive, but that spells trouble. Eventually someone will test the cracks in the system.

Some will make the argument that this is a broader societal problem. Hey, this affects the sports industry across the board: NCAA, MLB, NASCAR, etc. Why doesn’t one of those organizations step up? And why aren’t you casting aspersions on the inaction of politicians and complacence of government? Shouldn’t they shoulder the blame as well? Short answer yes. Long answer no. The legal explanation doesn’t pan out because it’s a hypothetical. So all we’re left with is a moral quandary and the circular catch-22. You acknowledge a problem, you own it… and if something bad happens, you’re screwed.

So why Kroenke? Here’s your answer. Some degree of moral accountability is necessary at the highest levels of authority. Even if you’re afforded the luxury of not having to play by the rules. Even when you’re a multi-billionaire. Every rational human being still makes judgments of “right and wrong” when it comes to matters of “life and death.” If we can’t trust Kroenke with such an elementary stadium security issue, then how on earth could we possibly find him ethically competent to preside over a billion dollar stadium development project?

A lot of things are driven by profit, but freedom of speech is a hot commodity these days. Sometimes it’s necessary to speak up. If you disagree with my analysis, here’s a million dollar challenge. Forget that. Let’s call it the billion dollar challenge. Just try asking Stan Kroenke about this issue in a live, televised forum. See if you can find a reporter with the guts. Best of luck. That person won’t be a reporter for long. Hero? Yep. Reporter. Nope.

* AGSAF (Artificially Generated Stampede Awareness Foundation) is currently seeking a spokesperson, preferably a high profile athlete or celebrity/musician, who’s willing to tell Americans that “legitimate venue emergency evacuation orders do NOT come from their personal cell phones.” Regrettably, not a single member of Congress appears interested. Many know about the problem but willfully choose to steer clear. Not much of a surprise. After all, there’s no money in it.

That sounds like the ravings of a crazy person.

 

[ChrisW]

This is a real stretch but read it if you're interested.
*******************************************
http://www.agsaf.org/how-to-terminate-the-inglewood-stadium-project

How to Terminate the Inglewood Stadium Project



The most likely way to prevent an NFL team from relocating to Los Angeles is to squash the new stadium proposal in Inglewood, California. Information contained in this article and the agsaf.org website does serious damage to the moral credibility of Rams owner Stan Kroenke. It will also become necessary to disclose the National Football League’s “dirty, little secret” as I demonstrate a level of either mesmerizing incompetence or professional subterfuge. Either makes Kroenke an exceedingly poor candidate to oversee a billion dollar development project.

The major news out of the NFL is the possibility of a franchise relocating to Los Angeles. Kroenke is leading the charge with a stadium development proposal for Inglewood. Several teams are rumored to be in the relocation mix: San Diego Chargers, Los Angeles Raiders and the St. Louis Rams.

Sports writers are naturally drawn to stories about player indiscretions (drunk driving, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.), but the overarching themes usually involve money. The NFL is the most profitable sports league in the world. Future revenue streams always make for a compelling story line. And nothing is bigger, both literally and figuratively, than the construction of a brand spankin’ new stadium.

As I’ve stated, the press usually focuses on money. However, this isn’t about a $100,000+ political contribution to the campaign of Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts from the same company tasked with the stadium construction (Hollywood Land Co. based out of San Francisco). Small world, eh? This isn’t about the NFL which currently operates as a tax-exempt organization under section 501 (c-6) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Conveniently labeled and organized as a not-for-profit trade/industry association despite the NFL front office hauling in record profits of nearly 10 billion this year with an admitted goal of reaching $25 billion by 2027. And this isn’t about Stan Kroenke who happens to be married to a Walmart heiress. It’s not about the second wealthiest NFL owner desperately trying to increase his leverage and fortune.

I lied. It’s about Mr. Kroenke a/k/a the 6 BILLION Dollar Man. It’s all about him.




The NFL’s most alarming problem involves divulging the truth. And not only will the truth set you free, it is free. It wouldn’t cost Kroenke a dime. But in this case, he refuses to publicly convey vital information about stadium safety. Kroenke reminds me a little of Jack “you can’t handle the truth” Nicholson. Well, not quite.

So finally, what’s the dark secret? I will tell you. It is the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede” and the potential for a dominipede (multiple, simultaneous stadium stampedes likely impacting the 1 o’clock slate). The agsaf.org website does a sufficient job of elaborating on the mechanics. Three books and 70+ articles on the subjects of outdated emergency evacuation protocol and advancements in asymmetric generational warfare (killing without weapons).

Still, I’ll summarize. Roger Goodell’s vision for every NFL stadium is maximum wireless connectivity. There’s little reason to believe the Inglewood project would deviate from this mission statement grounded in hyper-connectivity. It’s all part of the “Stadium WiFi Initiative” established back in 2012. You might recall it being hailed as the “living room” experience.

Now last time I checked, virtually everyone in the stadium has an active cell phone. With the Inglewood project, that would be 80,000+. These mobile devices are capable of disseminating false information. The overwhelming concern here is a real-time saturation of bomb threats and phony emergency evacuation orders, both unintentional and deliberate.

Since the vast majority of fans have never given this matter any consideration, it leaves you with two distinct choices. You either tell people about it and substantially increase their level of situational awareness… or you let them remain completely ignorant and oblivious.

Let me ask you a straightforward question. Is it reasonable to assume that Stan Kroenke has never been briefed on the prospect of an “artificially generated stampede?” It’s simply the modern, technological version of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. Middle school kids can carry on an insightful conversation about this stuff. Comprehending the notion of a cellular-induced panic doesn’t require a doctorate in Physics from Stanford.

Why is it that not a single person affiliated with the NFL has ever publicly spoken of this — a potential downside to all these cell phones in any of their stadiums? Why is any discussion about wireless hacking and social media hoaxes off limits? Why won’t they tell the truth about evacuation protocol? Allow me to explain. And please take note. Because in the aftermath of a national tragedy, a deliberate act of silence could be regarded as a felonious act of criminal omission.

I understand the dilemma of being proactive. It would be a voluntary admission that a specific scenario exists which could render a stadium unsafe. Hmmm, and such an admission would be in direct conflict with all that money flooding in. Once again, common sense safety issues take a back seat. We’ve previously seen this narrative unfold with the prolonged concussion lawsuit settlement and the league’s recent domestic violence troubles.

Profit has an uncanny knack for keeping people tight-lipped. Revenue has a tendency to impose its will on morality. But in this case, the solution is really simple. Just explicitly inform fans that LEGITIMATE emergency stadium evacuation orders would NEVER be delivered via their personal cell phones.

If an evacuation’s absolutely necessary, they use the public address system in tandem with the video monitors. Because it’s necessary to present a clear, unified directive. This is Evac Protocol 101. You don’t send out a blitz of text alerts. This is not rocket science. Out of roughly 200 NFL and NCAA stadium incident Commodes, I defy you to find just ONE who would disagree with the assessment above.

But in the end, it’s always about money. I understand that. However, this particular safety issue is hovering around a fifth grade comprehension level. And when every politician, every government agency (DHS, FCC, NSC, etc.), every sports writer in journalism and broadcasting, every billionaire NFL owner and every stadium manager adamantly refuse to acknowledge the possibility that something like this could at the very least be attempted, let alone happen. Well… call me naive, but that spells trouble. Eventually someone will test the cracks in the system.

Some will make the argument that this is a broader societal problem. Hey, this affects the sports industry across the board: NCAA, MLB, NASCAR, etc. Why doesn’t one of those organizations step up? And why aren’t you casting aspersions on the inaction of politicians and complacence of government? Shouldn’t they shoulder the blame as well? Short answer yes. Long answer no. The legal explanation doesn’t pan out because it’s a hypothetical. So all we’re left with is a moral quandary and the circular catch-22. You acknowledge a problem, you own it… and if something bad happens, you’re screwed.

So why Kroenke? Here’s your answer. Some degree of moral accountability is necessary at the highest levels of authority. Even if you’re afforded the luxury of not having to play by the rules. Even when you’re a multi-billionaire. Every rational human being still makes judgments of “right and wrong” when it comes to matters of “life and death.” If we can’t trust Kroenke with such an elementary stadium security issue, then how on earth could we possibly find him ethically competent to preside over a billion dollar stadium development project?

A lot of things are driven by profit, but freedom of speech is a hot commodity these days. Sometimes it’s necessary to speak up. If you disagree with my analysis, here’s a million dollar challenge. Forget that. Let’s call it the billion dollar challenge. Just try asking Stan Kroenke about this issue in a live, televised forum. See if you can find a reporter with the guts. Best of luck. That person won’t be a reporter for long. Hero? Yep. Reporter. Nope.

* AGSAF (Artificially Generated Stampede Awareness Foundation) is currently seeking a spokesperson, preferably a high profile athlete or celebrity/musician, who’s willing to tell Americans that “legitimate venue emergency evacuation orders do NOT come from their personal cell phones.” Regrettably, not a single member of Congress appears interested. Many know about the problem but willfully choose to steer clear. Not much of a surprise. After all, there’s no money in it.

At first I saw "How to Terminate the Inglewood Stadium Project" and I was like

Then I saw "AGSAF (Artificially Generated Stampede Awareness Foundation)" and I was like

 

[bluecoconuts]

Mind telling me the post you're referring to?

Right before the post where I said I got my information from Stan and not from the articles that suggest its about presitge or for his family moreso than profits and himself.

