Kind of thought that myself....he is basically going to control the stadium:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...o-himself/

Well, the last offer that son of a ***** made to the Spanos was that Spanos would pay for have of the cost of the construction, maintenance, and future renovations, and Kroenke would keep all the revenue from parking, concessions, advertising and non-NFL events. Sure sounds like Kroenke wants to keep the market to himself.

I would be pretty shocked if 1 from the chargers or raiders don't take the deal.

(01-13-2016 09:53 AM)lew240z Wrote:  Well, the last offer that son of a ***** made to the Spanos was that Spanos would pay for have of the cost of the construction, maintenance, and future renovations, and Kroenke would keep all the revenue from parking, concessions, advertising and non-NFL events. Sure sounds like Kroenke wants to keep the market to himself.

To be fair, since Kroenke owns the land, secured the deal, got it cleared, and is still footing most of the additional investment (the stadium is only part of the deal), that seems fair to me. He is willing to do it all himself, and did the work needed to be done. This isn't a charity (even though you wouldn't know that the way the NFL operates everywhere outside of California), he has no reason to give up more of his investment.

If the Chargers built their own stadium, they would pay 100% of the costs listed above, plus the land, plus the cost to make the land suitable, plus put in the effort to get it zoned and passed (the Carson plan had none of that done, and required a vote), and because that is double what they are going to pay now, and they have no cash, the interest alone would cause the total cost to probably triple or quadruple over the Kreonke deal. And because he does not have money to build anything around such a new stadium himself, he still would make a lot less non-football money as he is not in a position to profit from it.

So, it is fair that Kroenke gets to keep the parking, concession and advertising from Chargers games? I doubt that Spanos agrees. I have read that Kroenke and Spanos had an agreement to buy the land together and Kroenke went ahead and bought it without Spanos' knowledge.

If a new stadium gets built in San Diego, it won't be out of Spanos pocket entirely. The city is willing to make some commitment, probably including the land. Also, the NFL will come up with $300,000,000.

(01-13-2016 11:41 AM)lew240z Wrote:  So, it is fair that Kroenke gets to keep the parking, concession and advertising from Chargers games? I doubt that Spanos agrees. I have read that Kroenke and Spanos had an agreement to buy the land together and Kroenke went ahead and bought it without Spanos' knowledge.

If a new stadium gets built in San Diego, it won't be out of Spanos pocket entirely. The city is willing to make some commitment, probably including the land. Also, the NFL will come up with $300,000,000.

I'm guessing the NFL wants any city to put up at least $500M in order to get a new NFL stadium, like what Mpls did.

I don't think they'll give Oakland or SD a new stadium for free.


Spanos will have to get Kroenke to at least give him 100% of the game related revenues from Chargers games in the stadium. And I'd argue that parking and concessions for Chargers games count under that.

Then Kroenke keeps 100% of the revenues from Rams games and all other events.

I think that's the minimum acceptable offer.

(01-13-2016 11:23 AM)bluesox Wrote:  I would be pretty shocked if 1 from the chargers or raiders don't take the deal.

If Spanos says no to LA, then Davis will jump on Kroenke's cheap lease offer, and that would mean the Chargers are in SD while both the Rams and Raiders are in Inglewood.

(01-13-2016 11:41 AM)lew240z Wrote:  So, it is fair that Kroenke gets to keep the parking, concession and advertising from Chargers games? I doubt that Spanos agrees. I have read that Kroenke and Spanos had an agreement to buy the land together and Kroenke went ahead and bought it without Spanos' knowledge.

Generally if you are leasing something, you get those revenues from your own events. However they would not get any of those revenues from non-Chargers events.

I have not heard the last part, but since we know Spanos cannot afford to even buy the land, I'd have to know the timeline to know if that is even unfair, but if say such an agreement existed, and a piece of land came up, and Spanos didn't have the money to do anything, what is Kroenke supposed to do? Not do the deal because his would be partner can't afford it?

NFL won't allow the second LA team to be hosed on lease terms, but neither the Chargers nor Raiders can afford to be 50-50 partners in a stadium that is owner-financed with no public money.

Here's one example:

Quote:Jim Trotter
‏@JimTrotter_NFL

Source: Per NFL financing guidelines, % of stadium costs must be put in escrow, per se. Kroenke expected to write check for $1.05B. #gangsta

To be a 50-50 partner, Chargers or Raiders would have to pay half of all stadium expenses, including this one. They would have to find the cash to put up half of that $1.05 billion escrow deposit.

(01-13-2016 12:25 PM)Wedge Wrote:  NFL won't allow the second LA team to be hosed on lease terms, but neither the Chargers nor Raiders can afford to be 50-50 partners in a stadium that is owner-financed with no public money.

Here's one example:

Quote:Jim Trotter
‏@JimTrotter_NFL

Source: Per NFL financing guidelines, % of stadium costs must be put in escrow, per se. Kroenke expected to write check for $1.05B. #gangsta

To be a 50-50 partner, Chargers or Raiders would have to pay half of all stadium expenses, including this one. They would have to find the cash to put up half of that $1.05 billion escrow deposit.

Yep. If you can't find the cash in your home market, how are you going to build in LA?

So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

(01-13-2016 01:29 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

I'm sure they could. But I'm thinking that $100 million isn't enough for the Raiders and Chargers owners.

Football is a bit different than other sports in this respect: local TV revenue is mostly irrelevant. Just preseason games, and radio games. So to that point, if he can max out on the Rams in terms of ticket, suite, and sponsorship revenue, since there is a tipping point where tickets and suites really can't be priced higher, and there is still an appetite for more, it makes sense to have a second team that he can charge rent to and make more money, plus any additional money that can be made from the extra events in terms of the other properties he owns nearby.

But if there is not an abundance of appetite left after he gets his fill, then he is better off having the market to himself.

Looks like the answer to the question in the title of this thread is, "No."

Quote:Jason La Canfora
‏@JasonLaCanfora

NFL making considerable progress on final deal that would bring Chargers to LA very quickly. A formal decision on that likely not far off..

2:55 PM - 13 Jan 2016

(01-13-2016 02:44 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 01:29 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

I'm sure they could. But I'm thinking that $100 million isn't enough for the Raiders and Chargers owners.

Yeah but how about 100 million to move to St. Louis and pick up the plans that St. Louis offered for helping renovate that stadium?

How about 100 million to help sweeten the deal of The Raiders moving to San Antonio?

That 100 million doesn't have to be used in San Diego or Oakland.

(01-13-2016 06:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Looks like the answer to the question in the title of this thread is, "No."

Quote:Jason La Canfora
‏@JasonLaCanfora

NFL making considerable progress on final deal that would bring Chargers to LA very quickly. A formal decision on that likely not far off..

2:55 PM - 13 Jan 2016

Or it could be the NFL using the media to further pressure San Diego.

(01-13-2016 06:33 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 02:44 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 01:29 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

I'm sure they could. But I'm thinking that $100 million isn't enough for the Raiders and Chargers owners.

Yeah but how about 100 million to move to St. Louis and pick up the plans that St. Louis offered for helping renovate that stadium?

How about 100 million to help sweeten the deal of The Raiders moving to San Antonio?

That 100 million doesn't have to be used in San Diego or Oakland.

If the NFL had wanted to spend the extra $100,000,000 in Saint Louis, Goodell won't have ridiculed Saint Louis when they asked for it. I think you'll find the previous stadium offer is off the table. The local politicians are really, really pissed with the NFL due to the lies told by Kroenke and the NFL. The mayor all but called Goodell a liar in a couple of interviews. That is not a stance taken by a politician looking to get another NFL team. Besides, no one want the damned Raiders here. Not even if Mark Davis could build a stadium out of his own pocket.

(01-13-2016 11:21 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 06:33 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 02:44 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 01:29 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

I'm sure they could. But I'm thinking that $100 million isn't enough for the Raiders and Chargers owners.

Yeah but how about 100 million to move to St. Louis and pick up the plans that St. Louis offered for helping renovate that stadium?

How about 100 million to help sweeten the deal of The Raiders moving to San Antonio?

That 100 million doesn't have to be used in San Diego or Oakland.

If the NFL had wanted to spend the extra $100,000,000 in Saint Louis, Goodell won't have ridiculed Saint Louis when they asked for it. I think you'll find the previous stadium offer is off the table. The local politicians are really, really pissed with the NFL due to the lies told by Kroenke and the NFL. The mayor all but called Goodell a liar in a couple of interviews. That is not a stance taken by a politician looking to get another NFL team. Besides, no one want the damned Raiders here. Not even if Mark Davis could build a stadium out of his own pocket.

I will take your word on it, being a local.

Yeah...pretty much the case and attitude of the Saint Louis Politicians...from the Saint Louis Dispatch:

ST. LOUIS • Mayor Francis Slay slammed the NFL Wednesday, a day after owners approved Rams owner Stan Kroenke's plan to move the franchise to Southern California.

Slay, the city's four term mayor, said he is done with the National Football League and has no interest in chasing another team after efforts to put together a plan for a new stadium here failed to sway the owners.


"They were not being truthful," he said at a press conference at City Hall. "And they knew we were putting a lot of energy into this."

Added Slay: "We were being led on."

Slay said called the NFL's Tuesday night press conference "pathetic," noting they didn't bother to thank St. Louis or its fan base.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-...3fffe.html

(01-13-2016 11:21 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 06:33 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 02:44 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 01:29 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So is it impossible that both Chargers and Raiders could both say "ah, f___ it. We ain't signing on to be Kroenke's little brother" ?

Wouldn't that give him 100% ownership and control of the only NFL team in LA?

I'm sure they could. But I'm thinking that $100 million isn't enough for the Raiders and Chargers owners.

Yeah but how about 100 million to move to St. Louis and pick up the plans that St. Louis offered for helping renovate that stadium?

How about 100 million to help sweeten the deal of The Raiders moving to San Antonio?

That 100 million doesn't have to be used in San Diego or Oakland.

If the NFL had wanted to spend the extra $100,000,000 in Saint Louis, Goodell won't have ridiculed Saint Louis when they asked for it. I think you'll find the previous stadium offer is off the table. The local politicians are really, really pissed with the NFL due to the lies told by Kroenke and the NFL. The mayor all but called Goodell a liar in a couple of interviews. That is not a stance taken by a politician looking to get another NFL team. Besides, no one want the damned Raiders here. Not even if Mark Davis could build a stadium out of his own pocket.

I agree the NFL managed the STL issue poorly. The league needs Kroenke's money to get to realize the LA dream. But there was no reason for the scorched Earth policy to was used to justify the move.