I am not sure what "our forum" is but there is a thread dedicated to this topic here in MLS N&A. Why don't you go share your knowledge there because no one in that thread is posting anything about hearing it is a done deal.
It is likely a tactic to try and get public money for a stadium. The threat of leaving. I am not sure how much leverage a soccer team has in Columbus. It didn't hurt when RSL was threatening to move to St Louis due to not getting the stadium funding moving. When the threat was thrown out, the Governor and other government officials got a lot more involved in trying to keep RSL in Utah...
I'm wondering if it's not a 'double dipping' attendance boost. That is, we know MLS teams count based on 'distributed tickets' which are based on season tickets plus those sold for the specific match, among other things. Teams that allow unused season tickets to be turned in for a ticket to another match, which may happen in greater numbers towards the end of the season because of 'use it or lose it' motivations, will be counting those tickets as distributed for those later matches. As an example to simplify and clarify: Imagine a team that has 2 home games and sells 1000 season tickets that are useful for those two home games. Suppose 100 fans don't show up, have unused tickets for the first home game and 1000 individual match tickets were distributed (sales, promotions, etc.). The attendance for game game one would be listed as 2000. For game 2, let's suppose all 1000 season ticket holders use their tickets, 1000 individual match tickets are distributed in the same manner as game 1, and all 100 of the unused game 1 tickets are turned in to become further tickets. The listed attendance for game 2 would be 2100. In that situation, weren't the 100 tickets unused at game 1 (but counted) then used at game 2 (and counted again) essentially being counted twice? It may be that the tickets turned in are not counted for the attendance at the later games by Colorado or any other team that allowed this practice. But, I'll wager they are counted twice, and everyone just whistles as they walk past this accounting fraud.
D.C. United expecting between 35,000 and 38,000 for RFK Stadium farewell match Sunday #dcu #mls— Steven Goff (@SoccerInsider) October 19, 2017 Thx, Jay!
It's $130 million according to Forbes. Team value: $130 million 2016 Revenue: $26 million 2016 Operating income: -$5 million The Crew were a founding MLS team and played an integral role in pushing the league toward developing soccer-specific venues, but the team has struggled to keep up with the wildly successful expansion teams. One piece of good news: A new jersey deal with Acura, reportedly the most valuable deal in club history.
Come again? The people who made the offer are the ones who said it for full value and you bought that? If I offered $40m for Toronto FC and say the same will you buy that to? There's being emotional over a potential club relocation and then there's believing anything that fits your narrative.
That's the full value according to Forbes (who don't have all the numbers) and doesn't include the stadium. What's the full value of the Crew according to AP? Or MLS?
The Columbus Dispatch and Sports Illustrated are quoted as saying the Columbus Partnership wanted to buy 100% of the team from Anthony Precourt. Ostensibly that would mean that Precourt had discussed the value of the franchise with them. It has been quoted so often in this forum that it would be harder to read a page or thread not referencing those reports. Which is why you knew that when you started this contrarian shtick. Now, if you had not read any of this forum before posting, I will give you an opportunity to do so now.
Not sure what 'contrarian shtick' is all about but you have lost the plot. You can't say someone has offered the full value of a team unless a) The club was sold at that value or b) The owner (AP in this case) comes out and says 'They offered me what I think my club is worth but I have turned it down anyway'. Since the club has not been sold I'll ask you to provide a link where AP said the latter.
What if the owners is a serial liar? What if he denies that anyone even made an offer? What if MLS executives are quoted by reporters as saying that Precourt was "going rogue?" Contrarian shtick. Go read the threads. Stop posting until you do.
The point is that Precourt did not accept the offer. Did he do it saying "f you Columbus" or is his perceived value higher than what the investors offered? Would the investors meet MLS standards? I'm sure Precourt would sell for the right amount. I'm not defending him, because F##@ him, but saying that he turned down a "full value" offer is disingenuous.
https://www.massivereport.com/2017/...ting-with-the-media-columbus-crew-sc-mls-2017 You knew this when you posted. Nobody would be so foolish as to jump into this forum five days after the news broke without picking up some of the particulars. God dammit, people, read. The Columbus Dispatch and Sports Illustrated are saying them. Journalists. People who know to get two sources. People who know how to get good quotes. This isn't hashtag Fakew News. This is what independent investigations into the subject revealed.
Reading comprehension is important. We are debating two different things. I've acknowledged that the investors offered "full value" to Precourt. Go back to my first post whe I said "Full value to these investors is most likely different than what Precourt considers full value." What I and the other poster are saying is that only the investors are saying they offered full value. That could have been 80m, 120m, 200m, who knows. Precourt did not accept. So unless Precourt says, "Yea they offered me what I wanted, but I don't like Columbus so I declined it so I could move the club to Austin instead" then the investors claim that they offered "full value" is nothing but spin. Precourt may be confident that he will have a stadium deal set relatively soon, in eithe City, which would cause the value of the club to increase greatly in short order. Therefore his perceived value of the club is higher than the perceived value of the club to investors who plan to keep operating the club as is in Crew stadium. Tesla is not worth a fraction of it's current market cap, but investors think they are going to ramp up quickly in car and battery production that it's worth the price. I could offer $1bn for Tesla based on its current revenue and claim it's "full value", but no shareholders would sell me their shares at that price
I get that, but it reads to me that the partnership offered AP 100% of his valuation of the club, not theirs. And that's why they're so mad.
Yea I guess that would have to be cleared up. Did Precourt say "I want this price" get it offered, then say no? I find that unlikely, but if that's the case, then I guess Precourt could actually look even worse than he already does.
And that's why anyone who says "well we just gotta believe Precourt at his word" is making a huge mistake. I imagine the Columbus Partnership feels that way precisely for this reason.
Are you freaking kidding me with this? I have read the forum since day 1. I'm a former Crew STH who lived in Columbus for 2 years so I have no love for what AP is doing but just because we don't like him doesn't mean we can accuse him of things he hasn't done. What you stated was completely untrue so I called you on it. I asked for a link that mentioned the partnership offered AP's value of the club and that he decided to not sell it out of spite (or some other reason). You provided a link that doesn't say anything like that. Try again.