BillnutinHouston Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Ralph's recent moves to push for the fair sharing of local revenues is exactly why he is, without a doubt, deserving of being voted into the NFL Hall of Fame. Being one of only 2 owners to vote against the collective bargaining agreement, publicly challenging the agreement when nobody else would (and getting ridiculed for it in the process), and getting Tag's ear and landing a seat on the 8-team committee to determine the qualifiers for revenue sharing, demonstrates the kind of principled leadership that is rare in the NFL today. Ralph had the guts to challenge the system, to stand up and take the insults thrown his way by an uninformed and uncaring media, and he is exactly the kind of owner that needs to be in the Hall. Way to go, Ralph! Let's hope the voters for the Hall recognize this latest achievement and give the man his due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 I applaud Ralph, too. But I'm not willing to say he did this based on "principled leadership." He was just standing up for his individual rights/economic benefit...nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 I applaud Ralph, too. But I'm not willing to say he did this based on "principled leadership." He was just standing up for his individual rights/economic benefit...nothing more. Sorry but it's WAY more than just that. If Ralph was looking-out for himself alone, he'd merely sell the team to the highest bidder, pocket $700-800M in PURE profit, not care whether the team moved, and call it a day. The fact that he's fighting to EVEN make just $10M a year in profit (what he made last year reportedly), is very telling. And his reluctance to raise ticket prices is ALSO very telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Sorry but it's WAY more than just that. If Ralph was looking-out for himself alone, he'd merely sell the team to the highest bidder, pocket $700-800M in PURE profit, not care whether the team moved, and call it a day. 668203[/snapback] Actually, he'd just move the team to the LA market and increase the vaule of the club significanty by doing so...then he'd sell the club and make a huge profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted April 23, 2006 Author Share Posted April 23, 2006 Sorry but it's WAY more than just that. If Ralph was looking-out for himself alone, he'd merely sell the team to the highest bidder, pocket $700-800M in PURE profit, not care whether the team moved, and call it a day. The fact that he's fighting to EVEN make just $10M a year in profit (what he made last year reportedly), is very telling. And his reluctance to raise ticket prices is ALSO very telling. 668203[/snapback] EXACTLY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Sorry but it's WAY more than just that. If Ralph was looking-out for himself alone, he'd merely sell the team to the highest bidder, pocket $700-800M in PURE profit, not care whether the team moved, and call it a day. The fact that he's fighting to EVEN make just $10M a year in profit (what he made last year reportedly), is very telling. And his reluctance to raise ticket prices is ALSO very telling. 668203[/snapback] I suspect he's not willing to pay the $200-$300 million in capital gains taxes quite yet. And each year he owns the franchise, it appreciates 10%-plus along with the other 31 teams. Still a good investment. And don't kid yourself...if the market could bear higher ticket prices, they would be higher. Ralph's a businessman, not a philanthropist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Actually, he'd just move the team to the LA market and increase the vaule of the club significanty by doing so...then he'd sell the club and make a huge profit. No need to move the team. Just find an owner who wants to move to L.A. and jack up the price accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 I suspect he's not will to pay the $200-$300 million in capital gains taxes quite yet. And each year he owns the franchise, it appreciates 10%-plus along with the other 31 teams. Still a good investment. And don't kid yourself...if the market could bear higher ticket prices, they would be higher. Ralph's a businessman, not a philanthropist. Of course he's not going to give away tickets and lose money. Just that if he were one of the "new guard," he'd have moved or sold a LONG time ago, and would definitely be thinking about moving/selling now instead of creating waves and getting the politicians involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Of course he's not going to give away tickets and lose money. Just that if he were one of the "new guard," he'd have moved or sold a LONG time ago, and would definitely be thinking about moving/selling now instead of creating waves and getting the politicians involved. 668276[/snapback] I think Ralph's "creating waves" now so the value of his franchise isn't diminished in any way. If the initial revenue sharing provisions were eneacted, they would've made it tougher to sell the team to local interests and/or made it more difficult for the next owner to keep the team to keep in Buffalo. I think Ralph IS commited to keeping his legacy intact by not carpetbagging the franchise to LA or some other city. But I don't think for a minute he isn't interested in protecting his investment from attack by the new CBA. And he'd maximize his revenue here if he thought he could get more blood from the turnip. All in all, that's better than the Modells and Bidwells, let alone the Snyders. But alturism doesn't apply either, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 No one is in the business to lose money, and that includes Ralph. But while making just $10M would be fine for him, it wouldn't for most, especially someone who lives outside the community (Ralph is from Detroit, which says a lot to me). The issue of losing franchise value means nothing because as I said, Ralph could sell the franchise to someone who wants to move it to L.A. and charge a premium for that right alone. The potential provision that would prevent a new owner from getting additional revenues would likely not make a difference, if the new L.A. franchise were as successful as the NFL thinks it could be. So in short, no Ralph isn't a philanthropist, but he's the least selfish owner I have ever come across. His action tell ME that he's fighting for the Bills' survival IN WNY, not just his own financial well-being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 Ralph's a businessman, not a philanthropist. 668222[/snapback] While I agree that Ralph is a businessman first, many nonprofit organizations in WNY would beg to differ with the "not a philanthropist" part of that statement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 No one is in the business to lose money, and that includes Ralph. But while making just $10M would be fine for him, it wouldn't for most, especially someone who lives outside the community (Ralph is from Detroit, which says a lot to me). The issue of losing franchise value means nothing. 668332[/snapback] I think you've got it backward. The issue of franchise value is ALL that owning an NFL team is about financially. It's an investment, not an operating company. There are thousands of businesses nationwide that throw off net profits of more than $10 million annually--but not too many of those trade for upward of $1 billion, or increase in value by 10%-plus per year. Pro sports franchises are like stocks. You don't get rich on the dividend income, you do it on the capital gain. Ralph could break even each year and still get weathier by letting his "investment" go up another $50-$70 million in value. Any CBA provisions that hurt his ability to grow the sales price he'll eventually get and/or make it harder to sell the team are his biggest financial concerns. The competitiveness of the team, in terms of signing top FAs is also important, of course. But that impacts franchise value in a more indirect way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 23, 2006 Share Posted April 23, 2006 While I agree that Ralph is a businessman first, many nonprofit organizations in WNY would beg to differ with the "not a philanthropist" part of that statement... 668351[/snapback] Sure Lori, I agree. What I meant was he doesn't run a nonprofit business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I suspect he's not willing to pay the $200-$300 million in capital gains taxes quite yet. And each year he owns the franchise, it appreciates 10%-plus along with the other 31 teams. Still a good investment. And don't kid yourself...if the market could bear higher ticket prices, they would be higher. Ralph's a businessman, not a philanthropist. 668222[/snapback] 200-300 Mil? Capital gains is now taxed at 15%, is it not. If I'm wrong, someone provide correct figures. And who's to say what the final gain would be ruled to be. Thats would make the taxes pretty small by many a standard. Inheritence taxes are the ones that still haven't been adjusted downward in a signficant way for estates over 1 mil, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I applaud Ralph, too. But I'm not willing to say he did this based on "principled leadership." He was just standing up for his individual rights/economic benefit...nothing more. 668189[/snapback] Not true!!! He would've moved the Bills out when he could find a place where he could make some money. Think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 200-300 Mil? Capital gains is now taxed at 15%, is it not. If I'm wrong, someone provide correct figures. And who's to say what the final gain would be ruled to be. Thats would make the taxes pretty small by many a standard. Inheritence taxes are the ones that still haven't been adjusted downward in a signficant way for estates over 1 mil, IIRC. 668573[/snapback] Capital gains on the sale of business assets, including intangibles like NFL franchises, are still taxed at the 28% rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstngoal Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Ralph's recent moves to push for the fair sharing of local revenues is exactly why he is, without a doubt, deserving of being voted into the NFL Hall of Fame. Being one of only 2 owners to vote against the collective bargaining agreement, publicly challenging the agreement when nobody else would (and getting ridiculed for it in the process), and getting Tag's ear and landing a seat on the 8-team committee to determine the qualifiers for revenue sharing, demonstrates the kind of principled leadership that is rare in the NFL today. Ralph had the guts to challenge the system, to stand up and take the insults thrown his way by an uninformed and uncaring media, and he is exactly the kind of owner that needs to be in the Hall. Way to go, Ralph! Let's hope the voters for the Hall recognize this latest achievement and give the man his due. 668145[/snapback] I agree especially since Marv is in and Wilson isn't. It's a disgrace!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in STL Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I applaud Ralph, too. But I'm not willing to say he did this based on "principled leadership." He was just standing up for his individual rights/economic benefit...nothing more. 668189[/snapback] Wrong. He is trying to preserve something from the past. Something that was good about the NFL and is now threatened. Ralph could make tons of money by selling the team. He is more interested in his legacy. I am very surprised that Lamar Hunt in KC and Al Davis in Oakland have not come to Ralph defense, at least for moral support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Wrong. He is trying to preserve something from the past. Something that was good about the NFL and is now threatened. Ralph could make tons of money by selling the team. He is more interested in his legacy. 668871[/snapback] Wanna buy a bridge from New York to Kings County? Look, I'm not slagging Ralph. But I think there's a lot of rose-colored glasses being worn in this thread. I agree with those of you rushing to his defense--Ralph genuinely likes Buffalo and wants to keep the team here. But I don't think he'd ever lose sight of the fact that if the franchise value of the team ever did begin to go backward because of the CBA, he wouldn't sit there twidling his thumbs because of his legacy or "principaled leadership." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts