MLS sale of Chivas USA looming(?) asking price varies from one source to the next

I'm with Knave on this. Just shut it down and start again. LA as an asset belongs to the league rather than the particular franchise. But little value in "moving" anything.

 

I agree. LA doesn't need two team like NY doesn't need to teams. Start the biding at 85 million and see who out of Los Vegas, Sac or Minn wants it the most. Maybe Minn gets lucky and gets it under 100 million, the price Atlanta paid.

 

Except that's not true. It may be a condemned shack, but it certainly is not on a toxic waste site. If it were, some of the stink of the Chivas brand would be rubbing off on the Galaxy and that simply isn't the case. The problems with Chivas are confined to Chivas and, given the right ownership, could be renovated into a nice, middle-class suburban/urban home.

 

It is "toxic" as a site, in that the LAG already have that venue -- and CUSA/LA2 would always look like and be the "secondary tenant" at HDC/StubHub if they simply carry on playing there.

It's a bit of the same logic as to why NYCFC aren't willing to play in RBA. They need to be in a different location within that market.

Certainly, but how long does that renovation process take, and what are the best steps in executing that renovation?

And finding and selling to that "right (new) ownership" group seems to be the current stage in the process for the league (even before the local renovations can/will begin).

 

Then you and I disagree. I think the franchise is, at this point, basically toxic. You can't just rebrand and start fresh. You have to let the fumes dissipate. I think it hurts the team to be seen as a rebranded Chivas USA.

That's why I'm not opposed to a hiatus for LA2. Then you don't even have to say or suggest that the new team is connected to the old one. It doesn't have to be, not even by proximity. So you're not dragging all that history along. Chivas USA wouldn't even have to be in the conversation. It would give the new team the kind of fresh start it needs.

 

You mean if they're not bought?

Complicating things is also the fact that Chivas USA must be rebranded after this year. So if they're not bought, what name do they play under? And if they're bought in a year, are they rebranded a third time? Seems to me you have to get things exactly right with the second iteration of LA2. It might already be far too late to get things right for next year.

 

Ed.

 

i'm glad to see some glimmers of common sense, after earlier opinions that it was practically a done deal, an irresistible opportunity, and so on.
for all intents and purposes, at this point in time mls has only one team in los angeles, and no very good prospects for a second one. and btw, the galaxy have been affected somewhat by this mess, imo. the atmosphere and crowds at galaxy games are hardly top even by mls standards. the mls brand has taken a hit there.

 

THIS x 1000 .... smartest person in the room today. MLS HQ is incompetent if they think a proper Chivas re-brand and roll out can happen by spring 2015, Let LA2 sit vacant for a few years while a big fish prepares to pay premium expansion fee and build to suite with all the hoopla and fanfare LA expects. Chivas rebranded won't work .....by 2015 ......unless they go to Weingart. And again, it's too late for that....

 

All the good Garber has done (including buying Chivas) is seemingly out the window for me if he really sells Chivas for a measly 60 million dollars. Let me correct myself, if he sells it for 60 million AND decides to keep them in Los Angeles! What a moronic move. Just sell them to the Kings owner who can in turn relocate them to Sacramento. How hard is this Garber? You don’t need a 2nd LA team… yet. If you really think MLS will be 1 of the top leagues by 2022, then imagine the expansion fee you can command down the road? Just wait a little. In the meantime, sell to Sac. Galaxy/Earthquakes/Republic rivalry sounds great to me. Even typing it got me amped up! And then you still salvage your expansion slot for Vegas or Minnesota.

 

A little more details here: What does the future hold for StubHub! Center housemate Chivas USA?

http://www.lagconfidential.com/2014...-hold-for-stubhub-center-housemate-chivas-usa

 

Thank you holly nichole music !

 

Why would they let someone buy CUSA for $60M and move them when that undercuts the price they're asking for other expansion franchises?

I'm sure this is an "as is" offer. And any potential ownership group could probably play hardball and get them for even less.

 

It's probably not even an "as is" sales offer, since I don't think the franchise/team has a deal in place at this point to rent/share StubHub (or any stadium) as 2015 approaches.

What were the initial terms/conditions of CUSA's agreement to be a second tenant at their current stadium?

 

No. Sac has connected with their team, Republic, not Chivas. No one is Sac wants Chivas or anything to do with Chivas.

Ranadive and his cohorts want to turn Republic into an MLS team as Republic represents the community. Why would Ranadive want to relocate the league's biggest failure, especially one from SoCal which will have a bad stigma attached to it in NorCal, where they hate anything to do with LA?

Chivas is Garber's problem, not Sac's or Ranadive's. Sac should get an MLS team based on its own merits as a market and high ceiling as a ownership group, not to fix a mistake of the league for Garber. They're already going to have to fund a new stadium and pay, going off Orlando, an expansion fee around 70M most likely. Why would they instead want to pay 60M plus relocation for a failed brand from SoCal?

 

FYP

 

Let's assume the Kings group invests in Republic. They would be doing for the privilege of securing entry into MLS . Any smart business man will tell you the cheapest and fastest way to do it is to purchase the assets of the team formerly known as Chivas. They are not buying the badge or the history. And they avoid the risk of. non-entry to boot because expansion is not a certainty. To the extent Chivas is a problem for MLS , the flip side is that they are a solution for Republic. The get in. Fast. And have the luxury of keeping the best talent , developed and otherwise, and discarding most of the rest. They will be way more competitive out the gate than as a true expansion team.

 

Say what?!

So what happens to the current USL Pro Sac team? You know, the one that has a current owner and a dedicated fanbase. You think they gonna roll over and play dead?

 

I don't follow you at all. If the Kings/Republic buy the Chivas and relocate them to Sac, everything Chivas gets dumped, except the players on contract. The Republic front office takes over, and Preki coaches.

They would be buying the franchise tag.

 

The current owner is going to be part of the MLS ownership group, along with the Kings. The USL franchise tag gets sold or moved (say to Fresno). Just like what Orlando is doing

 

Knave, I follow what your saying. I would substitute a superfund site, to a house where a serial killer buried bodies in the basement. That house would sit vacant for years, eventually get torn down, and the land would not be rebuilt upon till everyone forgot what happened there.

Chivas is a house with bodies buried in the basement. They need to tear it down and leave it alone till everyone forgets about them.