New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[ChrisW]

Agreed. But we all know Kroenke is the only one with the wherewithal to get it done in LA. I really don't believe at the end of the day the owners are going to allow two of the "poorest" owners in LA. Too important to the NFL not to fail - again.

poor doesn't fit here. The project in Carson is bankrolled by Goldman Sachs. Money isn't an obstacle. I think it's going to come down to timing. Do they want to wait an extra year to play in LA or not.

 

[blue4]

It's highly unlikely that either Oakland or San Diego end up in STL. Paying the relocation fee on top of the stadium buy in pretty much eliminates both of these owners.

I wouldn't say eliminates. You've got public money in St Louis if it holds, you've got a relocation situation that is going to break rules no matter which way it goes, and you've got a unforced error of a pledge by Stan to help either team get a stadium if he gets his payday, and you've got Oakland who won't build anything. If Mark Davis has a tiny sliver of a brain he could come out richer and ahead pretty easy if he wanted to. I think the NFL would be all to happy to see that happen. Not likely but not impossible either.

San Diego, no they ain't coming. I see no scenario where anyone even suggests that option.

 

[ChrisW]

I wouldn't say eliminates. You've got public money in St Louis if it holds, you've got a relocation situation that is going to break rules no matter which way it goes, and you've got a unforced error of a pledge by Stan to help either team get a stadium if he gets his payday, and you've got Oakland who won't build anything. If Mark Davis has a tiny sliver of a brain he could come out richer and ahead pretty easy if he wanted to. I think the NFL would be all to happy to see that happen. Not likely but not impossible either.

San Diego, no they ain't coming. I see no scenario where anyone even suggests that option.

I think it's going to be in the range of a $750m investment to relocate and buy in to the stadium in STL. Then you've got the G4 on top (which won't be possible with any team other than the Rams.) It's going to be almost as expensive as buying a team to get here.

 

[blue4]

Agreed. But we all know Kroenke is the only one with the wherewithal to get it done in LA. I really don't believe at the end of the day the owners are going to allow two of the "poorest" owners in LA. Too important to the NFL not to fail - again.

You could stick the Toledo Tulips of the junior football league in LA or most towns and it wouldn't fail. Game's too popular anymore.

 

[blue4]

I think it's going to be in the range of a $750m investment to relocate and buy in to the stadium in STL. Then you've got the G4 on top (which won't be possible with any team other than the Rams.) It's going to be almost as expensive as buying a team to get here.

If they'll waive bylaws for Stan they'll waive G4 requirements for others. I think only a move to LA will draw $750 mil, and I'm beginning to think it won't go that high.

 

[ChrisW]

If they'll waive bylaws for Stan they'll waive G4 requirements for others. I think only a move to LA will draw $750 mil, and I'm beginning to think it won't go that high.

I'm talking relocation plus the 250m in owner contribution for the Riverfront Stadium. And, I believe only two teams each year can pull funds from the G4 loan pool.

 

[DavidU]

poor doesn't fit here. The project in Carson is bankrolled by Goldman Sachs. Money isn't an obstacle. I think it's going to come down to timing. Do they want to wait an extra year to play in LA or not.

A substantial portion of the Spanos net worth is the Chargers. Sure, GS is going to underwrite the deal, but they aren't doing it for free.

Also, remember San Diego is one of the NFLs favorite Super Bowl destinations. A Super Bowl will work in Carson, but its far from ideal.

 

[blue4]

I'm talking relocation plus the 250m in owner contribution for the Riverfront Stadium. And, I believe only two teams each year can pull funds from the G4 loan pool.

If Inglewood wins that leaves just two teams who need funds. Stan's is self funded.

 

[ChrisW]

A substantial portion of the Spanos net worth is the Chargers. Sure, GS is going to underwrite the deal, but they aren't doing it for free.

Well of course they aren't doing it for free, But the money is there. And GS seems to think it's a good investment.

 

[Legatron4]

If Inglewood wins that leaves just two teams who need funds. Stan's is self funded.

No, no it's not. He's not just writing a check for 2 billion and calling it a day. He's getting help too. If Inglewood wins that leaves two teams with shitty stadiums and doesn't solve anything. Spanos doesn't want to play second fiddle to the Rams and that's exactly what he would be doing.