 

[RmsLegends]

Certainly one can take that as an indicator of what they believe or they can take the absence of verbal clear intent AS Kroenke wanting to give the St. Louis market as many opportunities as he can afford to see that he doesn't get shafted out of the opportunity .

I would also say this Kroenke would be a huge slimeball if he put this city through it's paces in the way they are with no intent to reward the efforts of Peacock and company. It's just not in me to hold that low an opinion of the guy who was the main proponent and driving force behind the Rams actually moving to St.L.

Upon a little further analysis of the man's possible motives is THAT his main line of business is developing properties around centers of activity and he (if NFL bylaws allow) may be intending to be a landlord to other teams with a venue he could rent to promoters of fights concerts and the like.

While actions do speak louder than words , they aren't as explicit and are subject to interpretation

Personally bro my opinion is he has every intention of moving the Rams there. He is a developer and as such he knows the most important thing once ya have built is to get a tenant in ASAP as failure to do so means ya lose money. I believe he intends for the Rams to be there and if not he would not be so silent. As he is aware ya already have 2 teams in Cali who have stadium problems and if he was building for another occupant I think he would have already approached either one or both teams about being the occupant.

I also think his silence works in his favor as I have read St. Louey will build a stadium and I have also read they do not want to build one if no one is gonna commit to taking up residence. So his silence works in his favor to slow down any plans St. Louey has of actually building a stadium if no one is there to commit. So this is pure conjecture on my part as I am taking it at face value that the comments I have read StL will only build a stadium once they have a commitment from a team.

I honestly believe he at one time had every intention of keeping the Rams in StL and his mind soon changed after he found himself in arbitration with the CVC over the promise that was made to him. I think at that point owning the venue became of tantamount importance to him.

One reason is he is like we are a conservative who gives money to conservative politicians and causes and like any of us who are conservatives one thing we find a hindrance is government so we believe smaller government is the solution.

So my speculation from this mindset is he approached for the promised changes and heard no so he sought recourse through arbitration and after he won gov said ok then we default. So even though now the city is willing to build the venue it still does not solve the future problem of gov being involved. Such as say x amount of years down the road he believes a change or upgrade or extension needs to be done to the venue while the city owns it he has to approach them for permission and get them to do it. So again he could be facing a no and he could seek the legal remedy again, but StL has already shown they are all to willing to default when the legal outcome is opposite of their answer. So what conservative worth his salt would ever want to tie his economic freedom in the hands of bureaucrats when he has the economic means to change that.

Pure speculation here by me, but also could be a case of he wanted to build a stadium in St. Louey he would own, but also heard a no as the city wants to own it. Which I so can understand why the city wants to own it, for the revenue. StL has been a city on decline for many years when it comes to population from it's high of 850k in the 50's to around 320k today. Then when ya figure in all the current and future revenue lost by the city from cancelled events due to a safety concern following Ferguson to future revenue from black lead organizations of a secular and religious nature over the judicial outcome in Ferguson and saying they will hold their conventions elsewhere. As well as the MO Senate just passed Senate Bill 5 which would limit cities from keeping 30% of the revenue from citations to only 10%. So is easy to see how the city could or will be facing a revenue shrinkage and is easy to see how the city owning the venue makes financial sense for them.

However I think that is the problem Stan wants to own the venue so he can be the last word and make some money and the city wants to own the venue so they can be the last word and make some money.

So I think Stan is building the LA stadium to answer any future problems he will come across from a public owned stadium. An has every intent is to move the Rams there and silence works on his behalf as if any truth to the city wants a commitment before it builds he can stay silent and works in his favor. I also think he has stayed silent as he will be underway in December if not sooner. The league has said no one can move before 2016 so when it comes time for him to make his case heard for a move he will already have a whole year of building done and a year to do any private talks he needs to do to win over any votes he needs to from fellow owners who will vote the matter.

So I believe he has every intention of moving the Rams and his silence works in his favor as it could hamper any going forward StL does as well as buys him time to have progress done on his development as well as time to win over any votes he will need to move.

 

[blue4]

Personally bro my opinion is he has every intention of moving the Rams there. He is a developer and as such he knows the most important thing once ya have built is to get a tenant in ASAP as failure to do so means ya lose money. I believe he intends for the Rams to be there and if not he would not be so silent. As he is aware ya already have 2 teams in Cali who have stadium problems and if he was building for another occupant I think he would have already approached either one or both teams about being the occupant.

I also think his silence works in his favor as I have read St. Louey will build a stadium and I have also read they do not want to build one if no one is gonna commit to taking up residence. So his silence works in his favor to slow down any plans St. Louey has of actually building a stadium if no one is there to commit. So this is pure conjecture on my part as I am taking it at face value that the comments I have read StL will only build a stadium once they have a commitment from a team.

