What's to stop the expansion team suitors from just buying and relocating an existing team?

Discussion in 'MLS: Expansion' started by yellowbismark, Mar 9, 2009.

  1. yellowbismark

    yellowbismark Member+

    Nov 7, 2000
    San Diego, CA
    Club:
    Club Tijuana
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Several potential investors have made remarks about the high price of expansion, most notably Saputo. What is there to stop them from making an offer to buy an existing MLS team for less than the cost of expansion?

    Granted, there are some owners who probably don't want to sell. But I would presume there has got to be at least a couple disinterested owners who might not shy away from an offer to buy.

    Does Hunt really care to operate 2 teams?
    Vergara/Cue will probably get bored at some point, if they haven't already.
    And then there's Kraft, probably the most disinterested of them all
    What if McFarlane gets tired of the twists and turns of DCU's stadium wild-goose-chase?

    Forbes has valued only three MLS clubs higher than $40 million (LA, Toronto, Chicago).

    I'm not trying to advocate anyone get relocated, I'm just wondering why it hasn't seemed to come up as a possibility when it seems like a better deal in comparison to expansion.
     
  2. krudmonk

    krudmonk Member+

    Mar 7, 2007
    S.J. Sonora
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Probably the centralized structure of MLS. Owners in other sports, with greater independence than we see in MLS, need the blessing of other owners and commissioner before skipping town.
     
  3. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    It really is easy....in MLS the league owns the majority of each team, and the owner/operators own the balance of their own team and a pro-rata share of the league (it is way more complicated than that but that is essentially it).

    So, the people who would sell an existing team are the exact same people out in the market selling expansion teams.....so they have no incentive to sell existing teams any cheaper (if at all) than they sell expansion teams for.
     
  4. yellowbismark

    yellowbismark Member+

    Nov 7, 2000
    San Diego, CA
    Club:
    Club Tijuana
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Fair point. The league controls half, I get that. They can't just swoop in now, if everybody's committed...but at some point in the near future, an owner is going want to bail. Owners come and go. I'm guessing Saputo just waits for the first current owner to cash in his chips.
     
  5. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    but

    1. the price would still be the same....which he did not like.
    2. he still would only own half of his team....which he does not like
    3. and he still owns a share of teams in other markets that he is not fond of
    4. he still has to expand his stadium to get in.
    It is not much different!
     
  6. FandesRens

    FandesRens New Member

    Jan 25, 2009
    Ottawa
    Club:
    Ottawa
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Add to this that his potential new MLS team which he would be might be weaker than his USL-1 Montreal Impact team and there you have it... no go!
     
  7. yellowbismark

    yellowbismark Member+

    Nov 7, 2000
    San Diego, CA
    Club:
    Club Tijuana
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Yeah, Bill Gaudette, Roberto Brown and Adam Braz and company....I'm sure MLS would be collectively trembling in their boots to face that team.
     
  8. piltdownman

    piltdownman Member

    Jun 24, 2005
    vancouver
    Montreal is much deeper than any of the MLS clubs. MLS squads have 22 players max, montreal has around 40 players.
     
  9. KaptPowers

    KaptPowers Member

    Dec 29, 2003
    Arlington, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    As disinterested as Bob Kraft is, his son Jonathan is believe or not a fan and has done good things for the team in the past. The reason you wouldn't get Bob to sell is that he'd probably want the price to include money he's already spent (yes, har har $11, I know). Another thing is that the Revs do something with his privately-built-and-funded stadium during the darkness of the NFL offseason.
     
  10. jasontoon

    jasontoon Member

    Jan 9, 2002
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I could get 40 of my friends together. We still couldn't even beat TFC.
     
  11. piltdownman

    piltdownman Member

    Jun 24, 2005
    vancouver
    Yes, but if those 40 friends were as good as all but the top three or four players at TFC, during a busy regular season you would have a chance.
     
  12. Fiorentina lives!

    May 5, 2004
    yellowbismark:

    Gaudette plays for PUERTO RICO ISLANDERS, NOT Montreal Impact.


    ;)
     
  13. evangel

    evangel Member+

    Apr 12, 2007
    Montreal would still be in the CCL if Gaudette played for them.
     
  14. opal347

    opal347 BigSoccer Supporter

    Apr 18, 2005
    Clinton Twp, MI
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Here's your correction: Matt Jordan.

    Not too much different, IMO (although Gaudette is looking really good in the CCL right now)
     
  15. SounderMan

    SounderMan Member

    Nov 8, 2006
    Lacey WA
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would think that the BOG would have to allow the sale and the relocation. So if a guy like Joey Stupedo has insulted the BOG by telling them that their league wasn't worth the asking price for an expansion franchise, he might stand to have a tough time having th epurchase and relocation approved.
     
  16. Cville K C

    Cville K C Member

    Nov 3, 2008
    Collinsville, IL
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Ultimately, if a team wants to relocate or the owner wants to sell, the league won't be able to stop him. I guess the league could buy out the owner's share and run the team or they could find another owner in the same city. But if the owner is losing enough money, what are they going to do? Just make him keep eating losses. Then we might be back to disbanding a team, which would be a huge embarrassment for the league. Or even bailing out a team?

    Don't get me wrong. It would take the right set of circumstances. The owner would have to want to sell. It would probably be a situation where there would be no other possible ownership group in the city. Or if attendance falls enough, then the league might be happy to oblige. It's not likely in the next year or two, but it could happen with a couple of franchises in four or five years certainly.
     
  17. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    You don't understand MLS "ownership". MLS, LLC owns 50 or 51% (I forget) of each team.
     
  18. Cville K C

    Cville K C Member

    Nov 3, 2008
    Collinsville, IL
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, actually I think I do understand MLS ownership. If you have a 50% ownership guy who wants out, either the league has to buy him out or allow him to sell his share or he could just walk (if the league doesn't allow him to sell or won't buy him out), dumping the team in the MLS' lap with a ton of losses. In other words, instead of the team/owner shouldering the losses (or at least half of the losses), the league would have to shoulder the entire thing. If a team is continuously losing money, how long could the league afford to do that. Therefore, they would either need to find another owner that is willing to buy part of the team and keep it in that city, or they would have to move the team or they would have to lose money year after year (which the league couldn't afford to do for long). My guess is that if the league has an option of disbanding the team, owning 100% of the team and taking big losses, or moving the team, the least costly and least embarrassing would be to move the team.

    It doesn't matter whether the owner's share is 100% or 50% or 1%, if the owner decides to pull out, somebody else has to take the hit as far as losses go.
     
  19. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Your answer is, of course, correct as a "long run" analysis of what happens with a continually money losing MLS team.

    As often happens in these threads, though, we lose connection to the original question.....which is (paraprhrased) if one or more of these expansion bidders did not like the $40 million expansion fee...why don't they just go an buy a money losing existing team for less and move it....in that scenario, the league ownership would play a big part in blocking such a move.
     
  20. Earthshaker

    Earthshaker BigSoccer Supporter

    Sep 12, 2005
    The hills above town
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    When the Earthquakes were moved to Houston the league had to approve the relocation.
     
  21. jasontoon

    jasontoon Member

    Jan 9, 2002
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Who would make that call? The BoG? It seems likely that, faced with a hopeless situation (of which there aren't any right now), the other owners would rather move the team than keep subsidizing it.
     
  22. Cville K C

    Cville K C Member

    Nov 3, 2008
    Collinsville, IL
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would agree that it definitely would not happen overnight and that the league would try to block it initially, if they don't like the sale/move. As I said in the original post, I can't see it happening in the next year or two, but more likely 4 or 5 years down the road. I would add that it is more likely to happen if the league shuts down future expansion. If the league decides to stop at 18 teams and one team is losing a lot of money or has poor attendance or a poor stadium situation, it would increase the odds. I could certainly see Chivas moving down the road (Phoenix? or San Diego?)and possibly a relocation to NYC2, expecially if the league stops at 18. That probably doesn't help Cooper or Saputo or some of the others that don't make it this time, but I still think there will be relocation at some point.
     
  23. piltdownman

    piltdownman Member

    Jun 24, 2005
    vancouver
    I'm sure they would need league permission to move a team. Look at how many times the NHL has blocked Bassilie, from buying a NHL team and moving them to Hamilton.
     
  24. art

    art Member

    Jul 2, 2000
    Portland OR
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    of which maybe 5 or 6 are decent players?
     
  25. Macksam

    Macksam Member

    Aug 2, 2007
    Brampton, Canada
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    They haven't blocked it. They just gave the current owners an "incentive" to sell the teams to people who are going to keep the teams in the current market.
     

Share This Page