New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Rmfnlt]

I don't know what's taking them so long to release them... For any city, it should be in the respective task forces hands by now correct? I don't think any of them are very good...

Well, it could be that none of them are glowing... but, given the uncertainty hovering over each city's head, is that surprisin

Interesting. I thought (it has been a while) that interest expense on second homes was not deductible. I wonder if I'm only thinking non-income producing. I was going to buy a piece of property several years out so that I would have a ready hunt camp adjacent to an area we used to hunt and fish. At the time, I couldn't deduct interest or taxes on that property.

Anyway - I now don't remember how this is supposed to apply to the utilization of bonds toward a new stadium. Meh... the courts will decide that I suppose.

If you owned a rental house, you would complete the above form.

In this example above, $1,907 is carried forward to page 2 of your 1040 ("Itemized deductions").

As you can see, taxes, interest (and a bunch of other things) get deducted. If you are saavy , that line 26 ends up a loss and becomes a deduction on line 40 of your 1040.

So, yes, all of this is deductible.

Yeah, I don't know how this got as far as it did. But, it's important to get the facts straight, no matter where we do it, right?

Nothing shady about taking equity out of your primary residence to purchase another property.

Now... bond extensions? You got me there!!

 

[The Ripper]

Which is sad. The home market's ability to come up with a new stadium and support the team should be the deciding factors in these decisions.

The numbers the NFL use for support are different. They use gate receipts and local revenues to determine fan support. They also will use any information they have to support their decision which will include Cardinals revenue numbers, the surveys from expansion and revenues minus the guarantees, if the decision is for relocation. If the decision is for the team to stay they will include the guarantees for the revenues and they will use tickets sold and not gate receipts. They can justify either decision when the time comes.

 

[MrMotes]

2001? Wohoo, Rams are going to the SB...

 

[den-the-coach]

2001? Wohoo, Rams are going to the SB...

Video at 11:00pm

 

[Moostache]

Sorry that's the least likely scenario...Kronke's not giving up his franchise for a "Chance." to get the Broncos, plus there is a trust that Pat Bowlen set up for his family.

So you feel that Kroenke is going to give up the Inglewood project and his football team? I just don't think IMO that happens...Call me crazy.

I think you misread that the first time:
"MOST LIKELY - Rams stay in St. Louis, Kroenke sells to local ownership group or just decides to bide his time to sell when other opportunities open up in Denver; Raiders and Chargers do end up in Carson as a joint venture."

I did not mean to imply he was giving up both as a matter of fact, just as options available...he'll have a lot of choices no matter which way this all goes. He may want to get out of the club if the owner's vote down his proposed move, or he may decide to say "screw it" and stay in the dome year-to-year with the most ridiculously owner friendly lease in the sport, or he may sell, or about a dozen other things could happen. I do get the feeling through Peacock and Nixon that THEY don't want Kroenke as the owner, or at the very least would not be sad to see the Rams stay without him.

 

[den-the-coach]

I think you misread that the first time:
"MOST LIKELY - Rams stay in St. Louis, Kroenke sells to local ownership group or just decides to bide his time to sell when other opportunities open up in Denver; Raiders and Chargers do end up in Carson as a joint venture."

I did not mean to imply he was giving up both as a matter of fact, just as options available...he'll have a lot of choices no matter which way this all goes. He may want to get out of the club if the owner's vote down his proposed move, or he may decide to say "screw it" and stay in the dome year-to-year with the most ridiculously owner friendly lease in the sport, or he may sell, or about a dozen other things could happen. I do get the feeling through Peacock and Nixon that THEY don't want Kroenke as the owner, or at the very least would not be sad to see the Rams stay without him.

Okay got it...Good points all the way around, but Stan does not strike me as someone who bides his time. In the end, he might not have a choice, but his M.O. does not showcase that whatsoever.

 

[ChrisW]

CVC vs. STL hearing is set for tomorrow morning. This picture is from a thread on Rams Talk. Credit goes to Marxist over there.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The SD ones must have been descent or we would have heard something from the Chargers. The city might be holding them back there so they don't cause issues with the negotiations. The surveys really don't matter in Oakland plus who would they send them too and if it was Schaff she probably wouldn't care.

Maybe, I don't think any of the the teams will really say anything for a while, either after the task forces releases something, or after they've had long enough to digest them.

 

[tonyl711]

Sorry that's the least likely scenario...Kronke's not giving up his franchise for a "Chance." to get the Broncos, plus there is a trust that Pat Bowlen set up for his family.

So you feel that Kroenke is going to give up the Inglewood project and his football team? I just don't think IMO that happens...Call me crazy.

in your opinion it is, i could see it happening.

 

[The Ripper]

in your opinion it is, i could see it happening.

The changes that were made at the last ownership meeting directly benefit the Bowlen family in their efforts to keep the team with the use of an irrevocable family trust and allowing the managing owner to only control 5% of the team.

 

[RamBill]

Bernie: Nixon says St. Louis will be ready
• By Bernie Miklasz

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_d3713e35-59e1-5ff7-a281-bf500bf8c794.html

The always reliable Daniel Kaplan of the Sports Business Journal Reports that the NFL will have a special meeting of the league's owners on Aug. 11 on Chicago. The topic: an update on Los Angeles, and the three-team chariot race to get there.

This looms as an important date for the St. Louis effort to keep the Rams by securing land and funding for a new football stadium on the north riverfront.

The NFL will obviously be looking closely at the situation in St. Louis. The meeting is a crucial checkpoint for assessing the viability of the St. Louis plan developed by Gov. Jay Nixon's task force, led by Bob Blitz and Dave Peacock.

So the pressure is on.

And Nixon is confident.

In a series of interviews with local media outlets Nixon has repeatedly stated that St. Louis will be ready. He's gone beyond that by claiming that the faster timetable is a plus for St. Louis. Nixon anticipated the scheduling of the August owners meeting and has prepared accordingly.

"The fact that the NFL has sped up its time frame is great news for St. Louis," Nixon told me earlier this week. "The NFL has told us, in essence, to stay in the timeline, stay on top of the process, and we've shown the capacity to meet that faster timeline. My view is, that's a huge asset for St. Louis, and that's designed to help us.

"Our team has been working hard on this. A lot of folks have done a lot of things here in short time. And I do think that down the stretch, when it's time to tell the world that we are very proud to be an NFL market and that we are prepared in a cost-effective way to do what it takes to compete with anybody. I'm the Governor of the 'Show Me State,' so our commitment has got to be shown (to the NFL). And it will be."

The August meeting is the latest reaffirmation of the league's expedited time frame for making a decision on Los Angeles. The NFL is expected to allow teams to begin applying relocation this fall, with a decision to come late in the year or early in 2016.

The Rams, San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders are vying for the Los Angeles market. Rams owner Stan Kroenke is planning to build a stadium complex in Inglewood, near LA. The Chargers and Raiders have partnered on a new stadium plan in the Los Angeles suburb of Carson.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said the league will go with only one stadium plan if the decision is made to reenter Los Angeles, which hasn't had an NFL franchise since 1994.

Given the intensity of the competition, and the with the clock running down, it's essential for St. Louis to reassure the league that the stadium financing is set and cleared of all remaining obstacles.

That's why Nixon says he's pleased by the move-up of the original relocation timeline. In his view the credibility of the St. Louis plan would be further strengthened by having everything in place earlier than expected.

"In all of our conversations with the NFL and the feedback we get from the league, it's clear to me the NFL is impressed by what we've done here," Nixon that. "And impressed by how quickly we've reached this point. We've kept pace with the process. And we'll continue to do that."

Nixon is confident that the stadium funding and remaining land acquisition will be locked in by the NFL's August meeting.

That's his deadline.

At least two potential snags reman.

The board that runs the Edward Jones Dome filed suit last month against the city of St. Louis, challenging a 2002 city ordinance that requires a public vote prior to the use of tax dollars on a new stadium.

A second suit, filed by six Missouri lawmakers, is challenging Nixon's authority to extend existing stadium bonds to fund the new project.

If Nixon is worried about the possibility of the stadium project being derailed or delayed in a way that would seriously damage the quest to save the Rams or attract another NFL team, he isn't letting on.

"I'm not concerned," Nixon said. "We're going to get this done. It's coming down to crunch time. We're almost in the two-minute offense. We have to present a unified approach. We have to get this done this summer. And we will."

(I'll have more from Nixon and the St. Louis effort in my Post-Dispatch column Sunday.)

Thanks for reading ...

- Bernie

 

[den-the-coach]

in your opinion it is, i could see it happening.

Okay that why I posted IMO, so we'll see how it plays out.

 

[dieterbrock]

Okay that why I posted IMO, so we'll see how it plays out.

I'm with you. And I'd expect the cross ownership thing be rectified before the Broncs ever went on the market. Which doesn't seem like any time soon

 

[Hacksaw]

in your opinion it is, i could see it happening.

So you think Kroenke would give up a storied franchise for the possibility of obtaining another one simply to avoid a cross-ownership violation? You know there are other ways to get around that right? He has a very capable kid already running the Denver franchise.

 

[Hacksaw]

"That's why Nixon says he's pleased by the move-up of the original relocation timeline. In his view the credibility of the St. Louis plan would be further strengthened by having everything in place earlier than expected."
Now I get what he has been saying that for. Since the league seemed to be putting the screws to all 3 cities fighting for their teams by moving the timetable up, by keeping pace would show great resilience. Props to them,,, as long as the plan is solid and the league agrees the less than half is enough.

 

[tonyl711]

So you think Kroenke would give up a storied franchise for the possibility of obtaining another one simply to avoid a cross-ownership violation? You know there are other ways to get around that right? He has a very capable kid already running the Denver franchise.

no but i can see him staying in St Louis, then selling the team and buying the Broncos if and when they go up for sale. he pretty much owns the sports market in Denver, IMO he would probably take that over LA since that would put most of his teams in the same city.

 

[RamFan503]

Ah, ok. I was thinking about Kroenke's part. I wasn't throwing the stadium license in there.

It's all pretty convoluted. I think it is included in the team contribution in most stadium deals. Here's one that broke out the owner specific contribution in Minnesota.
http://blogs.mprnews.org/stadium-watch/2013/10/04/video-how-seat-licenses-work/
After a decade of negotiations, threats and promises, the Vikings showed Minnesota the money Thursday night. The team stacked up a subsidy from the NFL, a personal seat license plan and future naming rights to pay its $477 million share of the new stadium. And then Vikings owners kicked in another nine figures to seal the deal.
“The 100 million in equity is cash coming from the Wilfs, from the pockets of our owners,” said Vikings Chief Financial Officer Steve Poppen.

So IF THIS IS CORRECT, (I need to stress the part in caps as I don't know for sure) Minn is getting essentially $100 million from the Wilfs' pockets and St Louis expects $250 million from Stan. The project size is very similar so it seems to be a good comparison.

The SD project only uses 50% of the PSLs and allows Spanos to keep the other 50% and rent is included in their projections.

The problem I think a lot of us have in rationalizing any of these proposals is that none of them would be comparing apples to apples with the St Louis project. It is completely understandable IMO how the media, the Governor, and the fans can all come up with different numbers as far as who will be paying what and whether it is a good deal for Stan or the city/state or both or maybe even neither.

It does seem though at least to me that St Louis is asking for the largest personal influx of cash from ownership.

 

[den-the-coach]

no but i can see him staying in St Louis, then selling the team and buying the Broncos if and when they go up for sale. he pretty much owns the sports market in Denver, IMO he would probably take that over LA since that would put most of his teams in the same city.

Those a great points @tonyl711 , however, Kroenke put in a huge bid to purchase the Dodgers. IMO I think he sees the opportunity, but if he stays in St. Louis and the Broncos do come up for sale I don't dismiss your scenairo.

 

[Goose]

Those a great points @tonyl711 , however, Kroenke put in a huge bid to purchase the Dodgers. IMO I think he sees the opportunity, but if he stays in St. Louis and the Broncos do come up for sale I don't dismiss your scenairo.

Den you make a good point. There is a lot more to this than any of us will every know and I think we can all agree on that. I 100% believe that Stan will work out his cross ownership as part of a deal. I know the league has said it won't expand but where there is smoke there is fire. There has been chatter that expansion could part of a deal and that it is not off the table. Consider this. The reality is that only way STL builds a new stadium is if the Rams stay. Nixon is on his way out and this really appears to be the only chance to extend the bonds. I would have serious doubts the next Governor would do that. The G4 loan is not available, supposedly, if another teams relocates here. The Raiders and the Chargers do not seem to have any interest in moving here. We have been told that Inglewood is going to get built. Stan wants to build a NFL Mecca. The NFL could award Stan an expansion team. Cut or eliminate fees since he has the deep pockets, land, and stadium plan. He sells the Rams for top dollar and gets his California dream. The STL Task Force is on course to check off every box on the checklist the NFL has provided them. No other city has had State and City officials involved in the process to keep the NFL. It does not appear to be reasonable at all for the NFL to allow a cities team to relocate when they have worked as hard as STL has to achieve what it has take 10+ years for other cities to achieve. I do not think that the LA committee will take that commitment lightly and consider the repercussions if they were to allow the Rams to leave from other cities. Now this is just my opinion if the STL Taskforce everything wrapped up with a bow on it by August I don't see the Rams leaving.

 

[OldSchool]

Inglewood? I dunno know right now... not much news coming out of there lately... at least nothing significant to me.

Just curious but what news could come out of Inglewood that we don't already know about? The land is all purchased. The financing is done on the construction. All the necessary zoning, epa studies and legal hurdles needed have been done. Ground is being cleared and they're scheduled to start construction. All the deals with local construction unions and companies are done. There really isn't anything that needs to be said/released about Inglewood that we don't already know. I'm not attacking or criticizing I'm just curious if I've missed something that they need to solve/fix/announce.