eball Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 With this year's game in Toronto coming up, here are some updates: Updates of what? Has "Toronto" exercised its option to buy? And if so, how exactly does a city do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickedface Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 theres alot of info there, its always good to have info like that. i wouldn't know what to do if the bills left town. i might stop watching football, or actively cheer against them. i don't know. i don't want to know. i wouldn't stop watching the team when they lose but if they are moved to another city i wouldn't know what to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 A resounding... AYE!!!!!!!!! (I think the only 'nay' will be from the OP that routinely bumps it. ) Where's deep voice when you need him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 A resounding... AYE!!!!!!!!! (I think the only 'nay' will be from the OP that routinely bumps it. ) Would it be any different if he who can sleep when he's dead just created a new one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Would it be any different if he who can sleep when he's dead just created a new one? Probably not. The 11-page archival record of his fantastic imagination would be forever lost Until he recreates it and starts bumping it again, that is. If only Nyquil would just give him some... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I thought this wasn't a comedy thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 (edited) Probably not. The 11-page archival record of his fantastic imagination would be forever lost Until he recreates it and starts bumping it again, that is. If only Nyquil would just give him some... day and night, night and day, hour by hour, coffee gone crisp and long stale, popping bennies by the bowlful, and injecting adrenalin by the gallon he/she scours the intrawebs in search of nuggets and slivers of detail to provide the latest and nuanced update in his/her cause. he/she will not, refuses to -- until the very last breath seeps from his/her body -- relent. and the posts come, and the conspiracy grows, and the objective still incomplete, toronto, bills, buffalo, ralph, rogers, wilson googled and googled over and over again until the print on the keys grow pale as the full moon outside his/her window. weary, sleepless, deprived of dreams, defying, as we all can see, death for one more day in search of an answer and, maybe something more than that, a reason to be. jw Edited October 25, 2011 by john wawrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted October 25, 2011 Author Share Posted October 25, 2011 Well, at least we know who bought a Supercolloquial Mundane Adjectival And Onomatopoeic Accentuator: http://www.theonion.com/articles/amazing-new-hyperbolic-chamber-greatest-invention,1321/# Although it is difficult to find critics of the EHC-1 Alpha, those who oppose the machine do so vocally. The project's most prominent critic is Sandia National Laboratories' Dr. Owen Comstock, who argues that hyperbolic-chamber research has little social value and that federal funds would be better spent on his project, the high-energy, lowest-common-denominator-inductive Supercolloquial Mundane Adjectival And Onomatopoeic Accentuator. "EHC-1 Alpha?" Comstock said. "Pfft. More like the craptastic crapobolic crapulator of crappity-crap-crap. Blarf. In addition, it is ugly as ugly can get, raises several safety issues, and is so freaking stupid I had to puke at how stupid it is." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted November 19, 2011 Author Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) US pivate equity firm Providence Equity Partners is now reportedly interested in buying MLSE: http://www.thestar.com/mobile/NEWS/article/1087627 It’s possible neither Rogers nor Providence ends up with the company. Minority owner Larry Tanenbaum has the right to match any offer for Teachers’ 80 per cent interest. Rogers, Providence, Teachers and Maple Leaf Sports all declined to comment. While Toronto casual sports fans might not have heard of Providence, which is based in Rhode Island, the company is both well known in sports circles and familiar to Teachers’. The company manages more than $23 billion and has invested in more than 100 companies in 20 countries since it was formed in 1989. It’s unclear whether Tanenbaum would match any offer for Teachers’ stake. One person close to Tanenbaum said he would consider matching any offer to buy out Teachers’ and then file an initial public offering for Maple Leaf Sports, a move that would be both complex and controversial. While such an offering would probably be wildly popular with investors, the NHL and the NBA would both probably oppose such a move because it would make public more of their internal financial information. But it’s unlikely that the leagues could do anything to stop a public stock listing. The comment about the NHL and NBA being unable to do anything to stop a public stock listing makes no sense to me - - if the NFL Constitution & Bylaws can prohibit publicly traded companies from owning an NFL team, why can't the current owners of NBA and NHL teams vote to amend their governing documents (if necessary) to include such a prohibition? Other articles about Providence and its interest in MLSE: http://www.benefitscanada.com/news/u-s-investor-interested-in-teachers%E2%80%99-mlse-stake-22840 The U.S. private equity firm behind the Yankees Entertainment and Sports Network is interested in buying the parent company of the Toronto Maple Leafs. http://www.cbc.ca/m/rich/sports/nba/story/2011/11/16/sp-mlse-mapleleafs-teacherspension.html Teachers' raised its stake in MLSE to roughly 80 per cent earlier this year when it acquired a stake held by TD Capital Group. Terms of the deal for the bank's roughly 13.5 per cent stake were not available. Kilmer Sports, which is controlled by Toronto businessman Larry Tanenbaum, owns the remaining stake and holds a right of first refusal to match any sale offer under a shareholder agreement. The move by Teachers' to acquire the TD stake was expected to help streamline the sales process for Teachers' entire stake in the company. It's estimated the sports team operator could be worth between $1.5 billion to $2 billion since the Leafs are a lucrative money maker in what has long been one of the best hockey markets in the world. And more pessimistic about Teachers' getting its desired price (which supposedly includes an "ego premium") from any corporate bidder: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/mlse-unlikely-to-end-up-in-hands-of-us-equity-fund/article2238025/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Hockey&utm_content=2238025 Let's hope Tanenbaum ultimately buys MLSE, so that he doesn't get bought out by some other bidder and convert his existing equity stake in MLSE to cash. Edited November 19, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 Here's some good news. It looks like Tanenbaum may remain locked in as a minority owner of MLSE rather than being bought out by another bidder or exercising his right of first refusal to buy the company himself (at least for now): http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/mapleleafs/article/1092448--teachers-takes-for-sale-sign-off-leafs The majority owner of the Maple Leafs says it rejected “a number of offers” for the iconic hockey franchise before ending an eight-month search for a buyer on Friday. An asking price thought to be more than $1.5 billion and the presence of minority shareholder Larry Tanenbaum turned into major stumbling blocks for Teachers’ as it tried to unload its shares of the team and its other significant sports assets, according to insiders. At the same time, those insiders say that Teachers’ would likely consider selling the stake again if someone stepped up with a blockbuster bid and could stickhandle around key obstacles. “It can be for sale any time,” said one insider, who is familiar with some of MLSE’s affairs but requested anonymity. “It’s off the market but the next announcement could be a sale.” * * * * * * * * * * Investment bankers believe Teachers’ will remain open to selling MLSE in the next few years while the company is making strong profits, in part because some small market NHL clubs are clamouring for revenue sharing. That would shave profits for the Leafs, the company’s biggest revenue producer. * * * * * * * * * * In addition to a high asking price and Tanenbaum, the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission complicated a potential sale recently. The CRTC ruled in September that cable operators such as Rogers Communications and Bell Media who own their own channels must also offer them to their competitors That meant Rogers couldn’t buy Maple Leaf Sports and start a network that was available only to its own subscribers. Similarly, the CRTC ruling would ensure that even if Rogers bought MLSE, Bell or Wind mobile phone customers would have the same access to live game broadcasts as Rogers phone customers. * * * * * * * * * * Tanenbaum, a financier and former construction magnate, could not be reached for comment but he made it clear earlier he had no intention of selling his 20.47 per cent stake or giving up key shareholder rights under most circumstances. There had also been some speculation that Tanenbaum, MLSE’s chairman, would attempt to form his own group and bid for the Teachers’ stake. One of Tanenbaum’s key rights is a provision that forces the company to tender lucrative broadcast rights to the Leafs and other valuable properties. That would make it difficult for media companies such as Rogers to maximize the potential for MLSE for them, according to insiders familiar with broadcasting issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted December 9, 2011 Author Share Posted December 9, 2011 http://m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/rogers-bce-on-verge-of-deal-for-mlse/article2265448/?service=mobile Rogers Communications Inc. and BCE Inc. are on the verge of a deal to purchase a majority stake in Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment for more than $1.3-billion in a deal that could be announced in a matter of days. Sources say the telecommunications giants have reached a draft agreement with the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan to acquire about 80 per cent of MLSE, which owns the Toronto Maple Leafs, Toronto Raptors and a host of other assets. The deal has not been finalized and still may fall apart, but the companies were in talks late Thursday night, and sources close to the situation said most of the key details had been worked out. In particular, Rogers and BCE have won the support of minority owner Larry Tanenbaum, who owns 20 per cent of MLSE and has right of first refusal on any offer. His support clears a major hurdle for any deal. * * * * * * * * * * * * The deal gives MLSE an equity value of roughly $1.66-billion, not including debt. Of that, Rogers and BCE are said to be paying about $1.33-billion for roughly an 80-per-cent stake. At that price, MLSE has a total enterprise value of $2.1-billion, including debt. * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Tanenbaum’s support of Rogers and BCE as majority owners is key because the companies are buying the assets in order to gain greater control over the broadcast rights of Leafs and Raptors games, which they want to show on their respective networks. BCE owns TSN and Rogers owns Sportsnet. In addition to TV, the companies also want to stream that content over their wireless networks, though cellphones and tablet computers. However, the previous shareholders agreement dictated that all broadcast rights must be put out to auction. Mr. Tanenbaum, as a 20-per-cent owner, could have prevented Rogers and Bell from having control over those rights. For his support of the Rogers and BCE bid, sources indicate Mr. Tanenbaum will have his ownership stake sweetened, but it is not clear if that will be a direct cash payment or if he will receive a slightly larger share beyond 20 per cent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTO Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 What does this have to do with the Bills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millbank Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Rogers is the Company who pay the Bills for rights to one home game per season the last five years. It has been said they a obvious suitor for Bills at some point in time when team would be available. Now that they have expended a great deal of money on MLSE, will they have resources to purchase Bills and build new Stadium or will they be stronger suitor given they are partnered with Bell. Inc. This would be one reason as to why it is of import to local people. imo What does this have to do with the Bills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 YOU SHOULD BE THROWN OUT OF THE FAN CLUB !!!! Any one that says go ahead move the Bills to ANYWHERE but keeping them in B-lo is not a fan !!!! Let Terry Pegula buy the team now & keep them where tehy belong IN BUFFALO !!! I can't freakin believe it these posters get more & more Well just read the post & you'll see what i'm talking about or heck you don't have to read the entire post just read the heading & you need not go any farther to see he's not a BUFFALO BILLS FAN !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 YOU SHOULD BE THROWN OUT OF THE FAN CLUB !!!! Any one that says go ahead move the Bills to ANYWHERE but keeping them in B-lo is not a fan !!!! Let Terry Pegula buy the team now & keep them where tehy belong IN BUFFALO !!! I can't freakin believe it these posters get more & more Well just read the post & you'll see what i'm talking about or heck you don't have to read the entire post just read the heading & you need not go any farther to see he's not a BUFFALO BILLS FAN !!! Try decaf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 YOU SHOULD BE THROWN OUT OF THE FAN CLUB !!!! Any one that says go ahead move the Bills to ANYWHERE but keeping them in B-lo is not a fan !!!! Let Terry Pegula buy the team now & keep them where tehy belong IN BUFFALO !!! I can't freakin believe it these posters get more & more Well just read the post & you'll see what i'm talking about or heck you don't have to read the entire post just read the heading & you need not go any farther to see he's not a BUFFALO BILLS FAN !!! Settle down Beavis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bananathumb Posted December 10, 2011 Share Posted December 10, 2011 Leafs, Raptors, Jays...Bills are next. Rogers, Bell got the dough and the stadium. Be interesting to see what the NFL will do when Ralph is gone. The vultures are waiting to dig in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted December 10, 2011 Share Posted December 10, 2011 What does this have to do with the Bills? Rogers (even tohugh a company can not buy an NFL team), has been the "rumored" potential buyer of the Bills. But if they are laying down 1.5B for the Leafs, they are not going to have the close to 3B it would take them to buy the Bills (1+B for a stadium, 1B for the team, 700M for the relocation fee) unless they are leveraged to the max. So actually "good" news for the Bills staying in Buffalo. I never thought they would go to Toronto as there are WAY too many hurdles. But you know how people love conspiracies. The Bills will be staying in Buffalo people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted February 11, 2012 Author Share Posted February 11, 2012 http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/2012/01/31/bluejays_grassfield/ It's long been an eyesore to fans in the stands and to those watching at home on TV. And now that they fear it might cost them the opportunity to land a premium free agent, the Toronto Blue Jays say they are seriously considering rolling up the Astroturf and installing a grass field at Rogers Centre. The surprising revelation came from team president and CEO Paul Beeston in response to a question from a season-ticket holder during Monday's state of the franchise event at Rogers Centre. It's long been held that a grass field could be not be sustained at Rogers Centre for the duration of a baseball season. Not so said Beeston. "Grass can grow here. We've checked it out," he told a scrum of reporters moments after completing an hour-long Q&A session for fans along with general manager Alex Anthopoulos and manager John Farrell. "The real issue that we have is we have other events (at Rogers Centre), not just the Argos, but the other events here." Beeston added that there are fertilizers available strong enough to sustain a grass field for a baseball season, provided the field stays in place for the duration. "If you made the decision that you were going to make it a baseball-only stadium and you were going to put grass down, the question being can you do it, the answer would be yes," said Beeston. "Theoretically and practically. It can be done." The biggest current obstacle standing between the Blue Jays and a grass field appears to be the Toronto Argonauts of the CFL, a Rogers Centre tenant for nine dates in 2011 between the start of the baseball season and the conclusion of the World Series. The Argonauts current lease with the Rogers Centre is set to expire at the end of 2012, the same year their current five-year deal with the Buffalo Bills of the NFL ends. There is talk that Rogers Centre owner, Rogers Communications, and the Bills may extend their partnership beyond 2012, but as long as future Bills games aren't held during the baseball season it should pose no threat to a grass field for the baseball season. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * As CEO of not only the Blue Jays, but of Rogers Centre as well, Beeston knows the numbers better than anyone and he said he has an idea of how much a move to grass would cost. If that's the case it would appear then that the only decisions to be made now are whether Beeston wants to do it and whether Rogers is willing to bankroll the extra gardening supplies and potential lost revenue from other events. It sounds like a switch to a grass field, if it happens, would result in (1) non-renewal of the CFL Argos' lease, and (2) elimination of certain events from the Rogers Centre schedule. Would this make it easier, as a matter of both logistics and politics, to implement a future stadium "dig down" to meet NFL seating capacity requirements? I suppose there would still be events outside the baseball season remaining on the stadium schedule that would be disrupted by the "dig down," but political backlash might be reduced. If the Argos were already evicted (technically non-renewed) because of the switch to grass, it wouldn't matter any more if the "dig down" destroyed the ability to configure the stadium for CFL football's wider and longer playing field. For a related article on how a potential switch to grass might effectively evict the Argos, see: http://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/2012/02/09/argos_rogerscentre_grass/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 How about this scenerio. San Diego Chargers move to LA. Buffalo moves to San Diego? Then I could buy season tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts