Mr. WEO Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Maybe not LA. But what do Kroenke, STL, and the Rams have to do with the Pegulas, Buffalo, and the Bills? Why don't you read the article. It's answers your question for you. Hint: it's not about moving the Bills at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Just read the column. He is not incorrect and does not in any way suggest the Pegulas might relocate the Bills. Actually he brings up the very valid quandary of new stadium in the next decade vs Pegulas committment vs NFL vs Erie County/NYS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Why don't you read the article. It's answers your question for you. Hint: it's not about moving the Bills at all... I read the article. Obviously you read it but didn't understand it. So to answer the question I asked you, Kroenke and the Rams have nothing to do with the Bills, other than being another NFL owner and team. By mentioning Kroenke, who, like the Pegulas, has ties to the area, gobs of money and the team if paid for, and had stated his intention of keeping the team where it is, the inference is that a move could happen years down the line. If you think the article is just about a new stadium, there was no need to mention Kroenke or the Rams at all since Sir Roger stated months ago that the Bills would need to build a new stadium (and a new stadium is reportedly in the works). IOW, it's hardly breaking news worthy of an article. What's worse is that the city of STL was willing to help fund a $1.1B stadium, but Kroenke wanted more. So it's not even a stadium issue as it is a matter of greed, which is what I said. Kroenke has no debt related to the team yet still wants more money than what he could make in a "middling market" like STL. He's exhibit A as to why you should be kissing Ralph's ass for keeping the team in Buffalo all those years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammered a Lot Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (and a new stadium is reportedly in the works). reportedly by who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) I read the article. Obviously you read it but didn't understand it. So to answer the question I asked you, Kroenke and the Rams have nothing to do with the Bills, other than being another NFL owner and team. By mentioning Kroenke, who, like the Pegulas, has ties to the area, gobs of money and the team if paid for, and had stated his intention of keeping the team where it is, the inference is that a move could happen years down the line. If you think the article is just about a new stadium, there was no need to mention Kroenke or the Rams at all since Sir Roger stated months ago that the Bills would need to build a new stadium (and a new stadium is reportedly in the works). IOW, it's hardly breaking news worthy of an article. What's worse is that the city of STL was willing to help fund a $1.1B stadium, but Kroenke wanted more. So it's not even a stadium issue as it is a matter of greed, which is what I said. Kroenke has no debt related to the team yet still wants more money than what he could make in a "middling market" like STL. He's exhibit A as to why you should be kissing Ralph's ass for keeping the team in Buffalo all those years. Responding to another poster's claim that "the idea that Terry Pegula would move the Bills shows one of two things", you added "to generate clicks". When I pointed out that the article wasn't about moving to LA, you responded "maybe not LA". When I pointed out it wasn't about moving...at all, you said the Rams moving has nothing to do with the Bills (which you could have said intilally). You are always a moving target! Ralph threatened to move more than once (yet always voted against others moving), yet Erie Co. never called his bluff--they always gave him what he wanted. You have always imagined he had somewhere else to go that would make him more money (Houston!!, or something) but there was never a reason for him to move because he made gobs of money in Buffalo. Prior to Kroenke, teams moved because their community refused to build what the owner wanted. So, exhibit A as to why Ralph was never going anywhere. Kroenke did the taxpayers a huge favor moving that team. There is no way they could afford any new stadium. As for the willingness to help fund 1.1 billion, it was a lame offering that still would have ruined the tax base of that city. Edited January 25, 2016 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Greed does rule the NFL... generally speaking. Businesses need profits the way you and I need food and water. But football teams, for some, are more than just business. As Pegs has said, if he wanted more money, he'd dig another well. The Pegulas didn't buy the Sabres or Bills to make more money. Neither is the best business opportunity out there. They bought them for the joy of owning a Buffalo sports enterprise. Their motivation was never greed. So no amount of losing will get them to consider moving. It will get them consider what they need to do differently to begin winning. Successful business people buy and do impractical things all the time. Their success allows them that luxury. Thank goodness the Pegulas allowed themselves the Bills as an impractical luxury. I'm not sure I'll see the Bills win a SB in my lifetime but I'm pretty confident I'll never see them move out of Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Kroenke is not normal.. He is the most detached owner in the NFL from the city his team is in. I live in St. Louis.. Be lucky you have Pegula in Buffalo and be glad you all have a football team. When people in Buffalo B word about the Bills, I always say.. "it could always be worse". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Greed does rule the NFL... generally speaking. Businesses need profits the way you and I need food and water. But football teams, for some, are more than just business. As Pegs has said, if he wanted more money, he'd dig another well. The Pegulas didn't buy the Sabres or Bills to make more money. Neither is the best business opportunity out there. They bought them for the joy of owning a Buffalo sports enterprise. Their motivation was never greed. So no amount of losing will get them to consider moving. It will get them consider what they need to do differently to begin winning. Successful business people buy and do impractical things all the time. Their success allows them that luxury. Thank goodness the Pegulas allowed themselves the Bills as an impractical luxury. I'm not sure I'll see the Bills win a SB in my lifetime but I'm pretty confident I'll never see them move out of Buffalo. Except buying an NFL team is the best business opportunity almost without exception. What other business has a built in loyal consumer, guaranteed profits that are completely independent as to whether your product is successful compared to its competitors, is not really dependent on actual sales and has guaranteed massive increase in valuation over time? What is your definition of the "best business opportunity"? Dig another well? Ask Pegula if he is willing to do that right now--his natural gas assets are plummeting in value. He's a nice guy who bought a team because he could and it's fun to won one---and because he knew how incredible an investment opportunity it will be....i.e., to make money. Looking to make a huge profit doesn't equate with greed. It's why all businesses exist in this country. Kroenke is not normal.. He is the most detached owner in the NFL from the city his team is in. I live in St. Louis.. Be lucky you have Pegula in Buffalo and be glad you all have a football team. When people in Buffalo B word about the Bills, I always say.. "it could always be worse". Be happy he saved your idiotic Governor and Mayor from forcing another massive debt load on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 There's allot of people confident here that the Bills will never move. I won't quote one because the are many. Here are some attributes of people who were overconfident: Overestimating knowledge about a situation. Some apparently are inside Pegs cranium, guessing he has an irrationale love for the Bills and Buffalo and will sustain red ink, or he won't sell to an outrageous bid, or not do something goofy or unexpected. Ignoring or not seeking contrary information. The constant pressure to make money in mothership NFL cannot be ignored. The St Lous/San Diego/Oakland >> LA thing cannot be ignored. Overconfidence from past positive events. Sure, the white knight rode into town and saved the team. Yes, the mega-billion dollar NFL TV contract currently gives owners the chance to suck in their home markets and make money... but who is to say that TV money will continue? Or because billion dollar stadiums and luxury suites work for town X, Y and Z (jury still out).. are you sure it will work in Buffalo? "Well, I think we tried very hard not to be overconfident, because when you get overconfident, that's when something snaps up and bites you." Niel Armstrong Me.. I think the Bills are here forever. But only if fans are not complacent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I'm the opposite of this. I bought seasons and club seats while out of town to support the team and, in a small way, help keep it viable. But now that Pegula is locked in, I'm going to drop my clubs when my 3 year commitment expires. You bastard. JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 There's allot of people confident here that the Bills will never move. I won't quote one because the are many. Here are some attributes of people who were overconfident: Overestimating knowledge about a situation. Some apparently are inside Pegs cranium, guessing he has an irrationale love for the Bills and Buffalo and will sustain red ink, or he won't sell to an outrageous bid, or not do something goofy or unexpected. Ignoring or not seeking contrary information. The constant pressure to make money in mothership NFL cannot be ignored. The St Lous/San Diego/Oakland >> LA thing cannot be ignored. Overconfidence from past positive events. Sure, the white knight rode into town and saved the team. Yes, the mega-billion dollar NFL TV contract currently gives owners the chance to suck in their home markets and make money... but who is to say that TV money will continue? Or because billion dollar stadiums and luxury suites work for town X, Y and Z (jury still out).. are you sure it will work in Buffalo? "Well, I think we tried very hard not to be overconfident, because when you get overconfident, that's when something snaps up and bites you." Niel Armstrong Me.. I think the Bills are here forever. But only if fans are not complacent. So you've spent the entirety of this thread working to convince people that something you don't think will happen could potentially happen, and that it would be their fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I guess I'm confused as to what the point of the thread is. Do we get to be excited about the future or do we wallow in misery over what "might" happen in someone's pessimistic "woe is us" mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Responding to another poster's claim that "the idea that Terry Pegula would move the Bills shows one of two things", you added "to generate clicks". When I pointed out that the article wasn't about moving to LA, you responded "maybe not LA". When I pointed out it wasn't about moving...at all, you said the Rams moving has nothing to do with the Bills (which you could have said intilally). You are always a moving target! Ralph threatened to move more than once (yet always voted against others moving), yet Erie Co. never called his bluff--they always gave him what he wanted. You have always imagined he had somewhere else to go that would make him more money (Houston!!, or something) but there was never a reason for him to move because he made gobs of money in Buffalo. Prior to Kroenke, teams moved because their community refused to build what the owner wanted. So, exhibit A as to why Ralph was never going anywhere. Kroenke did the taxpayers a huge favor moving that team. There is no way they could afford any new stadium. As for the willingness to help fund 1.1 billion, it was a lame offering that still would have ruined the tax base of that city. Moving target? LOL! We realized the article wasn't about the Bills moving to LA...because LA has 2 teams now and there probably isn't room them, much less a 3rd team. No one mentioned LA. You made that up. But on second thought, maybe in 20 years or so, the LA market might open up again? Eh, never mind. Again that situation has nothing to do with the Bills and there is no urgency to build a new stadium because of it. So it was dumb to even mention it in the article. The article read like a stream-of-consciousness piece, a la "the Rams looked like they were staying so the Bills might move, no but wait, the Pegulas took that off the table so instead they need a new stadium, no, Poloncarz said the stadium is good for another 25 years, so I don't know what I'm even trying to say." Yes, Ralph had other places to go. Others in the know (Wawrow) have even told you this. You can keep denying it all you want, it doesn't matter. And his threats were just that: threats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Moving target? LOL! We realized the article wasn't about the Bills moving to LA...because LA has 2 teams now and there probably isn't room them, much less a 3rd team. No one mentioned LA. You made that up. But on second thought, maybe in 20 years or so, the LA market might open up again? Eh, never mind. Again that situation has nothing to do with the Bills and there is no urgency to build a new stadium because of it. So it was dumb to even mention it in the article. The article read like a stream-of-consciousness piece, a la "the Rams looked like they were staying so the Bills might move, no but wait, the Pegulas took that off the table so instead they need a new stadium, no, Poloncarz said the stadium is good for another 25 years, so I don't know what I'm even trying to say." Yes, Ralph had other places to go. Others in the know (Wawrow) have even told you this. You can keep denying it all you want, it doesn't matter. And his threats were just that: threats. "maybe not LA". Actually, it wasn't about them moving at all (not even "for clicks", as you claimed). As for the rest of your post above...I said all that already. The two had nothing to do with eachother. Wawrow still thinks Howard Milstein is going to build a stadium in NF..... Edited January 25, 2016 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 "maybe not LA". Actually, it wasn't about them moving at all (not even "for clicks", as you claimed). As for the rest of your post above...I said all that already. The two had nothing to do with eachother. Wawrow still thinks Howard Milstein is going to build a stadium in NF..... Is that you, Donn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 "maybe not LA". Actually, it wasn't about them moving at all (not even "for clicks", as you claimed). As for the rest of your post above...I said all that already. The two had nothing to do with eachother. Wawrow still thinks Howard Milstein is going to build a stadium in NF..... Is it too late to mention that I never said a thing about LA? Go back and check the thread. I'm not sure why you'd think I'd think that having the Bills move to LA, giving them 3 teams when they an barely support one, would make any sort of sense? The article was talking about some fictional ante being upped just because Kroenke moved the Rams to LA and got a bigger one than what STL was offering (he could have footed the bill himself with all the money he has). But then realizes Pegulas won't move the team and Poloncarz doesn't think there's a need for a new stadium and the NFL can't really do much about it. So again, what was the (real) purpose of the article? It's ludicrous to think Ralph had no options to move. You are alone in your belief and pardon me if I don't believe what I think and Wawrow has confirmed. Over you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts