Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 AEG moving the team to Houston is dead. Televisa buying the team from AEG and moving it to Houston looks dead also. 50/50 = (a) Silicon valley investor/operator buys the team or (b) MLS buys the team back from AEG. If (b), the team will probably not be moved in 2006 but very probably could be moved in 2007. MLS could sell the team to Televisa once they hammer out a TV deal. MLS and Televisa probably won't hammer out a TV deal in the next week or two, and then it will be too late to move a team to Houston for 2006. And, Houston appears to be the only real credible candidate to join Toronto for expansion in 2007-- so why rush things? Just work things out with Televisa in due course and give them the second 2007 franchise. Also, more likely that the Wizards get moved to Houston in 2006 than the Earthquakes do. Nobody has said the Wizards local investor(s) have a 50/50 shot at buying the team. Much more pessimistic there.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 And contraction will not happen. You've got to be one brick short of a load to think MLS will have fewer teams in 2006 than it did in 2005.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 added Leiweke, "YOU GET IT, PEOPLE??!! ALEXI'S A STINKY HIPPIE!!! HAVE YOU SEEN HIS GOATEE?!!?!1! OMGLOLS!!ONE!"
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 What the San Antonio deal taught us is that you need an owner(s) and you need the politicians in your pocket. Mayor Garza had neither at the end of the day. Even with a sweet stadium deal, MLS would have gone into a city with no potential owner.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 The Houston/Televisa deal is not dead. If it was dead, believe me, the press releases would have been out already justifying why the deal went south just as it did in San Antonio. As it stands right, MLS and Televisa have to work out the tv right %'s. Heck, even the article is laying down the ground for the possibility that it will be moved to Houston: In the end, Leiweke's message is meant as a pressure negotiating tactic for the City of San Jose and the local investors. Televisa is interested in the US market, but it doesn't need an MLS franchise that badly. It can continue to negotiate until Televisa gets the terms of their liking. In the end, if the local investors and the City of San Jose don't agree to AEG's terms, he can either sell it to Televisa on their terms or use the "League-owned Team" card to get out of it.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Well I asked the question because I didn't know the answer, and I'm not sure you really know the answer either. Do these teams make their books public, and are we accounting for large one-time expenses like stadium building costs in determining their profitability over x number of years? Even if you're right that LA and Columbus are in the black and they've already recouped their one-time large investments, etc. that's only 2 teams out of 12. Not sure that there's "bickering" going on, but if there is, I think it would be a good sign because that means multiple parties are actually talking about it with some modicum of passion.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 I dont understand what the enormous problem is with the quakes. They have a good team with a solid fan base. I mean they were actually drawing crowds to the game. Please, move KC, they play boring soccer and no one goes to watch them.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Yeah, my guess is that it's not truly "50/50" but that's a good thing to say when you're negotiating with multiple parties (or maybe even one party in this case if the other major option is an MLS buy back). You don't want someone to think either that they "have it in the bag", in which case they don't feel enough pressure to negotiate, or that "it looks unlikely", in which case they might give up.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 If you are an owner with no stadium, and a team that loses money without it, you will have a tough time selling the team.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Didn't seem to hamper AEG's ability to sell it this summer, did it? Eventually, a SSS will get built in the DC area, whether at Poplar Point, or some eventual plan B location in or outside the District. If KC or SJ suffer operational losses, that's one thing, since they aren't really bringing much to the table from a national perspective (well, at least, not as much to the table). DC on the other hand is essentially the face of MLS. You don't move your most successful and storied team, and the one with the best atmosphere for national TV audiences (especially when you're fighting an attendance and atmosphere image problem)... regardless of the stadium situation. It would be like MLB moving the Yankees if NY refused to help build a replacement for Yankee Stadium. Ain't gonna happen.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Unfortunately, that definiteness is not what the statement means. Journalists are used to statements like this. You have to break them down like the Supreme Court interprets a law to find what they really mean. The cited quote "...cannot continue to own the team." What does continue mean? It is relative. In a strict sense, it means as soon as he said this, the company sold the team. If it id not, it continued to own the team. In the broader definition, and that's what I'm sure he means, AEG could own the team for years because it meant it couldn't continue to own the team forever. Basically, once he says AEG can't continue to own the team, yet does not sell the team immediately, we are now in the broader understanding which has almost no limit.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Option (b), MLS buys the Quakes & then sells them at a later date to Televisa, sounds intriguing. Is this just brainstorming on your part, or have folks in California (or MLS) made remarks indicating that's a possibility?
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 I talked with some Revs execs when I was up there for the USA/PAN game and was told that the team is better off financially now with their current crowds than they were at old Foxboro Stadium with much larger crowds. It really is all about controlling revenue streams - or basically, keeping all the money.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 That 18k figure is basically the same number quoted to me by Curt Johnson regarding the Wizards last season. That number drops significantly when you control all or most of the revenue streams at the stadium. As to RFK, the number I heard back when the WUSA was in operation is that both the Freedom and United paid roughly $65k/game to rent the Stadium.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 It's worth the investment and the risk. With the new confidence form the TV deal, Adidas sponsorship, SSS, and the big swinging **** talk among owners of buying better players, the stage is set for a ballsy move like this (league owning/operating SJ to buy more time for a local owner). This would save 10 years of time, money, and emotion, and work from fans and staff. How inadequate people think those investments were is irrelevant because they had some value that will be lost in pulling the plug. A new club, even one year later, would have to start with maybe 10% the current fan base and NEGATIVE media standing rather than the slowly built presence the team has now. Right now the Earthquakes, because of the NASL history and that MLS version started during a period of growth for the city, can be seen as a symbol of old-school San Jose, a hometown team that just like the city is staking a claim to national and golbal prominence. Pull the plug, and the new team becomes a symbol of humble starting over after dismal gut-wrenching failure. The city itself has also been through that before, and has been coming back for a few years. Everything is optimism and trying to forget that terrible time, so anything symbolizing it won't do well.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Well enough that they're making parking free next year. Parking normally is $15/car, $13/car if you bought a season parking pass (which, if you had Category 3 tickets, meant you paid more to park than to enter a game this season). Also, there've been some really strong hints dropped lately that a Kraft-built Rev-specific stadium isn't out of the question.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 ....and I think this what might occur if SJQ don't get a local investor. 2006 could be SJQ's swan song.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 I am not saying this is wrong per say, but this does not pass my basic smell test. 1) We have it on an excellent source that the Revs were break even or profitable back in 1997. I do not believe they are break even today 2) The Krafts controlled the exact same revenues in the old stadium as in the new stadium 3) The new stadium costs significantly more money to open than the old stadium, which is the main reason the Revs have the embarassing seating configuration that they do. 4) While the parking and tickets and concessions are more expensive than the old days (resulting in more revenue per person), the attendance is significantly down, which offsets much of that per person gain on the total. Like I said, I am not disputing what Andy heard, but the numbers don't add up for me. I am sure I am missing something though. Andy
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Well, yeah, of course he is going to say that. What do you think he would say, "I'll never move the team, so don't make my stadium issues a priority?" Even if MLS would never relocate DC, it does them no good to admit that. Point being that you can't take a public statement like that at face value. Yes, DC needs a SSS. No, DC will not move under any circumstance.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 Never say never. I bet a lot of fans of the Brooklyn Dodgers would say the same thing. And countless of other sports team. Here, read what one of the new owners of DC United has to say (in case you missed in from page 1) http://washington.smartceo.com/cover.html Payne made it clear, however, that DC United is pinning its hopes on getting a stadium deal for Poplar Point. He would consider other locations but the focus right now is Poplar Point. He also stated that unless the team is able to secure a soccer specific stadium deal in Washington that he will likely take the team out of DC to another metropolitan market, silencing the Barra Brava and the Screaming Eagles forever. Also, read this part: Like I said, if there is no plan for a stadium in the next 5-10 years, there is a chance that the team WILL move. (a small chance but a chance nonetheless). Anyone who think otherwise is living in fantasy land. I don't think the owners will want to keep the team (even one as good and as rich a history as DC United) if it continues to lose money each and every year. Thus far, DC United has been losing money each and every year. Of course, business-knowledgable people would know that. You can't run a business that loses money every year with no prospect of breaking even. Fold and set up shop in some other place where the future is brighter.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 You've seen and audited their books? It may be true that DC is not yet in the black. Then again, any losses at this point are probably fairly minimal, at least compared to several of the other MLS teams that have been in similar cost situations without the same revenue streams.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 I don't think MLS will do that. I suggested that MLS should own a team in Toronto and saved the stadium deal (this was back in May/June 2005) because no one step up after the York deal fell through. My argument is that as a last option to save the $35 million in government subsidy no string attached free money, MLS can spend $15-20 million dollar and own a $60 million stadium. Which would cost each owner about $1.2 million dollars. They can own the team for a year or two and then sell it (like the MLB with the Expos...bought it for $120 and probably going to sell it for $450 million). However, most people thought that MLS should never own a team EVER again (even if it is likely that MLS will profit from it). Thank goodness that someone (MLSE) stepped up. From all accounts, they will get a sweet-heart deal on the stadium. Comparision: Toronto: $35 million in free government money, no string attached, no bond/debt to pay. MLSE contribute $10 million for the stadium and get a very favorable deal (much more favorable than Chicago). HDC: AEG pays for all of the cost Metrostars: AEG pays for all of the cost Chicago: Bridgeview pays for all of the cost. However, it will get a lot of stadium revenue to pay off the $7.5 million bond/debt. Example, 50% of parking, concession, stadium merchandise, 7% of ticket revenue and 100% of naming rights. Denver/Commerce City: Kroneke will pay for all of the stadium cost. Columbus Crew Stadium: Hunt pays for all of the cost FC Dallas: This is a very favorable deal with Hunt only putting up $15 million (+ 20 million in cost overrun and improvement). Anyway, AEG is paying the full cost for Metrostars and Galaxy, they 'could' pay the full cost for a SJ SSS, but they are not saying they will.
Re: AEG: Odds of Quakes Move 50-50 I'll give you one circumstance. DC United loses money every year with no stadium prospect in the horizon. Another city offers a stadium deal. The above has happened countless time in MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL, what make you think that it will be different for MLS? I'll admit that it is very unlikely that DC United will ever moved, but you can't say 'NEVER'