From the LA Daily News:

Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee (SNTIC) meets to discuss plans to build a 65,000-seat stadium near the Las Vegas strip, and according to sources, Davis will offer a commitment to pursue a Raiders relocation there if financing for the $1.3 billion project is approved.

Davis is absolutely serious about targeting Las Vegas as the future home for his franchise, and sees the growing city as the ideal landing spot for the Raiders both locally and regionally.

In Las Vegas, the Raiders envision a home base that would enable them to tap into the furthest reaches of their fan base. Las Vegas would be their primary market, but its elements as one of the most popular destination points in America would be the magnet they use to draw in Raiders fans and season-ticket holders from across the country.

And they have some powerful people getting behind a stadium effort that might soon be their future home.

Sheldon Adelson of the Sands Corp Corporation is proposing a domed stadium near the Strip through a public-private partnership. The preliminary financing proposal calls for about two-thirds of the funding to come from taxes on tourists.

The SNTIC will review tourism-related projects for possible state funding at this week’s meeting, with the stadium proposal being one of the projects being considered. The committee is expected to make a recommendation later this summer.


Davis’ appearance Thursday – and the commitment he is expected to make – could be a difference maker. Davis will leave no doubt his franchise will pursue relocation to Las Vegas if the stadium project is approved.

http://www.dailynews.com/sports/20160425...-this-week

In other words,

Sure, we will move into your shiny state of the art stadium.... IF somebody else pays for it.

Could be interesting. IF it was any other city, I would have a hard time seeing the legislature approving this, but Vegas is so built on tourism, it could actually pass.

Then the move needs approval from NFL owners. Thinking is just 5 years ago no way this gets approved because of gambling. But the reality is there are casinos all over the country now, and in London. So it would be hard to enforce a no cities with gambling rule nowadays. Plus the owners might be willing to cut the Raiders some slack just to keep them out of LA.

So it's promising, but not a done deal just yet.

http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf/...g_ste.html

Beat me to it. Oakland is just going to the highest bidder. It's so sad. Just move in with the Niners already. Hell (I know Wedge, I know) move in with Cal for goodness sake.

(04-26-2016 11:09 AM)goofus Wrote:  In other words,

Sure, we will move into your shiny state of the art stadium.... IF somebody else pays for it.

Could be interesting. IF it was any other city, I would have a hard time seeing the legislature approving this, but Vegas is so built on tourism, it could actually pass.

Then the move needs approval from NFL owners. Thinking is just 5 years ago no way this gets approved because of gambling. But the reality is there are casinos all over the country now, and in London. So it would be hard to enforce a no cities with gambling rule nowadays. Plus the owners might be willing to cut the Raiders some slack just to keep them out of LA.

So it's promising, but not a done deal just yet.

There are casinos many places but Vegas is the only area to my knowledge that allows sports betting, otherwise I'd be a regular in Lake Charles.

(04-26-2016 03:04 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 11:09 AM)goofus Wrote:  In other words,

Sure, we will move into your shiny state of the art stadium.... IF somebody else pays for it.

Could be interesting. IF it was any other city, I would have a hard time seeing the legislature approving this, but Vegas is so built on tourism, it could actually pass.

Then the move needs approval from NFL owners. Thinking is just 5 years ago no way this gets approved because of gambling. But the reality is there are casinos all over the country now, and in London. So it would be hard to enforce a no cities with gambling rule nowadays. Plus the owners might be willing to cut the Raiders some slack just to keep them out of LA.

So it's promising, but not a done deal just yet.

There are casinos many places but Vegas is the only area to my knowledge that allows sports betting, otherwise I'd be a regular in Lake Charles.

How they plan on using the purposes stadium...Interesting Two Bowl Games...


Proponents say the stadium would work with or without an NFL tenant. A draft report projects 46 stadium events, including 10 NFL games, two preseason and eight regular season.

Planners say there would be six UNLV games, two college bowl games, and two neutral-site college football games.

Based on the experience of other stadiums, proponents expect the rest of the calendar to be filled with rugby, mixed martial arts, boxing, Supercross and Monster Jam motorsports events, and maybe even the NFL’s Pro Bowl and Super Bowl games.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/ec...n-possible

Mark Davis is committing $500 Million to the project in Las Vegas to move the Raiders...From the article:

Via Scott Bair of CSNBayArea.com, the Raiders owner told the Southern Nevada Tourism and Infrastructure Committee meeting that he was ready to commit $500 million toward a stadium there to bring his team to the desert.

Davis also brought some rhetoric with him, saying Las Vegas: “would not just be getting a football team, they would be getting everyone who has worn the silver and black for the last 56 years.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...s-stadium/

(04-28-2016 12:52 PM)Maize Wrote:  Mark Davis is committing $500 Million to the project in Las Vegas to move the Raiders...From the article:

Via Scott Bair of CSNBayArea.com, the Raiders owner told the Southern Nevada Tourism and Infrastructure Committee meeting that he was ready to commit $500 million toward a stadium there to bring his team to the desert.

Davis also brought some rhetoric with him, saying Las Vegas: “would not just be getting a football team, they would be getting everyone who has worn the silver and black for the last 56 years.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...s-stadium/

I wonder if that $500MM includes or excludes whatever transfer fee the NFL would assign. I'd guess the former, but I also assume the fee will be smaller than what was assigned for LA. The total also probably includes the $100MM "assistance" from the league. But for Davis, even $400 is a pretty decent commitment. Going to have to finance nearly all of it, yeah?

(04-28-2016 01:07 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 12:52 PM)Maize Wrote:  Mark Davis is committing $500 Million to the project in Las Vegas to move the Raiders...From the article:

Via Scott Bair of CSNBayArea.com, the Raiders owner told the Southern Nevada Tourism and Infrastructure Committee meeting that he was ready to commit $500 million toward a stadium there to bring his team to the desert.

Davis also brought some rhetoric with him, saying Las Vegas: “would not just be getting a football team, they would be getting everyone who has worn the silver and black for the last 56 years.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...s-stadium/

I wonder if that $500MM includes or excludes whatever transfer fee the NFL would assign. I'd guess the former, but I also assume the fee will be smaller than what was assigned for LA. The total also probably includes the $100MM "assistance" from the league. But for Davis, even $400 is a pretty decent commitment. Going to have to finance nearly all of it, yeah?

Here is the reported financial breakdowns:

With the Raiders pledging $500 million -- $200 million from an NFL loan -- and the Sands contributing $150 million, $650 million of the $1.4 billion stadium budget comes from private funds. The rest would be generated by tourism taxes. Backers said Thursday they would ask for a special session of the Nevada Legislature in August to approve diverting some room-tax funds for the stadium.

Davis said other sites besides a 42-acre spot owned by UNLV on Tropicana Avenue, across from McCarran International Airport, are being looked at in the search.

Such a project could take three years, and Davis said that in the interim, the Raiders likely would play one preseason game a year at 35,500-seat Sam Boyd Stadium in Las Vegas but maintain their home base in Alameda, California, and play home games at the Oakland Coliseum.

The Raiders have two one-year leases at the Coliseum that take them through 2018.

Davis said he is committed to carrying on his father's legacy with the Raiders, and that the No. 1 thing to ensure the Raiders brand lives on is that the team gets a new stadium.

It is the inclusion of the Raiders that is pushing the Las Vegas stadium forward, and the appearance of Davis before the committee was the most solid commitment to date to moving an NFL team to the city.

The NFL has long shunned Las Vegas, refusing its TV ads and telling players not to make appearances at casinos. But Davis said he believes owners will approve the move if the stadium is built.

"If we give them an offer they can't refuse, and that's what we're talking about now, I don't see a problem," Davis said.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/154204...-las-vegas

I would guess that the $100M gift from the NFL only applies if the Raiders stay and build a stadium in Oakland.

But I am also guessing the NFL may waive the relocation fee if the Raiders move to Vegas instead of Los Angeles.

(04-28-2016 02:05 PM)goofus Wrote:  I would guess that the $100M gift from the NFL only applies if the Raiders stay and build a stadium in Oakland.

But I am also guessing the NFL may waive the relocation fee if the Raiders move to Vegas instead of Los Angeles.

That's right - I'd forgotten the $100MM was for solving their "home" stadium problem. So we're down to Davis finding $300MM on his own, but he'll still end up financing half a billion or very near that sum, plus...

...and I doubt the league will waive a relocation fee. It'll be smaller than the $550MM for LA but I can't imagine Davis will get a freebie.

Glad to see they'll just be taking from the tourists. They'll just spend a little less at the craps table, slot machines and in sports betting is what that amounts to. I'm on board with this if it's not taking away from the taxpayers of Vegas.

(04-28-2016 02:46 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(04-28-2016 02:05 PM)goofus Wrote:  I would guess that the $100M gift from the NFL only applies if the Raiders stay and build a stadium in Oakland.

But I am also guessing the NFL may waive the relocation fee if the Raiders move to Vegas instead of Los Angeles.

That's right - I'd forgotten the $100MM was for solving their "home" stadium problem. So we're down to Davis finding $300MM on his own, but he'll still end up financing half a billion or very near that sum, plus...

...and I doubt the league will waive a relocation fee. It'll be smaller than the $550MM for LA but I can't imagine Davis will get a freebie.

Agreed. Kroenke has to pay $550MM to relocate to LA, and Spanos is effectively diverted away from LA because he doesn't want to fork over $550MM himself, so it's very likely that any team moving anywhere from now on will pay a nine-figure relocation fee.

Interesting to talk about Vegas, but given how many fancy drawings never end up becoming real stadiums, people should wait at least until there is stadium construction going on before they start buying Las Vegas Raiders gear.

Also: If it's a domed stadium built to NFL standards, it's going to cost substantially more than that $1.3 billion figure they're putting out there.

Steve Wynn the owner of the MGM apparantly supports the project:

Billionaire Steve Wynn quietly has been taking on a power-broker role to help bring the NFL to Las Vegas.


Addressing his involvement for the first time during a red carpet event Friday, Wynn revealed he’s met with Oakland Raiders owner Mark Davis and two influential NFL owners, Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys and Stan Kroenke, who recently moved his St. Louis Rams to Los Angeles.

Wynn said Las Vegas has to be ready if the opportunity presents itself.

“If the NFL says, ‘If you want to move to Las Vegas, Raiders, you can,’ then we’ve got to spring into action and we’ve got to come up with a program.

“I just thought it would be a great thing for the town, don’t you agree?”

Word of Wynn’s interest recently surfaced. At a Thursday news conference at UNLV, Davis confirmed he met with Wynn. Rob Goldstein, president and chief operating officer of Sheldon Adelson’s Las Vegas Sands Corp., credited Wynn with initiating the domed stadium conversation in a meeting with Adelson and Goldstein about three or four years ago.

“This very idea came out of his mouth,” Goldstein said at the news conference after he and Davis appeared before the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee.

empire of hotel-casinos. Sands is a partner with Ed Roski’s Majestic Reality in pledging private financing for a proposed $1.4 billion domed stadium in the Strip resort corridor.

Davis on Thursday told the SNTIC, an advisory panel appointed by Gov. Brian Sandoval, that he would provide $500 million toward the construction of the 65,000-seat stadium if a public-private financing plan is approved by the Legislature.

I asked Wynn if he was partnering with Adelson.

“Well,” said Wynn, “Sheldon and I are both very strong supporters of it, and how it plays out is something we’ve got to see.

“We haven’t been down to the nitty gritty of it because, first of all, do the owners believe this is OK?” he added. “Their attitude toward the relationship with sports and gaming has changed. They’re having two games in London, where the entire audience can bet play by play, and the NFL is going to London and the audience is participating in that.

“So there’s been a sea change in the NFL’s attitude, at least based upon the London games,” Wynn continued. “It’s not hypocritical. I think they’re in a state of change. How that plays out with us is interesting.”


http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/col...dy-raiders

(04-26-2016 03:04 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  There are casinos many places but Vegas is the only area to my knowledge that allows sports betting, otherwise I'd be a regular in Lake Charles.

Well London allows betting even beyond what Vegas does, and they play games there, and have been talking of moving a team there, so I'd think at some point, they have to stop being hypocritical.

(04-28-2016 10:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Also: If it's a domed stadium built to NFL standards, it's going to cost substantially more than that $1.3 billion figure they're putting out there.

Not necessarily. The new Vikings stadium costs just over a billion, and that includes the costs of tearing down the old stadium, and cleaning the site. A Vegas stadium I think would be on (currently) empty land, saving money to prep the site, and labor costs. It's only the outrageously fancy stadiums in LA, NY (err, NJ), and SF (err SC) that cost that much. Even the new Atlanta Stadium is "only" $1.4 billion, with similar issues.

The only American city I know of that allows sports betting is Vegas. And as of now, they haven't moved a team to London. London is one thing because they really want British people to be marketed to but Vegas needs no extra marketing.

It's still dumb though because games can still be fixed at any time, usually without a paper trace whereas a casino sports book has an obvious paper chase.

Jerry Jones has given his "Blessing" for the Raiders to Vegas...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...las-vegas/

(05-11-2016 04:10 PM)Maize Wrote:  Jerry Jones has given his "Blessing" for the Raiders to Vegas...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...las-vegas/

Translation: anywhere but in my state.

(05-13-2016 10:54 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 04:10 PM)Maize Wrote:  Jerry Jones has given his "Blessing" for the Raiders to Vegas...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...las-vegas/

Translation: anywhere but in my state.

How much of a threat would the San Antonio market be to the Cowboys??

Firstly, I think there's room for dual allegiance. If you grow up a Cowboys fan, its not as if every fan who did will toss that aside to embrace something new. Second, the Cowboys dominate both Texas and much of the surrounding states when it comes to fans, let alone nationally. Losing San Antonio would be a hit but not as big as one may imagine.

(05-13-2016 03:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Firstly, I think there's room for dual allegiance.

An economist might partially agree. Dual allegiance means splitting your fan-dollars between teams. Some folks are wealthy enough to simply double their sports entertainment budget but most aren't. So, dollars spent on "San Antonio Raiders" will come from the budget currently allotted to Cowboys, or Texans, or whomever. If you're JJ, dominating Texas is important to you and you'll fight a new Texas team even though it might only take a small amount of your theoretical market share.

Notable that Jones doesn't think Davis can run his team properly and is only interested in helping/supporting a move if Davis sells.