What does the Bay Area Soccer Foundation do? I think that's what they're called. I'm talking about the group that brought World Cup to the Bay Area. There was supposed to be World Cup money put in a fund, and a board of local soccer leaders to oversee it. Put this well-connected group together with Johnny Moore and some folks in Club Quake and you might have an ideal exploratory committee for local ownership. I know this fantasy has been largely debunked but maybe we do have the makings of a Green Bay Packers ownership scheme here, whereby 49% of the Quakes is owned by the Bay Area soccer community. (and I have one thing to say to those of you expecting a cryptic music discussion here: Don't bring me down.)
For those of you who missed this article, it gives you just a hint of the kind of money in Bay Area club soccer. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/03/07/MNGRT5G2BT1.DTL The player development connection between local youth leagues and the Quakes can be clearly demonstrated - with Kinnear and Doyle at the helm, and Donovon in tow. Many board members of the Bay Area Soccer Foundation are already big wigs in the local clubs. And I can hardly think of anything more beneficial to those clubs than a local MLS team - especially one with a stadium and soccer park. (Boy Blue)
Let's say the franchise fee for 49% ownership of the Quakes is $25 million. (I assume the league owns the other 51%). The team probably loses about $2 million a year. 1000, fans investing $25,000 each could purchase the team, but would need to be willing to invest $1,000 a year (covers about 1/2 the losses). 10,000 fans with $2500 or 100 fans with $250,000 or some combination could also accomplish the same ownership goal. Fans owning the team might be very good in the San Jose market. It seems to me everyone that supports soccer in SJ doesn't necessarly support the Earthquakes. There are people that support the Cyberrays, teams from their homeland, eurosnobs, and only youth soccer. If we had a broad group of owners each group could lobby the teams management for their "cause" (i.e. cyberrays supporter wanting to have a women's team associated with the Quakes, Mexican supporters wanting the signing of a Mexican player, etc.), but would have to be willing to put there money behind it. I'd be willing to invest as a minority owner, if I can I get a scarf that says "San Jose Earthquakes - Owner" and a plan to become profitable. Noah Dahl the future George Steinbrenner?
Mr. Blue Sky I'd bet Johnny Moore, Lalas, the SJ mayor and some local soccer beegveeg could get a meeting with Milan Madaric. FYI: http://www.hants.gov.uk/pompey/mandaric.html But then again, I bet Don Garber and Phil Anshutz could too. PS eqfan: My head's totally in the clouds over this notion of being the most hated owner in soccer.
http://www.ussoccerplayers.com/resource_center/soccer_business/406319.html http://www.ussoccerplayers.com/resource_center/soccer_business/405998.html J Hutcherson has written about this and sums up the problems better than I could. And don't forget, it's not just the Quakes, but you have to be willing, and able, to underwrite the other teams in the league, the league office, the Quakes operations, SUM, etc. Tony
Where are these people going to come from? It's difficult enough to find 3,000 people willing to spend between $180 and $400 for season tickets.
