New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[iced]

Fabiani said it was an option. Link to the interview in the quote below. You have to download the podcast, and skip to it, but its there. And Fred, for as annoying as he is, is right when he points out that it would have been easy to dance around the question, especially given it's a competition between the two.

If it gets done, hard to say, personally I do have my doubt's, but he still hinted it was possible.

btw here's Sam farmers take

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-0408-nfl-stadium-scenarios-20150408-story.html#page=1

Rams, Chargers together

Why it can work: This is an outcome the NFL could live with if both the Rams and Chargers can't close deals with their cities. Putting a second team in Inglewood gives that stadium greater financial viability.

The Raiders have more options where they can move. The team has discussed relocation with San Antonio officials. They conceivably could share Levi's Stadium with the San Francisco 49ers. Or the Raiders could go to St. Louis if the Rams were to leave.

Why it can't work: This would require Kroenke and Spanos to reach agreement to share a stadium, something they have not shown a willingness to do.

Before Kroenke joined the Hollywood Park project, the developer initially approached the Chargers but they were not interested. The Chargers like the easy freeway access of the Carson site and believe fans care most about their ability to get to and from a game as quickly as possible.

Outlook: Somewhat likely.

It's stuff like that popping up everywhere that makes me reluctant to believe it's not likely to happen

 

[The Ripper]

Except the NFL not liking projects funded this way isn't new.

do you even know where this $700 million public funding is supposed to come from anyway?

Only with private 3rd party investors and that's not the case in SD

 

[iced]

Only with private 3rd party investors and that's not the case in SD

huh?

 

[The Ripper]

huh?

Private investor. Not connected to the team.

 

[iced]

Private investor. Not connected to the team.

who? trying to find somethin,so far nothin...can't even confirm anyone pitching $700 million

 

[dieterbrock]

TBH, I wouldn't want to share a stadium with anyone. Franchises go through cycles (well most do), and on your down years, you'd lose fans to the other team.

I tell you, it works fine here in NJ with the Jets and Giants. Wasnt that way before the new stadium, the Jets played at Giants stadium. But now? The way they built it, and I've been to plenty of games for both teams, is clearly Giants stadium when they play there and clearly Jets stadium when they do.

 

[The Ripper]

who? trying to find somethin,so far nothin...can't even confirm anyone pitching $700 million

http://media.utsandiego.com/news/documents/2015/05/18/CSAG_Report_FINAL_web.pdf

My first post said between 600 and 700. Coming in at 640 without PSL's

 

[RamFan503]

http://media.utsandiego.com/news/documents/2015/05/18/CSAG_Report_FINAL_web.pdf

My first post said between 600 and 700. Coming in at 640 without PSL's

Wow! So does anyone find it interesting there is no naming rights in the financing details and only $100 million from PSLs? This seems like a pretty good plan - especially in that the Mission Valley site won't sit as an aging stadium with a bunch of asphalt and also wouldn't need to undergo any zone changes or apparently a public vote. Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos and the NFL.

 

[Sum1]

Wow! So does anyone find it interesting there is no naming rights in the financing details and only $100 million from PSLs? This seems like a pretty good plan - especially in that the Mission Valley site won't sit as an aging stadium with a bunch of asphalt and also wouldn't need to undergo any zone changes or apparently a public vote. Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos and the NFL.

All indications on Twitter is that both the Chargers and the NFL will not be in favor of this deal...for what that's worth.

 

[Moostache]

Sounds a lot like what I have thought for a while now...
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/...-buy-the-raiders-and-save-the-chargers-051615

(As usual now, if you wish to read my speculation and spit-balling, highlight the text and read on...if not, ignore the big white text space and have a nice day!)
That article is full of things that have been rumored for the last month or more. Namely, Kroenke selling the Rams and getting the Raiders and moving them to his LA facility.
What I find interesting today on this front, is the San Diego non-starter last ditch proposal. The SD task force is putting forward something that is almost diametrically opposite of what the Chargers said they needed to stay in San Diego. It is an almost point for point thumb in the eye of Spanos and his club's wish list.

That makes San Diego's departure almost a sure thing.
It also suddenly makes the RAIDERS the central piece to the puzzle, not the RAMS.

Kroenke has land and a stadium plan.
He also has an NFL team, but one with a paltry claim to relocation priority, and one with the strongest claim to NOT be granted relocation at all.
San Diego is looking to be L.A. bound regardless of Oakland or St. Louis.
Oakland appears to have little to no chance of getting a stadium in Oakland (no no desire to go anywhere else).
St. Louis appears on track to have a turn-key proposal and financing in line by the deadlines.

That means for Kroneke to get to L.A., he needs to leverage Carson out of existence and force Spanos' hand into joining him in Inglewood. Well, if the Raiders are available as a potential partner, that leaves Spanos with a viable option to NOT accept a deal in Inglewood. It then pits Inglewood against Carson and 2 teams against 1, and much to the chagrin of the Ostrich BBTLAR types, leaves Kroenke out of the equation. As long as SD-Oak can maintain any kind of united front, Kroenke is 3rd in line for a 2-seat dinner. He cannot get his way without peeling off one of those two teams.

So say you're Enos...and you want to build that stadium really badly, but you do not want to spend millions on lawsuits and aggravation, what is the best play to get in on a 45-degree angle and take away the competition? Forcing your current team into the market, especially if it is against league wishes is only going to make enemies. Even if you win, it becomes a pyrrhic victory at best. You do not want L.A. on bad terms with the other owners or commissioner. There are clearly issues in Oakland - stadium, fan base, revenue, weirdo owner, second class status in the market, etc. So how do you become the conquering hero in the NFL's eyes?

Also, trying to force the Chargers into Inglewood by abandoning the Raiders and Carson is another enemy maker.

Here's the easiest way - broker a deal with the NFL to sell the Rams for $1.5 billion value to investors in St. Louis (same weird controlling interest % as Mark Davis holds) and to the minority shareholders of the Raiders (53% - entitled to a buy-out at whatever their percentage ownership stake is from $795M value...if they sell, the St. Louis group would have first right of purchase, if not, they could retain their % but still no controlling interest). That would mean a 47% local ownership group with controlling interests, and minority owners from Oakland who would be free to retain their share of the ownership or sell it outright to the majority owners over time.

That puts the Rams in St. Louis, and the 47% of the sale price ($700M) that would cover Mark Davis is given to him to remove him from the equation at a profit. Davis comes out smelling like a rose - $700M is well above his current value in the team and lets face it, he is simply NOT NFL owner rich and won't be in the club 15 years from now no matter what happens now.

In exchange for this deal, Kroenke gets - 100% ownership of the Raiders, a waiver of cross-ownership rules, an additional waiver on relocation fees and NFL approval to move the Raiders to Los Angeles.

Now, if you are Spanos, you just crapped your pants.

That would solve a whole lot of NFL problems in one fell swoop:
- Oakland market refuses to play ball? They are out as an NFL city...sucks, but it would be by choice.
- St. Louis ownership and stadium happens, franchise remains put.
- Los Angeles market returns to the NFL AND retains its leverage against another city (namely San Diego)

Spanos could then try to proceed with Carson with no partner (this has been mentioned as 'possible' but widely dismissed as 'unlikely'); he could try to stay in San Diego (although that seems less likely than anything if their proposal is as bad as it sounds in some reporting), or he could swallow hard, accept a generous lease and partial stake in Inglewood at Wal-Mart Stadium.

 

[iced]

Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos and the NFL.

me too.

Thought this was interesting

LA Threat Surfaces

In the latter half of 2014, speculation about the Chargers potentially moving to Los Angeles began.17 The rumors became reality in February 2015, less than a month after Mayor Faulconer announced the formation of CSAG and his pledge to resolve San Diego’s stadium issue. The mayor shared these messages during his first State of the City. At the time, he was in office 10 months.

On February 20th of this year, the Chargers announced plans for a joint stadium with the Oakland Raiders in Carson, California. The news came as a surprise to everyone in San Diego.

According to NFL bylaws, any team that wants to relocate needs the support of two-thirds of the league’s owners, or 24 of 32 NFL franchises.18 The owners want to know what has been done to build a new stadium in the existing market, what’s being planned, and whether that market can sustain a franchise well into the future.

