Poloncarz confirms there are suitors who want to move the team

[thebandit27]

Based on what the NFL said the relocation fee would be for LA in 2011: http://www.footballp...at-275-million/ and the estimated expansion fee in 2012 http://www.forbes.co...adds-two-teams/ a potential owner looking to relocate would be paying a slightly more most likely, but if they are that rich it's worth it to have the guarantee of getting the team now whereas who knows when the league might be expanding again.

 

Sure, makes sense...I'm also factoring in everything else involved in moving the team (stadium costs, overhead, etc.)

[klos63]

I know there is a "fiduciary responsibility" there but I thought I read that the trustees were committed to not selling to a suitor who wanted to move the team, regardless. Whether Golisano offers $1B or a guy worth 31B who wants to move it to LA but offers $4b, they were going to sell to the highest bidder who shows they will keep the team here. Sounds like Poloncarz is questioning that, and Brandon can't comment.

 

The Chargers should move to LA. Their stadium and fan base are crap there, they can't sell out, and they have fans all over SoCal. They need a new stadium, can't get one, and are on a year to year lease with Qualcomm. Someone please move there!

But there is no stadium in LA either. Where will they play?

[CodeMonkey]

I think we differ only on the semantics, as "astronomical" doesn't mean "not affordable". A billionaire still views billions as an astronomical price.

 

One of the misconceptions about the uber wealthy is that they do not value money the same way that average folks do; vis-a-vis "to them, a million dollars is like a dollar to you or I" (I should note that, I'm not saying you believe this, just using it as a commonly stated example). That's simply not true: to a billionaire, $1,000 is still worth $1,000...in fact, I once had a multi-milionaire business partner of mine tell me "to be perfectly honest, $1,000 is worth more to me than it is to some folks, if only because I have it to lose".

 

I say all that to say that even a person with billions in the bank still views a multi-billion dollar purchase as an enormous, ridiculous amount of money. Remember, you and I don't truly understand what that amount of money is worth--a person that has it does, and so to them the expense is real.

 

Know what I mean?

Yup I understand completely. And I agree that even a multi-million dollar purchase gets their attention and they do not take it lightly. And I can only wish I was playing in their sandbox

However one of the reasons most of them (ignoring inheritance) got that rich was by thinking long term and not getting spooked by the potential of a short term loss, even a significant one, if the long term outlook is strong enough.

 

Like I said above, it is one factor in their decision making process.

[cage]

You don't understand business. The vast majority of NFL revenue is guaranteed regardless of location. I could move a team to Albuquerque and I would still 90% of the revenue all the other owners get. So why would I spend tons of money to move the team from Albuquerque, when I could make a far higher rate of return by staying put? Only in TaskersGhost's world does it make sense to spend 3-4x as much for maybe 20% more revenue.

 

I agree with you totally. LA has flamed out a few times now and Toronto has been a bust for the Bills. The only thing that matters is a winning franchise no matter where it is.

 

When the Raiders were successful their logo'd merchandise was the leading selling stuff... now that they suck, they're not even in the top half of the league.

 

BTW, it would be the bitterest irony if the sale of the Clippers becomes a significant factor in driving the price of the Bills up to the point where a local owner couldn't buy them.... we all know the Clippers used to be....

[FireChan]

BREAKING NEWS!

 

FireChan reports that there are some Bills suitors who want to move them to moon.

 

"Doomed!" "I knew this was gonna happen, we can't beat that moon colony in terms of revenue." "Way to go Ralph, you jerk."

[thebandit27]

Yup I understand completely. And I agree that even a multi-million dollar purchase gets their attention and they do not take it lightly. And I can only wish I was playing in their sandbox

However one of the reasons most of them (ignoring inheritance) got that rich was by thinking long term and not getting spooked by the potential of a short term loss, even a significant one, if the long term outlook is strong enough.

 

Like I said above, it is one factor in their decision making process.

 

Yes, it certainly is a factor...speaking of sandboxes, hilarious story:

 

The friend of mine I talked about in my last post always wanted a beachfront property in New England (he's from there originally but splits time between there and Florida). So he goes and buys three adjacent parcels along a secluded lake in the northeast...beautiful waterfront land with lots of room for houses, etc. Unfortunately, no beach...so he just strokes a check and brings in 7 or 8 dump trucks full of milky-white sand from the Gulf Coast and literally builds his own beach!

[CodeMonkey]

You denied that there was 7-10 million people within 100 miles of Buffalo. You are wrong.

Toronto and Erie both are just under 100 miles so count them and obviously Rochester is in as well. Toronto's 6 million for the region itself I think would get the number to 7 million. But i think if he had said 8-10 you would have been in trouble

Edited June 2, 2014 by CodeMonkey

[Dibs]

Brandon's silence on the "fiduciary duty" question speaks volumes. He doesn't want to publicly state that this is the obvious requirement and potentially quell bidding. I would argue this spells out the reality. Now, the bigger question is what role does the NFL play in this, or can they? Do they want it where every time a team needs/demands a new stadium in a smaller market (there are lot of small market on the context of the CHI/LA/NYC markets BTW) that relocation is an open option so that they can basically chase the top 32 markets all the time. If that's the case, they've turned unmistakably from an entertainment entity to a money machine not unlike GM or any corpoation seeking maximum profits over all else.

 

If I understand things correctly though, the blackout rule would mean that unless the new top 32 market location actually sold out the games, there would be no local product on TV in those markets anyway(at least for home games).

 

Furthermore, revenue sharing means that the NFL owners would make less money unless the number of seats sold(& merchandise) was more than the previous location. The owner of the moved team would likely be very happy regardless as the mega dollar luxury boxes(& stadium advertising) don't come under the revenue sharing rules and they can keep all of those massive profits for themselves.

 

My point here being that there are many financial reasons for an NFL owner to want to move to a big market area but that doesn't necessarily mean that the NFL(the other 31 owners) will make more money out of a team moving locations. If there is no significant new revenue for the NFL I doubt they would give the okay for a team to move.

[CodeMonkey]

Yes, it certainly is a factor...speaking of sandboxes, hilarious story:

 

The friend of mine I talked about in my last post always wanted a beachfront property in New England (he's from there originally but splits time between there and Florida). So he goes and buys three adjacent parcels along a secluded lake in the northeast...beautiful waterfront land with lots of room for houses, etc. Unfortunately, no beach...so he just strokes a check and brings in 7 or 8 dump trucks full of milky-white sand from the Gulf Coast and literally builds his own beach!

Yeah having a fat wallet makes a whole lot of things possible

[Wayne Cubed]

Toronto and Erie both are just under 100 miles so count them and obviously Rochester is in as well. Toronto's 6 million for the region itself I think would get the number to 7 million. But i think if he had said 8-10 you would have been in trouble

 

Haha, it would have been really close.

[Jauronimo]

Yes, it certainly is a factor...speaking of sandboxes, hilarious story:

 

The friend of mine I talked about in my last post always wanted a beachfront property in New England (he's from there originally but splits time between there and Florida). So he goes and buys three adjacent parcels along a secluded lake in the northeast...beautiful waterfront land with lots of room for houses, etc. Unfortunately, no beach...so he just strokes a check and brings in 7 or 8 dump trucks full of milky-white sand from the Gulf Coast and literally builds his own beach!

Sounds like that guy doesn't understand business.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Waiting out six years is a pretty risky move seeing as how someone else could move to LA before them. It sure would be nice to see an asshat with that kind of plan spend $2 billion and then have to sell the team for $1 billion.

Yep. I don't see it. There are way too many variables (Oakland and SD among them) for this to really work unless you have a crazy multi-billionaire who is prepared to do this at all costs. I'm not saying that that person doesn't exist, but it's just as likely that the NFL doesn't want to work with someone who is hell-bent on killing a brand regionally for six years just to court the LA market long-term.

 

I mean, there are empty stadiums, but there is also the prospect of destroying all the regional interest that has been cultivated state-wide and north of the border.

 

I see Toronto as really the only viable relocation prospect, and the one to get nervous about -- mostly because I could see the league buying and selling the notion that Toronto is in the same regional base as Buffalo.

 

This is what I don't understand, here. If there are purchasers out there willing to shell out a quick $2B for the privilege of putting an NFL team in Los Angeles, than it should happen rather quickly - but not necessarily with the Bills. I have to think that there are ownership groups out there who would love that kind of return on their investment and whose franchises are mired in lagging markets without much fan support or the political protection that Western New York benefits from, i.e., San Diego, Jacksonville, St. Louis. If it's that economically advantageous and imminent for an LA team to exist, the best course of action for everyone is for the Bills to stay put, and one of those franchises to relocate (or, alternatively an outright expansion). It simply doesn't make sense at this point in the league's development to relocate a well-supported and storied franchise, especially one protected by political heavies like Schumer and Cuomo.

Another good point.

 

If some knucklehead wants to offer $2B for the Bills, I could see the Rams or Jags owner calling him up and offering the franchise for $1.8B.

[jahnyc]

Generally, billionaires buy teams to keep the teams, not to sell to the highest bidder for a profit. There may be some competition from other teams/owners for the LA market, but it is much more difficult for a current owner to move a team than it would be for a purchaser of a team without an owner to then move a team.

[CodeMonkey]

Sounds like that guy doesn't understand business.

Really? That cost was probably negligible compared to the cost of the 3 lots on a lakefront and building what I would have to assume was a pretty good sized high quality house on them.

 

That was just another incremental cost that was factored into doing the project.

Edited June 2, 2014 by CodeMonkey

[thebandit27]

Really? That cost was probably negligible compared to the cost of the 3 lots on a lakefront and building what I would have to assume was a pretty good sized high quality house on them.

That wa sjust another incremental cost that was factored into doing the project.

 

He was just needling Tasker with his comment...I can assure you that Jauronimo doesn't actually believe that.

[CodeMonkey]

He was just needling Tasker with his comment...I can assure you that Jauronimo doesn't actually believe that.

Oops

[Ronin]

if the team is sold to someone that is going to move them then i will boycott all future games and picket in front of the stadium and throw eggs at all of the traitors that try and enter.

 

If you're prepared to do that, why not just go and throw eggs at Wilson's grave. He's the one with the greatest influence to prevent this by selling the team. I mean he said one thing, about how he cared about us, but honestly, running the team into the ground and creating the league's most modern futile team fringing the league's historically most futile team did what for us exactly besides create a rift in the fanbase and cause many fans to turn to a state of apathy.

 

He could easily have prevented this but chose not to. He lied to you about doing all that he could, and bilked us fans by dangling that carrot in front of us for years.

[nucci]

Toronto and Erie both are just under 100 miles so count them and obviously Rochester is in as well. Toronto's 6 million for the region itself I think would get the number to 7 million. But i think if he had said 8-10 you would have been in trouble

and with these numbers Buffalo is still considered one of the smallest TV markets in the league.....which is what the league looks at

[Pondslider]

 

 

My point here being that there are many financial reasons for an NFL owner to want to move to a big market area but that doesn't necessarily mean that the NFL(the other 31 owners) will make more money out of a team moving locations. If there is no significant new revenue for the NFL I doubt they would give the okay for a team to move.

 

That's a good point. It might make more sense from individual owner's standpoint to pay whatever is necessary to get the team and move them to LA or Toronto or wherever, but like that article I posted earlier about the expansion fees said the NFL could be splitting over $2 billion the next time they add two more teams whereas the relocation fee to move the Bills would probably less than a quarter of that.

 

I do think if the team stays in Buffalo that it will lead to expansion in a few years with some of the out of town suitors getting that consolation prize.

[PromoTheRobot]

and with these numbers Buffalo is still considered one of the smallest TV markets in the league.....which is what the league looks at

 

I didn't realize Los Angeles was barred from watching NFL football unless they have their own team.

 

You know, things were just too happy around here lately. It's nice to have some "bad news" to energize folks. Nothing like a good old fashioned TBD freak out.

Edited June 2, 2014 by PromoTheRobot