Re: Re: Exploring Local Ownership What if a thousand of those same people would invest $1,000? What if 500 of them would invest $10,000? What if 50 of them would invest $100,000? It's a long shot but there's plenty of money in the Bay Area, even after the dot com bubble burst. (Yes, I know, my example only adds up to $11 million but I bet that would get AEG's attention...) The point is, if we sit back and don't do anything and the team moves at the end of the year, we'll always wonder if we could have done anything to save it. Screw that -- I think we need to give it our best shot and that we need to start now. (Strange Magic)
Re: Re: Re: Exploring Local Ownership       Multi-millionaires have a tough enough time maintaining MLS franchises when they need to share in the league losses (Horowitz in Miami, Kraft in New England, etc.) - one needs to be a multi-billionaire to run an MLS franchise comfortably (ala Anchutz, Hunt and Kroenke). So don't expect most season-ticket holders to be able to afford to spend even $1000 each on ownership, considering that this area still has among the highest unemployment rates in the nation.       The best we can do is buy season-tickets, take friends and relatives to games when possible and buy Earthquakes merchandise within our means. Let's allow AEG to search for the potential local investors who can realistically not only afford to take over the Earthquakes, but to share in the losses the league will still incur for at least the next decade.       Besides, just because Johnny Moore spoke of the search for local investors in the past tense doesn't necessarily mean that that search has stopped - it simply means that he's no longer involved in it (not suprisingly, since he's no longer with the Quakes front-office).       GO EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
Re: Re: Re: Re: Exploring Local Ownership Goodsport, I'm not really suggesting that we try to pass the hat to buy the Quakes. There's a lot that we *can* do, though, to help AEG recognize that they want to be involved in the Bay Area market. I know Club Quake is/will be working on some things to help show that so please be ready when the call for help goes out. (And yes, buying season tickets, taking friends to games, and buying Quakes gear helps a lot, too.)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Exploring Local Ownership 1000 millionaires = 1 billionaire. I'm not suggesting that there would be 1000 millionaires to invest in the Quakes, but there could be 1000 people who would be willing to invest a significant amount of money. The fans in Green Bay were able to buy the Packers, The fans in San Jose and of MLS might be willing to purchase a part of the team. The Bay Area is one of the wealthiest areas in the US, it could be possible.
Wishing There's no need to overstate the obstacles at this point in the discussion. We're not talking about NFL or EPL level investment here. I can't imagine the Quakes costing 25 million, or even half that without a stadium deal in the works. Bay Area Soccer Partners would not be the sole underwriter, as was implied, of the Quakes and "the other teams in the league, the league office, the Quakes operations..." That's the beauty of single entity - we would in fact be the local caretakers of what is apparently the least valued property in the league, but some billionaires would be sharing the load with us. Oh and we get a chunk of SUM? Brilliant! That'll help us make the sale. We'd also have a piece of a number of teams which are becoming profitable, share of a league we all believe is a good long-term investment, and we'd be helping to sustain a tier of the sport which greatly benefits youth soccer. Of course it would be simpler to get a rich local owner. But, Noah E, I don't think you can compare the Quakes measly season ticken drive with a concerted effort by Northern California's soccer leaders to get their own clubs to buy the Quakes. Investor/ownership is a whole different thing than buying a ticket. I think its time for youth soccer to flex its muscle like this, and I think this kind of owner/partner would be very healthy for MLS. After all, MLS would rather be in Northern California than not be in Northern California. And if the NFL can deal happily with a consortium of cheeseheads...
Noah D, will all due respect, take a look at what J Hutcherson wrote about this topic. No one is overstating the obstacles, but I believe you are vastly understating them. Mr Moore did say in one of the Quake Magic articles that he wished he'd spent more time wooing local ownership, but if it was easy to find local ownership, we probably wouldn't be having this debte and we could talk about by how many goals the Quakes are going to beat DC on the 3rd and if Alvarez has a chance to start. The best opportunity for fan ownership in the Bay Area is probably the Sonoma County Sol, who I am sure would welcome our money. Goodsport made a lot of good points about what we can do, along with keeping the pressure on Lalas and AEG. The youth angle has been suggested before on bigsoccer, but I have yet to meet an official of a youth soccer club who is interested in MLS other than as a fan. And for all the money these clubs have for their own purposes, paying John Doyle $125,000 to be Technical Director is one thing, coughing up $20M plus a new stadium, plus league-wide cash calls, plus paying for the Metros lease, etc. Lets just say I would be very surprised if that happens. Tony
This is a very good thing... Nothing bad can possibly come out of local people showing their support of soccer in the bay area. Even if the group doesn't succeed in buying into the team, the publicity and cooperation from this venture will have a positive impact. People who were ambivalent about the Quakes before might be tempted to come to games if they thought there was a chance the team might not stay. I say go for it. Make the loudest noise and the biggest ruckus you can.
I read Goosport as saying "Do what we've always done." I've said a team can't depend on the desperate evangelism of its small core group of fans. For one thing that whiff of desperation keeps people away from the bandwagon. I'm saying, in addition to our activism, we should brainstorm new possibilities. It seems clear having an MLS team in the Bay Area means more to us than it does AEG. Why not form an independent exploratory committee? One of their agenda items would be to arrange meetings with the likes of Mandaric. Another would be to consider pitching part ownership of the Quakes to leagues and clubs in the greater Bay Area. Shine a little love, will ya?
Eldorado And yeah, I'm probably thinking about one of them "new paradigms." But think about it yourself: The likes of Phil Anshutz are into this solely because they think its a good long term investment. Northern California soccer has the money for that. Unlike AEG, Nor Cal soccer would be investing in another tier of it's own structure. It is therefore a more self-serving investment with a good shot at long-range profitability and 100% chance of giving their athletes something to strive for: model professionals, a shot at the pros, a stepping stone to Europe, World Cup success etc. I would expect such an ownership group would have a greater role in the club's developmental system. I would expect a stronger connection between their coaching staff and the Quakes model professionals. All of which would equate to a greater retention of participants beyond age 14. Plus MLS could lend money, clout and a national profile to the construction of a profitable Bay Area soccer park - complete with stadium. That would be a huge benefit to Nor Cal soccer. I doubt this pitch has been made in the post World Cup 2002/HDC/Donovan and Adu era - when stadiums are going up, teams are becoming profitable and it has been demonstrated that MLS works for the American player. ... Years back there was a gathering of mucky mucks and ambassadors from every level of American soccer. At the end of an emotional weekend they distilled that what they wanted and needed more than anything else was a high profile domestic professional league. Exactly those folks were on the Bay Area Soccer Foundation board I referred to. (World Cup Legacy or whatever.) I think the time is right for youth soccer to take the next step. Maybe in the Bay Area we have the right people, and the right conditions, and can create the political will to get this done. Maybe.
How about EA Sports? Does anyone have any contacts with their executive management? They are located right here in Redwood Shores. http://www.ea.com/global/corporate/aboutea.jsp?src=11001homecorpabounone The FIFA videogames have been some of their best selling products (especially in Europe, but in the US too). If they could get to own a piece of the local team, they could market their PlayStation 2 like crazy, the way they're doing it in the Champions' League. They could put PlayStation 2 on the Earthquakes jerseys. Just a thought.
The ideas of linking youth soccer to MLS in a financial way is absolutley crazy. CYSA has the largest # of participants in the nation. That equates to a lot of money that goes to US Soccer. CAL North has been trying to find a way to separate themselves from USSF. Simply because they could then uses the profits gained and recirculate them into their own program instead of it being a support line to other states and regions. Youth brings in money to US Soccer yet most of that money goes to the higher levels of the soccer programs. MLS is Professional Soccer and needs to continue its growth. 9 years going and everything is getting stronger, the players, the teams, fan base, expansion, SSS, international tournament competition, US youth developement with in the professional ranks, overseas signings. "Believe" that the Quakes are here to stay for the long haul. SSS is the answer. It is proven. Focus your energy on this task instead of spreading yourself out on numerous fronts. This is not a simple idea for anyone to grasp or to organise. It is not a good idea. Youth soccer would not be interested. No way.
...So you're saying this idea is "just crazy enough to work" or I'm "crazy like a fox?" Just kidding. But I wish you could have been more clear because I think that was a very good post, (if a little knee-jerk negative.) We all know youth soccer is a balkanized political quagmire, full of small-minded rivalries over turf and funds. It would be great if some singular mission would get them to unite and take things to a next step. I think this is a worthy mission - apparently it strikes a chord with youth soccer folks too. And the right people are already in place - simultaneously on league/club boards and the World Cup legacy foundation - to make this pitch. Or at least consider it.