Discussion of The Bills Fan Alliance concept

[Fan in San Diego]

Great name for a post like this. Why would anybody give free money to help someone buy a business that will make them millions. The Bills are a profitable organization. Now, if you tell me I can buy shares of ownership and get shares of the profit then we are talking.

 

I would go for that scenario.

[dubs]

Here's the issue that I am not sure some people are understanding:

 

The inevitable sale of the team is coming. When that comes, new ownership uncertainty will make the Bills moving a distinct possibility. The area is not as competitive as others, for a number of reasons, but that's not to say it's not viable.

 

Some solutions that have been tossed out there are either just hoping for a good outcome or not possible. It's not possible for the individuals to get equity in the team. The NFL made sure of that. In case people haven't noticed, the public appetite for using taxpayer sourced funding for projects like these is seriously on the decline.

 

What this group is doing is being proactive. The target audience for this "fund" is those individuals who want to do what they can to keep the team here and can afford to contribute a little to that effort. I am not sure how big that market is, but there are definitely going to be some takers.

[McD]

In reality... for individuals this isn't a "business" move, it's a feel good move, an emotional move. You'd do it because of the sense of loyalty and passion that we as Bills fans have in spades. For some it's a form of national recognition, to some it's feeling a bit more relevant in the sports world... the NFL is THE sports league in America and there's only 32 teams playing each year... Buffalo is barely a top 75 city population wise in the US... that means 40 more cities larger than Buffalo don't to claim that they play on sports largest stage... to some the NFL means nothing, that the Bills have been hard to root for (esp the past 14 years), but to many, they cherish the fact that they have the ability to do so. If the Bills move... the NFL is all but dead to me. Yeah I could watch games, but I'd have zero emotional attachment. Some might even look at that as a blessing, but just like any other passion I'd rather suffer through some of that and then get some great feelings too then not have any at all. I'll take the ups and downs than the flat-line. I've not lived in Buffalo since I joined the AF 25+ years ago, but I'd do what I could to support anything that would help keep them there. Do you see what Seattle looks like today? Do you remember our glory years? There's only one way to ever get that feeling again, and that's to HAVE a team that's your own... can you ever imagine what you'd feel if the Bills win a SB? What the city/region would do and how they'd feel? This to me is an investment that someday... SOMEDAY we can all have that feeling.

[BillnutinHouston]

Great name for a post like this. Why would anybody give free money to help someone buy a business that will make them millions. The Bills are a profitable organization. Now, if you tell me I can buy shares of ownership and get shares of the profit then we are talking.

To my knowledge, every NFL team is profitable and according to this post the league is swimming in money. So then why you may ask would anyone move a team, ever? For MORE money. It's not just about making an annual profit, it's about maximizing the return on investment for your investors. This plan offers those investors a softer landing in Buffalo, with the hope that it will help offset the grener pastures in other places like Toronto and LA. If you can't appreciate that concept, it's no wonder you would scoff at contributing to this fund.

 

Kudos to those attempting to be proactive in addressing the soon-to-be unsettled ownership situation. Where do I send my check?

Edited February 3, 2014 by BillnutinHouston

[dubs]

To my knowledge, every NFL team is profitable and according to this postthe league is swimming in money. So then why you may ask would anyone move a team, ever? For MORE money. It's not just about making an annual profit, it's about maximizing the return on investment for your investors. This plan offers those investors a softer landing in Buffalo, with the hope that it will help offset the grener pastures in other places like Toronto and LA. If you can't appreciate that concept, it's no wonder you would scoff at contributing to this fund.

 

Incredible Post! Bravo!

[BackInDaDay]

the Bills have two distinct values.

one is their worth in the Buffalo market.

the other is their worth in another location which will make the franchise more profitable.

 

if the Wilson heirs insist on holding out for the higher price, the buyer will have to have a deal in place with the league to move the team to an area that will allow them to recover their costs and re-price their product, asap. if the purpose of this fund is to make up the difference until they're cleared to move the team, what's the point? interest free loans, are not loans.. they're gifts. if the contract is to return the gift upon gaining approval to move the team, what was accomplished? a year or two of deferring the inevitable? in this scenario, all the fund really does is help the Wilsons get their asking price.

 

now, if Ralph has made provisions that his heirs should try to keep the team in Buffalo - and that any sale of the team should be made at a discount if necessary, to achieve that goal. then the buyer will have their NFL club, but in a market where prices must be kept comparatively low. only someone, or a group of someones, with an allegiance to the legacy of the Buffalo Bills could find peace with such a deal, but in this case, the proposed fund could actually be a helpful means to a happy end.

 

unfortunately, i believe the former scenario is more realistic, but who knows what Ralph's up to.

[dubs]

the Bills have two distinct values.

one is their worth in the Buffalo market.

the other is their worth in another location which will make the franchise more profitable.

 

if the Wilson heirs insist on holding out for the higher price, the buyer will have to have a deal in place with the league to move the team to an area that will allow them to recover their costs and re-price their product, asap. if the purpose of this fund is to make up the difference until they're cleared to move the team, what's the point? interest free loans, are not loans.. they're gifts. if the contract is to return the gift upon gaining approval to move the team, what was accomplished? a year or two of deferring the inevitable? in this scenario, all the fund really does is help the Wilsons get their asking price.

 

now, if Ralph has made provisions that his heirs should try to keep the team in Buffalo - and that any sale of the team should be made at a discount if necessary, to achieve that goal. then the buyer will have their NFL club, but in a market where prices must be kept comparatively low. only someone, or a group of someones, with an allegiance to the legacy of the Buffalo Bills could find peace with such a deal, but in this case, the proposed fund could actually be a helpful means to a happy end.

 

unfortunately, i believe the former scenario is more realistic, but who knows what Ralph's up to.

 

Re: your first scenario, I don't think that's factually correct.

 

First, the purpose is obviously NOT to be a bridge to get a new owner financing until they can move the team. Not even sure where that is coming from. Second, an interest-free loan is exactly that. It's a loan that gets paid back at 0% interest. A gift would not need to be paid back. Third, and you may have missed this in the article, the loan would get paid back over a period of time and put back into the fund. It could then be borrowed again to help offset the lack of revenue from other sources, like PSLs or Luxury suites. The idea is that saving 10 - 20m per year in interest costs would be an attractive asset for a new owner.

 

Finally, I don't think anyone would claim this is THE solution. It's simply a private citizen idea that could help keep the team here. There would need to be other things that would also have to happen, but I certainly applaud the effort.

[Rubes]

Personally, I think its an interesting idea that I would support. What I would have liked to see from the Buff News article is the perspective of a sports franchise owner or two, someone like Mark Cuban, to provide a sense of how this idea appeals to the ultra-wealthy. Is this something that would truly sway things one way or the other? Or is it not really enough money, even interest-free, to accept with the accompanying restriction?

 

[Dean Cain]

For those thinking $170m is chump change remember $80m is all it took for us to vacate home field advantage for 1 game per year.

[BackInDaDay]

Re: your first scenario, I don't think that's factually correct.

 

First, the purpose is obviously NOT to be a bridge to get a new owner financing until they can move the team. Not even sure where that is coming from. Second, an interest-free loan is exactly that. It's a loan that gets paid back at 0% interest. A gift would not need to be paid back. Third, and you may have missed this in the article, the loan would get paid back over a period of time and put back into the fund. It could then be borrowed again to help offset the lack of revenue from other sources, like PSLs or Luxury suites. The idea is that saving 10 - 20m per year in interest costs would be an attractive asset for a new owner.

 

Finally, I don't think anyone would claim this is THE solution. It's simply a private citizen idea that could help keep the team here. There would need to be other things that would also have to happen, but I certainly applaud the effort.

 

anyone who pays a premium price for the Bills franchise will lose a fortune unless there's a plan in place to move it to a market that will pay premium prices for a NFL team. you don't invest in product unless you can make a profit. any prospective buyer willing to invest $900M for a product has plans to recover their costs and reap healthy profits. those plans can't include limiting their market to Buffalo, NY.

 

why would anyone accept smaller subsidies to stay, than what their product has the potential to earn in another market?

 

only if the Wilson family is willing to offer a discount to a buyer committed to Buffalo, would this fund have a realistic impact. but think about that. as the costs of remaining a viable franchise grow, the fund will have to grow. the market hasn't changed. so, even if this dream of accumulating such an insane amount of money from donations could come true.. it will have to come true in perpetuity.

 

generations of Buffalonians will have to willingly accept this incredible burden, or accept a franchise that can't raise the capital to compete.

 

i understand it's not a popular future to embrace, but free market capitalism will determine the team's fate.. and cake sales and car washes just ain't gonna cut it.

Edited February 4, 2014 by BackInDaDay

[Buffalo Barbarian]

From the front page of TBD via the Buff News.

 

http://www.buffalone...two-bills-drive

 

I think it's interesting. But to me, if they were to raise $170 million, I think the reason should be first and foremost to give to any local Bills ownership group that is being severely outbid by an outside group when the team is sold. So if they offer, 850 million and the other group offers 1 billion, this fund kicks in so the team is kept. That bid by an outsider of 150 m or so more that a local buyer group is the only way the team is going to be moved.

 

Wonder if it is possible to raise a billion dollars before the next owner takes over?

 

The coolest thing about this is it shows how much we want to keep this team and the League may e more inclined to keep us here.

[BillnutinHouston]

 

 

anyone who pays a premium price for the Bills franchise will lose a fortune unless there's a plan in place to move it to a market that will pay premium prices for a NFL team. you don't invest in product unless you can make a profit. any prospective buyer willing to invest $900M for a product has plans to recover their costs and reap healthy profits. those plans can't include limiting their market to Buffalo, NY.

 

why would anyone accept smaller subsidies to stay, than what their product has the potential to earn in another market?

 

only if the Wilson family is willing to offer a discount to a buyer committed to Buffalo, would this fund have a realistic impact. but think about that. as the costs of remaining a viable franchise grow, the fund will have to grow. the market hasn't changed. so, even if this dream of accumulating such an insane amount of money from donations could come true.. it will have to come true in perpetuity.

 

generations of Buffalonians will have to willingly accept this incredible burden, or accept a franchise that can't raise the capital to compete.

 

i understand it's not a popular future to embrace, but free market capitalism will determine the team's fate.. and cake sales and car washes just ain't gonna cut it.

There's a lot about your post I agree with factually, but I urge you to resist the temptation to just surrender without even putting up a fight. You'll hate yourself later if you didn't lift a finger.

 

Fortune favors the brave!

[BackInDaDay]

There's a lot about your post I agree with factually, but I urge you to resist the temptation to just surrender without even putting up a fight. You'll hate yourself later if you didn't lift a finger.

 

Fortune favors the brave!

 

i get it, but there are hard realities in this world that soft veils can only disguise for so long.

hope is a good thing, and no matter our differences, the ability to remain hopeful is probably the common denominator of every Bills fan.

if this becomes a reality, i will most definitely help seed the initial fund.

[Mr. WEO]

You don't see a distinct possibility of some outsider bidding $150 million more than a local group which would take the team out of Buffalo for good?

 

The NFL (the other owners) aren't going to allow the sale of the team to an owner (or group) that can't afford the market price of the team. They are going to green light an owner with the finacial means to buy the team outright.

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

When taxpayer money is spent on large projects, almost invariably the choices are influenced by political alliances, campaign donations, or lobbying of some sort. That is one of the least transparent (or efficient) activities we have in this country. To make it worse, everyone pays taxes so in effect everyone is impacted by decisions that are influenced by these forces.

 

 

It doesn't matter the motivation or the players involved. There is no secret funding of the stadium renovations. There is pure transparency of an announcement by elected officials that your money is headed for that purpose.

 

Another reason for some congressional rep or senator to push the IRS to grant this 501c3 status!

 

Charity status will have little or no impact on the vast majority of donor. The amount they give will be far less thant the standard deduction, so there will be no tax benefit for them.

 

True, but what else does your tax money fund? I'm sure most people aren't "fans" of those things either. Like people that pay taxes that fund schools and they have no children.

 

Society has long ago decided that education of all childen is a common good. They have not concluded he same regarding entertainment.

 

Re: your first scenario, I don't think that's factually correct.

 

First, the purpose is obviously NOT to be a bridge to get a new owner financing until they can move the team. Not even sure where that is coming from. Second, an interest-free loan is exactly that. It's a loan that gets paid back at 0% interest. A gift would not need to be paid back. Third, and you may have missed this in the article, the loan would get paid back over a period of time and put back into the fund. It could then be borrowed again to help offset the lack of revenue from other sources, like PSLs or Luxury suites. The idea is that saving 10 - 20m per year in interest costs would be an attractive asset for a new owner.

 

Finally, I don't think anyone would claim this is THE solution. It's simply a private citizen idea that could help keep the team here. There would need to be other things that would also have to happen, but I certainly applaud the effort.

 

It's not a loan because the "lenders" never get paid back. You are describing a gift that makes interest for the giftee, who may use the funds for any football related use he wants.

[dubs]

It doesn't matter the motivation or the players involved. There is no secret funding of the stadium renovations. There is pure transparency of an announcement by elected officials that your money is headed for that purpose.

 

It's not a loan because the "lenders" never get paid back. You are describing a gift that makes interest for the giftee, who may use the funds for any football related use he wants.

 

Yes…there is transparency in the actual payment of the funds. There is little transparency in how that gets decided.

 

It really doesn't even matter what the actual payment from the Fund Alliance is called, but you are not correct. It is a loan. Maybe you are just not understanding how it works.

 

The people who contribute to the fund are doing so by purchasing equity in the fund. They get shares in return. Part of the conditions of purchasing the shares is a lock-in provision, meaning you can't sell your shares for a pre-determined period of time (or whatever the provisions are, point is that the people in the fund are shareholders, not debt holders). The shares sold create this pool of capital in a legal structure called, The Fund. The Fund then lends money to the Bills, at 0%, that is then paid back to the fund according to the terms of the loans. In the article they referenced a 10-year repayment period. It is in fact a loan.

 

I get the skepticism and the hurdles that are present, but dismissing innovative and good ideas is just silly. Especially when most criticisms are just incorrect.

Edited February 4, 2014 by dubs

[Mr. WEO]

Yes…there is transparency in the actual payment of the funds. There is little transparency in how that gets decided.

 

It really doesn't even matter what the actual payment from the Fund Alliance is called, but you are not correct. It is a loan. Maybe you are just not understanding how it works.

 

The people who contribute to the fund are doing so by purchasing equity in the fund. They get shares in return. Part of the conditions of purchasing the shares is a lock-in provision, meaning you can't sell your shares for a pre-determined period of time (or whatever the provisions are, point is that the people in the fund are shareholders, not debt holders). The shares sold create this pool of capital in a legal structure called, The Fund. The Fund then lends money to the Bills, at 0%, that is then paid back to the fund according to the terms of the loans. In the article they referenced a 10-year repayment period. It is in fact a loan.

 

I get the skepticism and the hurdles that are present, but dismissing innovative and good ideas is just silly. Especially when most criticisms are just incorrect.

 

Maybe you didn't read the article. Everything you are claiming is incorrect.

 

You can repeat it a million times, but it is still false. Contributors have NO equity in anything. And if the fund "pays back" the loan to,,,the fund, it's not loan. Contributors will never be paid back unless the money isn't used.

 

From the article:

 

"No, you don’t get any stock in the Bills. And you get repaid only if your investment isn’t used and the team leaves Buffalo."

 

"And, fund supporters suggest this would be a voluntary gift from those community members who’d want to donate"

 

"Sabuda compared these donations to the $67 million of basically worthless stock sold in a 2011 “stock” offering for the Green Bay Packers. In each case, the offerings provided no control, monetary value or resale rights, just as with the Buffalo concept."

 

It's a gift, nothing more.

[dubs]

Maybe you didn't read the article. Everything you are claiming is incorrect.

 

You can repeat it a million times, but it is still false. Contributors have NO equity in anything. And if the fund "pays back" the loan to,,,the fund, it's not loan. Contributors will never be paid back unless the money isn't used.

 

From the article:

 

"No, you don’t get any stock in the Bills. And you get repaid only if your investment isn’t used and the team leaves Buffalo."

 

"And, fund supporters suggest this would be a voluntary gift from those community members who’d want to donate"

 

"Sabuda compared these donations to the $67 million of basically worthless stock sold in a 2011 “stock” offering for the Green Bay Packers. In each case, the offerings provided no control, monetary value or resale rights, just as with the Buffalo concept."

 

It's a gift, nothing more.

 

Exactly!!

 

I think we are splitting hairs here. You don't get equity in the Bills, you get equity in the established Fund. You don't make a loan to the Bills, the Fund makes a loan to the Bills.

[Bufcomments]

I would be ok with this as long as it goes towards building a new stadium.

 

I would chip in, I would love to frame something on the wall that says I helped keep the team here.

 

That would be awesome.

[Mr. WEO]

Exactly!!

 

I think we are splitting hairs here. You don't get equity in the Bills, you get equity in the established Fund. You don't make a loan to the Bills, the Fund makes a loan to the Bills.

 

Oy, never mind.

[dubs]

Oy, never mind.

 

haha…sounds good.

 

Honestly, maybe I made that assumption. Being in the investment industry for a while, that's what I read. It would make a ton of sense to structure it that way if that's not what they intended. It would set up a legal structure that's audited and overseen. So while an investor would never make money, they would always be assured that their 'investment' would be managed per the guidelines of the fund and a legal recourse if the Bills or the new ownership didn't pay back the loan from the fund.