CodeMonkey Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) The Bruins, coming off a title and another Finals appearance, are valued at $600 million. http://www.forbes.co.../boston-bruins/ The Sabres are valued at $250 million. http://www.forbes.co...buffalo-sabres/ The Bills, who have missed the playoffs 14 years in a row and only had 1 winning season in that time, are valued at $870 million. http://www.forbes.co.../buffalo-bills/ Jacobs could be a savior in his hometown. The Bruins fans weren't very good to the Jacobs family for a while, but now he can leave on very good terms. If it's between a NHL team or NFL, IMO, it's not even close. Same for me. But for me it would be the NHL team , particularly a top tier team, I assume you feel the opposite Time will tell. But it's nice to know there are possibilities that allow the Bills to stay in Buffalo. Edited April 7, 2014 by CodeMonkey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 there are pros and cons where I could see Jacobs' motivations for either keeping the Bruins, selling and Buying the Bills, or any other possibilities. It depends on what is going through his and his families' heads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 The main negative about Jacobs is his age. If the family is serious about the Bills, it would be better for all if one of the younger generation were to be the pricipal owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Sad to say but by the time you are wealthy enough to be a "front runner," you're older than Ralph, and that hardly solves our long term problems.; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Sad to say but by the time you are wealthy enough to be a "front runner," you're older than Ralph, and that hardly solves our long term problems.; Except that Jacobs has younger heirs who would love to own their hometown team. He could establish generational ownership much like the Rooneys. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Except that Jacobs has younger heirs who would love to own their hometown team. He could establish generational ownership much like the Rooneys. GO BILLS!!! Exactly, and with their family business, and business acumen, they are not likely to be hurting for money. Another thing that probably needs to be said about Jacobs owning the Bills versus the Bruins, is what I would call "The Golisano Syndrome." Rich guys don't like to lose money. They may not always insist on making the most money possible, but they are very adverse to losing money on anything. A lot of fans say things like be careful what you wish for, if Golisano owns the Bills because he was cheap and would never spend the money to make the team great. But the fact is, if Golisano issued the same edict to the Bills and Brandon/Whaley as he did to Regier/Quinn, we would be buying players like crazy. TG said, basically, "do anything you want, just don't lose money." In the NFL, it's almost impossible to lose money. If that was the only rule, we could buy anyone we wanted, for the most part. And I don't know how Jacobs ran the Bruins, before their recent successes after hiring new guys to run the team, but it's easy to imagine his aversion to spending a lot on players could have come because it's a lot harder to make money in the NHL than the NFL. And that he wouldn't be so thrifty if the team was pulling in 20-30m profit like the Bills do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Exactly, and with their family business, and business acumen, they are not likely to be hurting for money. Another thing that probably needs to be said about Jacobs owning the Bills versus the Bruins, is what I would call "The Golisano Syndrome." Rich guys don't like to lose money. They may not always insist on making the most money possible, but they are very adverse to losing money on anything. A lot of fans say things like be careful what you wish for, if Golisano owns the Bills because he was cheap and would never spend the money to make the team great. But the fact is, if Golisano issued the same edict to the Bills and Brandon/Whaley as he did to Regier/Quinn, we would be buying players like crazy. TG said, basically, "do anything you want, just don't lose money." In the NFL, it's almost impossible to lose money. If that was the only rule, we could buy anyone we wanted, for the most part. And I don't know how Jacobs ran the Bruins, before their recent successes after hiring new guys to run the team, but it's easy to imagine his aversion to spending a lot on players could have come because it's a lot harder to make money in the NHL than the NFL. And that he wouldn't be so thrifty if the team was pulling in 20-30m profit like the Bills do. You may be conflating annual revenue with overall investment value. Yes it's impossible to lose money when you buy an NFL team, unless your debt situation is a wreck. But you could lose revenue on an annual basis if you're fiscally irresponsible. Ralph was tight with the team's annual revenue and cash flow. I always had the sense he (via Littman) insisted on an annual cushion of positive revenue and cash flow, which constrained what they could do with their roster. It irked me because, as we all know, his investment in the team was appreciating by the hundreds of millions of dollars. Hopefully the next owner doesn't take such a conservative fiscal approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 You may be conflating annual revenue with overall investment value. Yes it's impossible to lose money when you buy an NFL team, unless your debt situation is a wreck. But you could lose revenue on an annual basis if you're fiscally irresponsible. Ralph was tight with the team's annual revenue and cash flow. I always had the sense he (via Littman) insisted on an annual cushion of positive revenue and cash flow, which constrained what they could do with their roster. It irked me because, as we all know, his investment in the team was appreciating by the hundreds of millions of dollars. Hopefully the next owner doesn't take such a conservative fiscal approach. Not really. Yes, you can have a ridiculous one season outlay. But the TV contracts are so big it's almost impossible to lose money. The Bills had the great lease agreement but were pulling in the lower end of the spectrum and pocketing 30m a year with terrible local monies coming in (suites, psls, sponsorships, etc). Yes, if you amass foolish debt on a stadium, and you count that as part of your payroll, you may not make 10-50m profit every year. But the yearly expenses and intake on an NFL team, you cannot lose money. In other sports you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple haze Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 You may be conflating annual revenue with overall investment value. Yes it's impossible to lose money when you buy an NFL team, unless your debt situation is a wreck. But you could lose revenue on an annual basis if you're fiscally irresponsible. Ralph was tight with the team's annual revenue and cash flow. I always had the sense he (via Littman) insisted on an annual cushion of positive revenue and cash flow, which constrained what they could do with their roster. It irked me because, as we all know, his investment in the team was appreciating by the hundreds of millions of dollars. Hopefully the next owner doesn't take such a conservative fiscal approach. Mr. Wilson would spend money. Unfortunately, he spent it in the wrong places. Not about money so much. It's about who is making the decision on who it is spent on. Execs, coaches and players included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) Mr. Wilson would spend money. Unfortunately, he spent it in the wrong places. Not about money so much. It's about who is making the decision on who it is spent on. Execs, coaches and players included. <Derrick Dockery nods his head> Edited April 7, 2014 by Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 <Derrick Dockery nods his head> ...and gives Langston Walker a fist bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Mr. Wilson would spend money where his GM's said he should spend it. I doubt signing Dockery and Walker were his ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Anyone truly interested in the Bills would have been planning to buy them for years. Ralph was 95. A name that hasn't been discussed much is Jeffrey Gundlach. He was quoted as putting a team together to buy the Bills back in 2011. As a big Bills fan growing up, he seems more likely to make this happen than someone like Jacobs who is already invested elsewhere He was mentioned in the Buffalo News yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Mr. Wilson would spend money where his GM's said he should spend it. I doubt signing Dockery and Walker were his ideas. No argument there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinInThe781 Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Cam Neely (President of the Boston Bruins) was on 98.5 The Sports Hub in Boston within the past hour. Neely said he has spoken to Jeremy Jacobs and that Jeremy has no interest in selling the Boston Bruins and has no interest in purchasing the Buffalo Bills. Statements came roughly between 4:25 to 4:35 PM EDT in interview on "Felger and Mazz" radio show Better yet, here's a link: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/04/10/cam-neely-jeremy-jacobs-wont-pursue-purchasing-bills-if-it-means-giving-up-bruins-ownership/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Damn, hope Cam is wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Damn, hope Cam is wrong! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Damn, hope Cam is wrong! Could also mean another family member might own the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heitz Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Could also mean another family member might own the Bills. Or just Jacobs making his team President feel secure and stable in his job... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts