Jim Kelly on LA Live

[buffaloaggie]

I'd like to see confirmation of that statement as well.

An ownership group has to meet certain qualifications of which Kelly's group does. Short of showing you a document, which I can't, I'll take the word of the guy that told me. He pulled me aside after I had posed a question to Chris Brown, John Murphy and Mark Kelso here in Atlanta concerning their thoughts on Jim Kelly's role and future role with the Bills. He could be full of it, but again, I didn't ask him to tell me that. Of course, Kelly's group would have to come up with the highest bid.

[SuperKillerRobots]

The only problem is Jim's plan everytime I hear it is that if RW passes b4 he sells they will have to be high bid. I hope his friends have the deepest pockets in the country!! And RW has never publicly said he will sell b4 he dies.

I want to beleive him but that is the facts.

BTW nice post and thanks

 

To be fair on this, Ralph has never said his estate would sell to the highest bidder, just that his estate would sell. It's possible that there is already an agreement in place to sell the team based on a certain affrodable-in-Buffalo multiplier after Ralph passes. It's possible that Ralph thinks the league would push back on this type of setup if it were out in the open (and possibly pit the other owners against him even more), so he's keeping it quiet.

[Chef Jim]

Mine are more on off the wall, etc., too, but how did you start off on this site, if not for football (the Bills)?

 

Well let's see I've been Chef Jim here for over 7 years and have been on here for longer than that (originally LABillsFan). So I've soured on the sport since then, probably in the last three years or so.

[JPS]

And this is why I don't really follow football anymore. It's really not about us anymore.

I'm getting there. Part of me hopes they lockout/strike. They'd save me a ton of dough.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

I find it interesting the part about Ralph giving the gree nlight, not necessarily waiting until he dies

 

Being an LA show, the Bills rarely get coverage here -- or when they do it's just "when are they moving to LA". So I was excited to hear Jimbo straighten Andrew out a bit about his plans to keep the Bills in Buffalo. The first question Andrew asked (after getting his input on the Reggie Bush Heisman situation) was about the move. Jimbo flat out said it's not going to happen as long as he is alive. Jim said he has a group in place, Ralph knows this, and they are not going to try to buy the team until Ralph gives them the green light or till he passes. Either way he said that it's his duty as a Western New Yorker to keep the Bills in Buffalo. And Ralph knows he is the man to do it.

[RevWarRifleman]

Here's my question. If there is a deal/plan in place to keep the Bills in Buffalo why the secrecy? Ralph knows if he were to do that he'd be a hero to all the fans. My not get that admiration before he goes. I don't get it.

 

 

Chef, good question, but I think that Ralph doesn't really give a d^@mn about fame & glory. Which is why he's keeping it on the down low. His history shows that over the years when compared to the other AFL/NFL owners, he's a low key guy

[May Day 10]

Kelly says good stuff, but he has a history of lots of talk and little action. I'm praying he's not blowing smoke with this.

 

PTR

 

I agree, but it seems to have gone on for too long, and seems to be beyond just blowing smoke. He also isnt saying he will "see what he can do". Although vague, everything he says has a sense of finality.

[bbb]

Well let's see I've been Chef Jim here for over 7 years and have been on here for longer than that (originally LABillsFan). So I've soured on the sport since then, probably in the last three years or so.

 

Got it - that makes sense.

[Mr. WEO]

That's not true, they could have a buy/sell agreement in place through a trust that would allow Bills ownership to pass to key Bills employees or an investment group. The value of the franchise would be settled by a business appraisal and the investment group would have the first right of refusal to purchase the team for the price agreed upon by the estates heirs.

 

I am sure Mr. Wilson has done the responsible thing and taken care of his estate planning needs.

The team would need an individual owner with at least 30% ownership--which Bills employee has that money? Any price agreed upon would have to be approved of by a super majority of the other owners. It has to be a full market price for them to approve.

[Chef Jim]

Got it - that makes sense.

 

Holy crap, that's a first.

[tonyd19]

 

That is good information that I never have read before. They don't need to have an open bid in that case then? Would other owners be willing to approve it if the price seemed low?

 

It depends if there is such an agreement in place, but yes, the other owners would have to approve the new group.

[JÂy RÛßeÒ]

Due to inheritance taxes, Ralph cannot LEAVE the team to anyone. It HAS to go to the estate. So either he sells while alive, which he's always said he will NEVER do, or it goes to the estate where the assumption is that it will go into a highest-bidder-gets-it auction

[Mr. WEO]

Due to inheritance taxes, Ralph cannot LEAVE the team to anyone. It HAS to go to the estate. So either he sells while alive, which he's always said he will NEVER do, or it goes to the estate where the assumption is that it will go into a highest-bidder-gets-it auction

His wife.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

Due to inheritance taxes, Ralph cannot LEAVE the team to anyone. It HAS to go to the estate. So either he sells while alive, which he's always said he will NEVER do, or it goes to the estate where the assumption is that it will go into a highest-bidder-gets-it auction

 

Jay, I think the terminology is crucial here, and has colored so much of the discussion. It will not be an "auction" such as when someone dies intestate and the executor just dumps everything, which would mean highest bidder. What it means is that the family will likely sell, as they would sell momma's house after her death. Sullivan and others are assuming that it will have to go to the highest bidder, but that is nothing but an assumption. They will be able to choose between bids, using whatever criteria they like. Price is one, but they are not going to be compelled to sell to the highest bidder, unless they just choose to do that.

[jimmy10]

Entirely my biggest miff, as well.

 

For a king, producing an heir to ensure continuity of rule --- was the utmost concern of his reign. They would announce the birth of a son proudly. It provided a sense of stability to the people.

 

Ignoring this and/or leaving fans in the dark has been one of the biggest shortcomings in the past ~10 years. One thing to wonder whether we'll have a good QB, quite another to be left wondering whether we'll still have a team in the not-distant future. I wish it were addressed without the relative vagueness that has existed.

 

I'll admit, this is what worries me about the whole situation as well.

 

While I'd like to believe the Bills will never leave WNY, the fact that fans' concerns about the team moving have been met only with cheerleading from Jimbo and NOTHING from Ralph is confounding. You're right, why NOT set a plan in place now and shout it from the rooftops that the Bills will be in Buffalo for at least the next century? It would set so many fans' minds at ease, and I imagine boost season ticket sales too.

 

This uncertainty about whether or not my favorite football team will even EXIST when my infant son grows up is an awful feeling. Much worse than our O-line/QB problems.

Edited September 16, 2010 by jimmyo

[Mr. WEO]

Jay, I think the terminology is crucial here, and has colored so much of the discussion. It will not be an "auction" such as when someone dies intestate and the executor just dumps everything, which would mean highest bidder. What it means is that the family will likely sell, as they would sell momma's house after her death. Sullivan and others are assuming that it will have to go to the highest bidder, but that is nothing but an assumption. They will be able to choose between bids, using whatever criteria they like. Price is one, but they are not going to be compelled to sell to the highest bidder, unless they just choose to do that.

But the other owners are not going to let it sell for a discount.

[tonyd19]

Due to inheritance taxes, Ralph cannot LEAVE the team to anyone. It HAS to go to the estate. So either he sells while alive, which he's always said he will NEVER do, or it goes to the estate where the assumption is that it will go into a highest-bidder-gets-it auction

 

 

No, the team is Ralph's asset. That means HE CAN LEAVE THE TEAM TO WHOMEVER HE WANTS. Just like if you had a car and died, you could leave it to whoever you wanted. The inheritance tax issue would have to be settled. This could be done through proper estate planning, setting up a dynasty trust, etc. Also, if Ralph were to pass this year, there would be no estate tax liabiiity. Believe me, there are a lot of ways to handle this if he wants to transfer ownership responsibly.

 

The team would need an individual owner with at least 30% ownership--which Bills employee has that money? Any price agreed upon would have to be approved of by a super majority of the other owners. It has to be a full market price for them to approve.

 

 

No, the team could be passed through a trust to another company or an investment firm lead by a current employee or a family member, or a dog, or to whomever Ralph wants. The key issue when setting something like this up, is to ensure the estate has enough liquidity to pay the estate tax liability without liquidating the family buisness. Haven't we all been wondering what exactly Jim Kelly's actual job is with this team? Perhaps he is being groomed as the owner as well as being the face of the franchise.

 

Also, I know a lot of you out there think thie Bills are a billion dollar company. In actuality they're probably a lot closer to $500 or $600 million or so.

Edited September 16, 2010 by tonyd19

[Mr. WEO]

No, the team is Ralph's asset. That means HE CAN LEAVE THE TEAM TO WHOMEVER HE WANTS. Just like if you had a car and died, you could leave it to whoever you wanted. The inheritance tax issue would have to be settled. This could be done through proper estate planning, setting up a dynasty trust, etc. Also, if Ralph were to pass this year, there would be no estate tax liabiiity. Believe me, there are a lot of ways to handle this if he wants to transfer ownership responsibly.

 

 

 

 

No, the team could be passed through a trust to another company or an investment firm lead by a current employee or a family member, or a dog, or to whomever Ralph wants. The key issue when setting something like this up, is to ensure the estate has enough liquidity to pay the estate tax liability without liquidating the family buisness. Haven't we all been wondering what exactly Jim Kelly's actual job is with this team? Perhaps he is being groomed as the owner as well as being the face of the franchise.

 

Also, I know a lot of you out there think thie Bills are a billion dollar company. In actuality they're probably a lot closer to $500 or $600 million or so.

 

The controlling owner must own 30% of the franchise OR as little as 10% IF members of his family own, collectively, another 20%.

 

Since, we presume, no family member will own the team, that means another owner and/ or his family will need to step up to cover the 30% minimum. A trust is not an individual and corprate ownership is not allowed.

 

Jim Kelly doesn't have 30% of whateve the sale price will be. He may become a fractional owner, like Venus Williams of the Dolphins, at most.

 

Also, if Ralph were to give to whomever he wants that's not an heir, it doesn't matter if there is no inheritence tax this year. The recipient is on the hook for the taxes.

Edited September 16, 2010 by Mr. WEO

[Doc]

Lamar Hunt was an original AFL owner and died in 2006, yet his family kept control of the team (his son is the de facto owner). How did they do it?

Edited September 16, 2010 by Doc

[tonyd19]

The controlling owner must own 30% of the franchise OR as little as 10% IF members of his family own, collectively, another 20%.

 

Since, we presume, no family member will own the team, that means another owner and/ or his family will need to step up to cover the 30% minimum. A trust is not an individual and corprate ownership is not allowed.

 

Jim Kelly doesn't have 30% of whateve the sale price will be. He may become a fractional owner, like Venus Williams of the Dolphins, at most.

 

Also, if Ralph were to give to whomever he wants that's not an heir, it doesn't matter if there is no inheritence tax this year. The recipient is on the hook for the taxes.

 

You can look at the Yankees as far as Steinbrennar passing away. The heirs were his two children. They did not owe ANY ESTATE TAXES on this transaction becasue George passed away in 2010. This saved the family around 500 million dollars

 

 

Once again, Ralph does not need to pass the team to an heir, he can pass it to whomever and the tax liability would be calculated the same as it would for a family member, assuming there is a tax liability. (sans Ralph's wife.)

 

As far as corporate ownership, an individual can pass an asset "which the team is an asset" into a dynasty trust, or a family trust, or any other legal entity they want to. There is no limitation. The idea that an individual must own the team is absurd. I can guarantee you every owner in the league has established their ownership control into corporate structures and or trusts for tax and liability reasons.

 

Now, maybe there is an NFL rule that states an individual must own 30% of the team, if that is the case it is news to me. But, even if this were true, it would not change any of the legal rights Ralph has to pass along his assets as he wishes.

 

Lamar Hunt was an original AFL owner and died in 2006, yet his family kept control of the team (his son is the de facto owner). How did they do it?

 

It could have been done a number of ways. Probably through a family trust and solid estate planning that kept enough liquid assets in the estate to cover the estate tax liability for the business.

Edited September 16, 2010 by tonyd19