Just admit you're wrong. Ironic that two teams that have no local ownership at all, Los Angeles and Houston, have been the two most successful franchises in the league the past several years. And one of the worst franchises in MLS with regards to attendance and more recently on field performance, has had a local owner since day 1....New England. Point being... a) you're wrong b) it doesn't matter if your owner sleeps on a cot in the stadium or is headquartered on the moon. Some ownership groups are simply better than others, regardless of residence.
Just to update the discussion here, the Sounders actually have zero owners that are local and have no other sporting interests. Hanauer is a local owner, but he is also a minority owner in Cambridge United.
Interesting perspective from Paul Kennedy at SoccerAmerica: Checketts' importance to MLS cannot be overstated "After Lamar Hunt and Philip Anschutz, Real Salt Lake founder Dave Checketts may be the most important investor in MLS history."
And poorly started: Checketts announced his purchase of an expansion team in 2004. On Sept. 23rd 2003, Kroenke bought the Rapids. So there were 4 investors when Checketts bought in. Kroenke was, as far as I know, actually the first investor to jump into MLS after the dark times when those 3 had to buy (almost) every team to keep them running.
that's one way of learning to live with it... especially when your team consistently underperforms in comparison. /banter off