thebug Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Good stuff, Lori. Now, Rogers has every right to ask their subscribers that question, and the wording is straightforward and not misleading, IMO. So, it doesn't look like they did anything wrong here... ...except potentially piss off their business partner (the Bills), if they didn't inform the Bills prior to doing this research. If they didn't know about it, I'm sure the Bills are pissed about being blind-sided by the news coming from fan boards, etc. I mean, someone would have to be stupid...really stupid...Skooby stupid...to not know this would become public information, very quickly. That one's going to stick around here for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 What, you think some phone calls were made? Ehhhhhh ... could be. [/bugsbunnyvoice] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Good stuff, Lori. Now, Rogers has every right to ask their subscribers that question, and the wording is straightforward and not misleading, IMO. So, it doesn't look like they did anything wrong here... ...except potentially piss off their business partner (the Bills), if they didn't inform the Bills prior to doing this research. If they didn't know about it, I'm sure the Bills are pissed about being blind-sided by the news coming from fan boards, etc. I mean, someone would have to be stupid...really stupid...Skooby stupid...to not know this would become public information, very quickly. Sounds like a good marketing ploy that works well for both sides to me. Canadians always want what they can't have and on the other hand Americans become complacent with things we do have until someone tries to take them away. One way or the other, one side of the border or the other, it drives up the value of the Buffalo Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Sounds like a good marketing ploy that works well for both sides to me. Canadians always want what they can't have and on the other hand Americans become complacent with things we do have until someone tries to take them away. One way or the other, one side of the border or the other, it drives up the value of the Buffalo Bills. Please explain: How does blindsiding the Bills and the NFL with something like this, so the way they find out about it, is from media coverage generated by angry US Bills' fans considered "good marketing"? (Assuming, of course, the Bills and the NFL were in the dark about this.) You think Bills fans are "complacent" on this issue, and the fires needed to be further stoked? You do hang out here, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Please explain: How does blindsiding the Bills and the NFL with something like this, so the way they find out about it, is from media coverage generated by angry US Bills' fans considered "good marketing"? (Assuming, of course, the Bills and the NFL were in the dark about this.) You think Bills fans are "complacent" on this issue, and the fires needed to be further stoked? You do hang out here, right? I'm saying we take things for granted sometimes and home games suddenly became more valuable when we are about to lose them. By creating a big stir over having another possible game in Toronto, in my opinion it might help boost ticket sales for the one game they already have. It also might help boost ticket sales here, I can't speak for would be season ticket holders, but It makes me feel threatened and I don't even make it to many games. I guess its probably a little far fetched to think this is some sort of thought out plan by Ralph Wilson to sell tickets, but I guarantee you none of this is going to hurt ticket sales at home or in Toronto and it all pays the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammered a Lot Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 And remember the Bills still have to play an AWAY game across the pond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damj Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 And remember the Bills still have to play an AWAY game across the pond. I don't know if this was posted, and not that it means much, but the Bills posted a message to their web site acknowledging the survey, but saying there's no plans to add more games. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endzone Animal Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I'm just shocked, SHOCKED, to hear that there is serious discussion about moving more Bills games to Toronto. SHOCKED I TELL YOU! Oh, and for those of you who find this news deeply troubling, what the hell have you been smoking? Ralph refusing to put in any stipulations to keep the team in Buffalo after he dies, then bad-mouthing the city repeatedly for being too poor and low rent to deserve a team, and then transferring home games up to Toronto as a "regional expansion" somehow didn't quite penetrate your awareness of what's going down? When will you folks learn that being a fan of Buffalo and a fan of the Bills is simply not a direct correlation anymore. It's like Buffalo is to Applebee's; yes, there may be a franchise in your community that you enjoy, but the restaurant is only part of a larger chain that will stick around only for as long as they remain viable according to franchise standards. This isn't the days of old, when you identified the WNY community with your NFL franchise. Ralph Wilson is separating from Buffalo, filing for divorce, and though you may not like it you should at least understand that what once was is no more. Move on. Let it go. Make peace with it...Ralph certainly has. You can choose to be happy with whatever few games of alimony remain after Ralph elopes to Toronto, or live in the past and remain bitter and resentful. I suggest changing your priorities, finding new hobbies, and trying to remember the good times instead of dwelling on the nasty breakup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millbank Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Seem to recall reading similar responses regarding Bills games in Toronto initially, and then many grudgingly accepting the notion of needing to expand market for game in Toronto. My guess is if the Toronto group offer Bills ownership enough money , they will simply market this outcome as the only viable means for team to compete with large market teams fans will need get onside with this or face team moving. Its of note Rogers group will be offering ticket for coming games at reduced prices compared to the first games, they get it to some extent, that insulting Southern Ontario sports fans with such inflated prices was foolish. I have read the various media releases, what else are they going to say other than at this time there is no agreement in place for more games ect. I think donkeys will fly though before you will hear from Bills that there will be no more games in Toronto than the one preseason and regular season ever. If the Bills can bank more money than they would earn in Buffalo via a agreement for more games how can there be any doubt they are going to do it. I think it unfortunate but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Hey, if they want to give Ralph more money up front and take another bath on the gate receipts, then by all means, go for it. And if you look at the pricing chart for that package, the only tickets they've knocked down are the 100/200-level sidelines, from $350 to $275. "VIP" seats are still $575, corners (where I sat for Miami) $155, upper deck $99. What a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millbank Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 In the end it is about the money of course. You shouldn't think automatically they will take a bath. But yes i think they will offer Ralph more upfront money and of course he will take it. Its not all just Rogers money in play here, some are Forbes list richest people in the world, they did not fall off a cabbage truck. Example Leafs this past year grossed $181 million, with cap its not a jump to conclude team made around $100 million dollars, even in this economy. I mention Leafs as shares and ownerships in various teams and companies is intermixed. Like it or not , these folks know what they are doing. It is wrong to conclude these people buffoons and bumpkins. As you said "what a deal", that is why in end there will be more games in Toronto. -just saying, my preference of course is all the games are played in Buffalo Hey, if they want to give Ralph more money up front and take another bath on the gate receipts, then by all means, go for it. And if you look at the pricing chart for that package, the only tickets they've knocked down are the 100/200-level sidelines, from $350 to $275. "VIP" seats are still $575, corners (where I sat for Miami) $155, upper deck $99. What a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I know it has been said before. But if the team is so desparate to collect any revenue stream possible, why the %$&* is the stadium named Ralph Wilson Stadium? Oh I forgot. Buffalo is the only place in the world that cant get a corporate sponsor for naming rights. (even though the scope/exposure of the league is National Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 In the end it is about the money of course. You shouldn't think automatically they will take a bath. But yes i think they will offer Ralph more upfront money and of course he will take it. It won't just be up to Ralph. Erie County and the NFL Owners will have to approve it, as well. I think that might be more difficult than you are willing to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endzone Animal Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Erie County and the NFL Owners will have to approve it, as well. I think that might be more difficult than you are willing to believe. Evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Evidence? http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/616482.html "We have no agreement, nor has there ever been one, to play an additional regular season game in Toronto," the statement continued. "Any such future agreement would require consultation and the approvals of Erie County, Empire State Development Corporation and the NFL owners." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 In the end it is about the money of course. You shouldn't think automatically they will take a bath. But yes i think they will offer Ralph more upfront money and of course he will take it. Its not all just Rogers money in play here, some are Forbes list richest people in the world, they did not fall off a cabbage truck. Example Leafs this past year grossed $181 million, with cap its not a jump to conclude team made around $100 million dollars, even in this economy. I mention Leafs as shares and ownerships in various teams and companies is intermixed. Like it or not , these folks know what they are doing. It is wrong to conclude these people buffoons and bumpkins. As you said "what a deal", that is why in end there will be more games in Toronto. -just saying, my preference of course is all the games are played in Buffalo I was there in December, remember? I saw the scalpers begging people to buy tickets at a deep discount off face price outside, and the empty swaths in the allegedly-sold-out stadium. I watched people leave in the third quarter, grumbling about the cost of the tickets as well as the crappy on-field product. The Rogers Group people may not be buffoons and bumpkins, but if they're sticking to the business model they used last year, they surely must think their potential customers are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millbank Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 My heart is not in the argument, my personal preference is of course all the games be played in Buffalo. But given how teams share in the revenue pool ect, where a team is able to gain more revenue and thus contribute more or at least not cost them money , other owners will be onside especially if it means more money for them. Given the economic climate we live, local political types discussing raising taxes for more monies and such, I think they take the money. Disappointing but true. imo. It won't just be up to Ralph. Erie County and the NFL Owners will have to approve it, as well. I think that might be more difficult than you are willing to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 It won't just be up to Ralph. Erie County and the NFL Owners will have to approve it, as well. I think that might be more difficult than you are willing to believe. I don't think there'll be any problems with the owners, but Erie County will probably balk at losing another game. Ralph will likely try like hell to circumvent county approval when the lease comes up for renewal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I don't think there'll be any problems with the owners, but Erie County will probably balk at losing another game. Ralph will likely try like hell to circumvent county approval when the lease comes up for renewal. You're assuming the Bills have any plans to renew the lease? We'll see ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 My heart is not in the argument, my personal preference is of course all the games be played in Buffalo. But given how teams share in the revenue pool ect, where a team is able to gain more revenue and thus contribute more or at least not cost them money , other owners will be onside especially if it means more money for them. Given the economic climate we live, local political types discussing raising taxes for more monies and such, I think they take the money. Disappointing but true. imo. Understand I am not suggesting it won't, or can't, happen. I'm just clarifying that it isn't simply up to Ralph. And, if I'm Goodell. I'm none too happy about the research stunt they just pulled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts