New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

Even the CVC in their proposal had those breakdowns, of how much they wanted from the Rams and how much they could contribute.


Please, the Rams plan wasn't sincere from the get go.. $700-$800 million from the city? Lol come on...

You mean - we'll cap it at $60 million in public funds? That is a cost breakdown? Yeah - that's a sincere attempt to strike a deal.

Like I said, good luck in getting the other owners to believe that - especially when he has deeper pockets. Particularly if the proposal is over $200 million (and in the rams case, it was $700-$800 million).

The one thing I can almost completely assure you is that billionaires don't play the "he's richer so he should pay more" game. Some may say it as a mantra that all 2%-ers should pay more taxes and give more but never in business negotiations.

What real incentive did the CVC have in shutting down the Dome for up to 3 years while renovating it? Loss of convention business alone makes it a losing proposition. Now, did they end up playing a dangerous game of Russian Routlette here, well duh!!!!

But that is why we are here. They felt they knew which chamber contained the bullet and they valued convention business above a long term solution to the NFL in St Louis.

But in terms of the lease and the Dome itself, i think this was always the "plan".

Confused. You mean they built the dome planning on having to build a new stadium in 20-25 years? Or do you mean they always planned to keep that top tier carrot extended on a stick to see how long the horse would walk?

If the former, then shouldn't they have been working on something long before this? If the latter, that strikes me as extremely bad faith dealings.

 

[RamFan503]

I am not one of those who places all the "blame" on Kroenke. I also agree with you about the polical climate in this town, and how they tend to only react when forced to. Go back to the Cardinal Stadium situation, and all the rumors of them "relocating" across the river. While that was the epotime of a smokescreen, it did happen,and got the attention of City Hall.
I also place a ton of "blame" on the NFL itself here. All these whispers and individual agenda of various owners is like watching an episode of "Survivor" with all the alliances that are formed behind the scenes. They put relocation guidelines in place with the primary purpose of preventing ANY owner from just up and moving for the purpose of financial gain for that individual franchise. But now for whatever reason, after exploiting the LA market for decades as leverage to build more stadiums than I care to count, they suddenly seem willing to turn a blind eye to their own guidelines.

Just another case of selective enforcement that is becoming the calling card of Roger Goodell.

Very well said.

 

[iced]

You mean - we'll cap it at $60 million in public funds? That is a cost breakdown? Yeah - that's a sincere attempt to strike a deal.

You mean offering $134 in cost and attempting to meet them somewhere in the middle? Yea that's a lot more realistic than asking for something 5x more costlier and putting the entire burden on the city

"Hey Ramfan503, wanna split a bottle of Johnny Walker Gold label? ($60 scotch)"
"Nah iced Get a Bottle of Blue Label, and you pay for all of it! ($215 scotch)"

The one thing I can almost completely assure you is that billionaires don't play the "he's richer so he should pay more" game. Some may say it as a mantra that all 2%-ers should pay more taxes and give more but never in business negotiations.

Well he most certainly can't play the "I'm broke like the davis family and can't afford my stadium."

Especially if he's willing to spend $2 billion to move and build a stadium - with public money on the table. Can't tell me it's because he hasn't been offered a good deal - have to pick up the phone for that to happen.

 

[D L]

So many Stan apologists.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The top 25% was subjective on a number of different levels. The Rams included a retractable roof for example, which was NOT necessary to achieve top 25%.

They included expanding concourses, entry points, etc. All which were part of their "wish list" but in no way were pertinent to achieving "top tier". So to answer your question, they absolutely could have come in with a "lesser" proposal and still met the SUBJECTIVE criteria for top tier.

So then the CVC could have made a counter proposal that met the top 25%. They offered up something they didn't meet it, and then walked away. It's might be subjective, but they went to an independent arbitrator, obviously they knew there were certain benchmarks needed to be hit to get close to the top 25%, but they decided against it. I don't see how this is Kroenke's fault, or how you can point to this as him not negotiating in good faith. If that's the case then the CVC didn't either. Hell the argument could be made that the riverfront might not even make the top 25%, and while it doesn't matter because the lease wouldn't be the same, it shows that there needs to be certain things done to hit that mark.

 

[The Ripper]

Indy Contributed $100 million

Stan proposed nothing

Here's a whole list of stadium renovations - not one has nothing coming from the owner/nfl, with the colts being the most extreme example of them all.

http://www.vikings.com/assets/docs/stadium/DES-recent-nfl-stadiums.pdf

He doesn't have to propose anything that wasn't what the Rams were supposed to do for arbitration

The Colts ended paying a lot less than that with all the additional revenues and paybacks.

 

[iced]

He doesn't have to propose anything that wasn't what the Rams were supposed to do.

The Colts ended paying a lot less than that with all the additional revenues and paybacks.

Yea he doesn't have to

but if you expect other owners to believe that's in good faith, good luck

 

[The Ripper]

Yea he doesn't have to

but if you expect other owners to believe that's in good faith, good luck

I mean the fact that there wasn't even mention of a G4 Loan says a lot - that's generally a given

They want their own leases honored so if they allow a municipality off then the same can happen to them.

 

[RamFan503]

Indy Contributed $100 million

Stan proposed nothing

Here's a whole list of stadium renovations - not one has nothing coming from the owner/nfl, with the colts being the most extreme example of them all.

http://www.vikings.com/assets/docs/stadium/DES-recent-nfl-stadiums.pdf

I don't know that any of us know that in order to get that plan accomplished that Stan wouldn't have put up sufficient funds to qualify for the G4 or that he wouldn't have had his people work up a plan to see it through. I'm going to guess that if the CVC had offered anything but a slap in the face, there would have been a more favorable business environment. My understanding also was that they were very difficult to deal with in getting modest improvements before that point and were very dismissive to the Rams suggestions.

 

[iced]

They want their own leases honored so if they allow a municipality off then the same can happen to them.

Lol how are they letting a municipality off when they're the ones offering money?

It was a bs proposal from the get go - everyone knew it at the time it was made, and everyone saw it for what it is. Make an offer to trigger the option.

If it was a realistic offer, he would have offered to invest some of his own money. But he didn't - however he's offering to invest that 2 billion elsewhere, and refused to answer phone calls by peacock/ the task force...hell the first time they met was by chance at the NFL meetings - Lol, but I'm sure that's going to be received as good faith right? Especially since the city is offering to put up $450 million in public money.

That'd put St.Louis as the 2nd most in Public Money for a stadium over the past 14 years (since 2001).

 

[iced]

I don't know that any of us know that in order to get that plan accomplished that Stan wouldn't have put up sufficient funds to qualify for the G4 or that he wouldn't have had his people work up a plan to see it through. I'm going to guess that if the CVC had offered anything but a slap in the face, there would have been a more favorable business environment. My understanding also was that they were very difficult to deal with in getting modest improvements before that point and were very dismissive to the Rams suggestions.

I don't buy it. A sincere offer would come with those details - why bother if he knew it was unrealistic in the first place?

I've never heard of any businessman making a proposal that didn't cover every detail - even your entry level Project Managers cover this stuff in little pretty power points.

 

[Angry Ram]

My guess is that it's because your baseball team is really good and the Cardinals fans are awesome. Also for a while the only other pro sports team in town was the Blues until the Rams came. It probably just stuck. Maybe? Does it seem like that's a bad thing?

It shouldn't be a bad thing but it's made out to be a bad thing.

Usually when that label is used to describe STL, it implies that people there don't care about the Rams or that they won't care if they leave. Based on my personal experiences, that is complete bullshit.

 

[bluecoconuts]

You mean offering $134 in cost and attempting to meet them somewhere in the middle? Yea that's a lot more realistic than asking for something 5x more costlier and putting the entire burden on the city

"Hey Ramfan503, wanna split a bottle of Johnny Walker Gold label? ($60 scotch)"
"Nah iced Get a Bottle of Blue Label, and you pay for all of it! ($215 scotch)"



Well he most certainly can't play the "I'm broke like the davis family and can't afford my stadium."

Especially if he's willing to spend $2 billion to move and build a stadium - with public money on the table. Can't tell me it's because he hasn't been offered a good deal - have to pick up the phone for that to happen.

So instead of walking away you can say "How about we get a 150 dollar bottle and split it"

If he sticks to 215 dollars and you pay for it all, then sure walk away, you found the line. I don't think Stan went right up to the line in his initial proposal though.

If he wants to invest in 2 billion for LA and not 500 million for St Louis, he can talk about the various reasons why that plan won't work. He wouldn't own the stadium as he likes, doesn't get PSL's, etc. I believe there's a law in St Louis saying they can't give away land for a private stadium, and if that's a sticking point for Stan why can't he make a stand? The city is allowed to make a stand about the dome, and funding, and location, but he can't make any stands otherwise he's not operating in good faith? That doesn't make sense.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I've never heard of any businessman making a proposal that didn't cover every detail -

Peacock and the riverfront stadium? There are still tons of unanswered questions about the financing.

 

[RamFan503]

"Hey Ramfan503, wanna split a bottle of Johnny Walker Gold label? ($60 scotch)"
"Nah iced Get a Bottle of Blue Label, and you pay for all of it! ($215 scotch)"

Hey Iced. Remember that bottle of Blue Label you agreed to buy me if I moved there? Nah 503 - you want some Monarch Vodka instead? You'll only have to give me $10 bucks so I can go get it.

Well he most certainly can't play the "I'm broke like the davis family and can't afford my stadium."

No but that just means they might be able to squeeze more out of Stan than Mr. Kangaroo.

Especially if he's willing to spend $2 billion to move and build a stadium - with public money on the table. Can't tell me it's because he hasn't been offered a good deal - have to pick up the phone for that to happen.

Actually, he doesn't have to pick up the phone for that. He simply has to give authority to others to negotiate on his behalf. That whole mantra is just being used as a wedge issue.

 

[RamFan503]

So many Stan apologists.

Good thing there are no apologists for the methods of the CVC.

 

[iced]

So instead of walking away you can say "How about we get a 150 dollar bottle and split it"

If he sticks to 215 dollars and you pay for it all, then sure walk away, you found the line. I don't think Stan went right up to the line in his initial proposal though.

If he wants to invest in 2 billion for LA and not 500 million for St Louis, he can talk about the various reasons why that plan won't work. He wouldn't own the stadium as he likes, doesn't get PSL's, etc. I believe there's a law in St Louis saying they can't give away land for a private stadium, and if that's a sticking point for Stan why can't he make a stand? The city is allowed to make a stand about the dome, and funding, and location, but he can't make any stands otherwise he's not operating in good faith? That doesn't make sense.

How are you negotiating in good faith when you have a stadium proposal with $450 million public money on table? When you look at how he's negotiated the CVC, how can you look at that and believe he was really trying to work with the city?

Not even close to good faith imo. St.Louis's offer for a new stadium does/will meet NFL's criteria for a viable stadium and have $450 in public money; can oakland or SD say the same for their prospective cities? Nope. NFL wants money up front for their stadiums, something SD lacks, and something Carson has with Goldman sachs.

Spanos and Davis are positioned better than Kroenke is as far as gaining permission to relocate, while appeasing all the other owners with 2 teams in LA to increase everyone's share of the TV market.

 

[iced]

So instead of walking away you can say "How about we get a 150 dollar bottle and split it"

why would I think you are going to split it? Your counter offer just included me covering everything...

 

[The Ripper]

Lol how are they letting a municipality off when they're the ones offering money?

It was a bs proposal from the get go - everyone knew it at the time it was made, and everyone saw it for what it is. Make an offer to trigger the option.

If it was a realistic offer, he would have offered to invest some of his own money. But he didn't - however he's offering to invest that 2 billion elsewhere, and refused to answer phone calls by peacock/ the task force...hell the first time they met was by chance at the NFL meetings - Lol, but I'm sure that's going to be received as good faith right? Especially since the city is offering to put up $450 million in public money.

That'd put St.Louis as the 2nd most in Public Money for a stadium over the past 14 years (since 2001).

Did the price of the stadium go up? Right now it's 600 million from the owner & the NFL and if the concession revenues go to the owner then a tax on hot dogs and beer comes from the owner too and that brings it to 700 million from the owner. That's not including shortfalls

 

[iced]

Peacock and the riverfront stadium? There are still tons of unanswered questions about the financing.

true but not something he left out or ignored either - while there are unanswered questions, he atleast gave an estimate... an attempt, something kroenke didn't make

again, everyone believed it was bs from the get go, and i don't see how thats changed except made his true intentions about LA become more apparent