Faced with multiple proposals by NFL teams interested in moving to Los Angeles, the league formed the “Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities” earlier this year. The committee is made up of six NFL owners tasked with analyzing stadium plans from existing markets and for L.A. League executives have told CSAG that members of its group and City representatives would likely be invited to present to the Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities this summer.

The Chargers have not filed for relocation with the league, but the team has said it would be forced to do so if either the St. Louis Rams or the Oakland Raiders file for relocation.Rams owner Stan Kroenke is proposing a privately funded stadium in Inglewood, California that would be capable of housing two home teams. The Chargers have not released the financing plan for Carson but have said the stadium would be privately financed and based primarily on a record number of sales of PSLs. The team also has said its financing plan would remain viable if the Raiders work out a deal to remain in Oakland.

Makes it sound like the Chargers want to bolt for LA just as bad as the Rams do. this sounds like two owners fighting over a market more than anything

The Chargers have not released the financing plan for Carson but have said the stadium would be privately financed and based primarily on a record number of sales of PSLs.

this is partially true - the intial pitch called for this, then Sachs upped the investment to completely cover the amount of project.

 

[The Ripper]

Wow! So does anyone find it interesting there is no naming rights in the financing details and only $100 million from PSLs? This seems like a pretty good plan - especially in that the Mission Valley site won't sit as an aging stadium with a bunch of asphalt and also wouldn't need to undergo any zone changes or apparently a public vote. Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos and the NFL.

The naming rights and 1/2 the PSL's goes to the team.

 

[ChrisW]

Wow! So does anyone find it interesting there is no naming rights in the financing details and only $100 million from PSLs? This seems like a pretty good plan - especially in that the Mission Valley site won't sit as an aging stadium with a bunch of asphalt and also wouldn't need to undergo any zone changes or apparently a public vote. Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos and the NFL.

What's up with the developer purchase of $225m?

 

[The Ripper]

What's up with the developer purchase of $225m?

The NFL didn't want the stadium to be funded with revenues from an associated development so they decided to sell the land instead.

 

[RamFan503]

Sounds a lot like what I have thought for a while now...
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/...-buy-the-raiders-and-save-the-chargers-051615

(As usual now, if you wish to read my speculation and spit-balling, highlight the text and read on...if not, ignore the big white text space and have a nice day!)
That article is full of things that have been rumored for the last month or more. Namely, Kroenke selling the Rams and getting the Raiders and moving them to his LA facility.
What I find interesting today on this front, is the San Diego non-starter last ditch proposal. The SD task force is putting forward something that is almost diametrically opposite of what the Chargers said they needed to stay in San Diego. It is an almost point for point thumb in the eye of Spanos and his club's wish list. .

So what specifically are you referring to as being "diametrically opposite"?

 

[Moostache]

So what specifically are you referring to as being "diametrically opposite"?

I could be wrong, but sounded like location, financing and total team contribution in the SD "plan" were all drastically different than the Chargers had indicated they wanted...

 

[bluecoconuts]

Wonder how it will be viewed by Spanos

Not downtown, he'll probably have Fabiani trash it.

At first glance, without looking into details (at all, I just scrolled to see the team input of 300 million) it looks like it meets similar criteria as St Louis in terms of financing. When I get home I'll look at time tables and more details (or you guys can tell me how I'm wrong)..

 

[The Ripper]

I could be wrong, but sounded like location, financing and total team contribution in the SD "plan" were all drastically different than the Chargers had indicated they wanted...

The Chargers said in February they were agnostic in terms of a site. The team contribution is 300 million minus 60 million from the PSL sales and increased revenues that weren't included before Grubmans visit.

 

[ChrisW]

View: https://twitter.com/JasonPhilCole/status/600401320139436033

 

[Hacksaw]

So the owners are going to reward Davis for being poor and Spanos for being stubborn and too picky? Then select the stadium that will be built over methane and with a financial burden that could be tough to debt service and be profitable over Inglewood.

Right.

Spanos isn't that popular and Davis isn't. Sure Enos may be newer at the table but he brings stability and offers up an option for team 2 if they don't get their way .

You never know but I doubt it.