I honestly believe he at one time had every intention of keeping the Rams in StL and his mind soon changed after he found himself in arbitration with the CVC over the promise that was made to him. I think at that point owning the venue became of tantamount importance to him.

One reason is he is like we are a conservative who gives money to conservative politicians and causes and like any of us who are conservatives one thing we find a hindrance is government so we believe smaller government is the solution.

So my speculation from this mindset is he approached for the promised changes and heard no so he sought recourse through arbitration and after he won gov said ok then we default. So even though now the city is willing to build the venue it still does not solve the future problem of gov being involved. Such as say x amount of years down the road he believes a change or upgrade or extension needs to be done to the venue while the city owns it he has to approach them for permission and get them to do it. So again he could be facing a no and he could seek the legal remedy again, but StL has already shown they are all to willing to default when the legal outcome is opposite of their answer. So what conservative worth his salt would ever want to tie his economic freedom in the hands of bureaucrats when he has the economic means to change that.

Pure speculation here by me, but also could be a case of he wanted to build a stadium in St. Louey he would own, but also heard a no as the city wants to own it. Which I so can understand why the city wants to own it, for the revenue. StL has been a city on decline for many years when it comes to population from it's high of 850k in the 50's to around 320k today. Then when ya figure in all the current and future revenue lost by the city from cancelled events due to a safety concern following Ferguson to future revenue from black lead organizations of a secular and religious nature over the judicial outcome in Ferguson and saying they will hold their conventions elsewhere. As well as the MO Senate just passed Senate Bill 5 which would limit cities from keeping 30% of the revenue from citations to only 10%. So is easy to see how the city could or will be facing a revenue shrinkage and is easy to see how the city owning the venue makes financial sense for them.

However I think that is the problem Stan wants to own the venue so he can be the last word and make some money and the city wants to own the venue so they can be the last word and make some money.

So I think Stan is building the LA stadium to answer any future problems he will come across from a public owned stadium. An has every intent is to move the Rams there and silence works on his behalf as if any truth to the city wants a commitment before it builds he can stay silent and works in his favor. I also think he has stayed silent as he will be underway in December if not sooner. The league has said no one can move before 2016 so when it comes time for him to make his case heard for a move he will already have a whole year of building done and a year to do any private talks he needs to do to win over any votes he needs to from fellow owners who will vote the matter.

So I believe he has every intention of moving the Rams and his silence works in his favor as it could hamper any going forward StL does as well as buys him time to have progress done on his development as well as time to win over any votes he will need to move.

The St Louis area is the 21st largest market, a city is also the metro areas so the region has not lost population, Ferguson is over, conventions are still happening.

And you are way off trying to make this a liberal vs conservative thing.

 

[RmsLegends]

Well I reckon blue4 if ya look to be offended ya will always find a cause to do so. My comments said no such thing and the way ya read it allows ya as the individual to hear what ya want to hear or when ya are looking to be offended find your cause.

I would think plainly from me quoting and speaking directly to Thor with my comment I came across as I know him and have had many interactions with him and so from a personal basis I commented him from a same perspective we have and share and speculated how another with our mindset could have come to a same opinion. That is all I did and said as my words are there for all to see.

So ya taking umbrage with me for things I did not say is over the top. While I make no excuse or back down from what I said, to me personally to read I was looking to debate which is better libs or cons is very far from my intent.

 

[ChrisW]

One reason is he is like we are a conservative who gives money to conservative politicians and causes and like any of us who are conservatives one thing we find a hindrance is government so we believe smaller government is the solution.

So you say that he's a conservative but he wants to move the Rams to the Democratic mecca that is California?

However I think that is the problem Stan wants to own the venue so he can be the last word and make some money and the city wants to own the venue so they can be the last word and make some money.

You should frame this little paragraph as speculation as well. Owners in the NFL simply do not own venues. The reason why is they are a huge burden as they are easily twice as expensive as any other sports venue. The revenue streams are the real deal when it comes to NFL franchise owners.

PS - if I may suggest. In the world of internet forums, it's impossible to read things a certain way and impossible to read the original authors tone. Red font doesn't do anything to help the situation because it's harder to read, and puts off a more aggressive mindset.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Well I reckon blue4 if ya look to be offended ya will always find a cause to do so. My comments said no such thing and the way ya read it allows ya as the individual to hear what ya want to hear or when ya are looking to be offended find your cause.

I would think plainly from me quoting and speaking directly to Thor with my comment I came across as I know him and have had many interactions with him and so from a personal basis I commented him from a same perspective we have and share and speculated how another with our mindset could have come to a same opinion. That is all I did and said as my words are there for all to see.

So ya taking umbrage with me for things I did not say is over the top. While I make no excuse or back down from what I said, to me personally to read I was looking to debate which is better libs or cons is very far from my intent.

You make good points but the font and color you use burns my eyes.