 

[RamBill]

Rams Players Torn Between LA and St. Louis Fans

The St. Louis Rams are spending day two in Oxnard, California practicing with the Dallas Cowboys. With the proximity to Los Angeles plenty of LA Rams fans have been making the trip north to see their former team. Their hope is the Rams will soon be returning to Southern California as the NFL talks openly about wanting a team or teams back in that market. But It leaves the players in an odd position. Getting cheers from these fans while knowing St. Louis is still home. FOX2 Sports Director Martin Kilcoyne is covering the story from Oxnard, California. He talks with Jared Cook

Watch Kilcoyne's Rams Report

 

[DavidU]

Well of course they aren't doing it for free, But the money is there. And GS seems to think it's a good investment.

One person is mortgaged a million dollar home to the hilt. Good credit - but an uncertain financial future.

One person can write a check if need be.

Who would you rather sell to?

Will try and make this my last post. Not intending to come to your board and cause any trouble.

 

[RamFan503]

Wasn't quoting his article

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12040153/san-diego-chargers-commit-play-2015-qualcomm-stadium"Calendar year 2015 will constitute the team's 14th year of work on a San Diego stadium solution."

Since 2007, the Chargers have had a three-month window to renew the team's year-to-year lease with the City of San Diego for Qualcomm Stadium that permits the team to terminate the lease at any time between Feb. 1 and May 1.

Iced - the very next statement doesn't mesh with a year to year lease. They obviously have to have a longer lease term if they would have to pay "the City of San Diego $17.6 million to leave next year."

It may be written that way in the article but it's not like BSPN always has their facts straight.

 

[drasconis]

Also, remember San Diego is one of the NFLs favorite Super Bowl destinations. A Super Bowl will work in Carson, but its far from ideal.

Huh....it has been 12 years since a SB happened in SD...the stadium is a dump now...how does this amount to "one of the NFLs favorite Super Bowl destinations"

 

[DavidU]

Huh....it has been 12 years since a SB happened in SD...the stadium is a dump now...how does this amount to "one of the NFLs favorite Super Bowl destinations"

Its been 12 years because as you said, the stadium is a dump. A new stadium? The NFL would love Super Bowls back in San Diego.

 

[beej]

One person is mortgaged a million dollar home to the hilt. Good credit - but an uncertain financial future.

One person can write a check if need be.

Who would you rather sell to?

Will try and make this my last post. Not intending to come to your board and cause any trouble.

well that depends are these people complete strangers to me or do I have an interest in their business transactions. If the person who is mortgaged to the hilt is in danger of going out of business, would that affect my bottom line and would a leg up help him get on track?

 

[iced]

Iced - the very next statement doesn't mesh with a year to year lease. They obviously have to have a longer lease term if they would have to pay "the City of San Diego $17.6 million to leave next year."

It may be written that way in the article but it's not like BSPN always has their facts straight.

If a team renews its lease every year and has an out/option to go somewhere else, I'd call that year to year...every year they have to give notice whether or they're not they're going to play there.

Feel like at this point people are starting to get into semantics that have the same result

LA Times -

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-chargers-stadium-lease-20141216-story.html

The St. Louis Rams and Oakland Raiders, like the Chargers, have year-to-year stadium leases

 

[DavidU]

Don't forget, the Chargers have been playing in Qualcomm rent free.

 

[The Ripper]

If a team renews its lease every year and has an out/option to go somewhere else, I'd call that year to year...every year they have to give notice whether or they're not they're going to play there.

Feel like at this point people are starting to get into semantics that have the same result

LA Times -

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-chargers-stadium-lease-20141216-story.html

The Jaguars can also get out of their lease every year but no one calls that year to year

 

[iced]

The Jaguars can also get out of their lease every year but no one calls that year to year

1) Shahid Khan has invested money into the stadium since becoming owner, so logic would dictate he is investing in Jacksonville

2)Breaking their lease is extremely expensive - about $100 million...Chargers pay $17 mill to leave. Additionally to break the lease the Jags/NFL would have to open their books to prove losses (Which is definitely not gonna happen)

3)Khan also said he isn't moving the team