I'm a Rapids fan who doesn't have a dog in this fight, so none of them. But you're out here declaring anyone thinking Vancouver is staying is dealing with hope and nothing else while @sportie1 is here claiming that there's no way Vancouver is moving. (At least) One of you is going to look like a dope when this is finished.
I must have missed the part where the provincial government has agreed to make the BC place lease more manageable and an ownership group is in place willing to pay for a stadium and can get it through the government’s red tape. If that all happens then you can say I’ll look silly. That’s fine. I just don’t think it’s anywhere close at the moment, nor has it been for the last couple years while this has been a well-published escalation. I do think a lot of people are mad that there isn’t a solution yet.
At least a portion of the value of the naming rights will be attributable to the Whitecaps. Any sponsor agreements will have language about specific number of events and reach, with specific clauses surrounding any current tenant involved. The caps lease could then require a specific percentage of any naming rights deal. Should the caps leave, the potential sponsor would almost certainly have a clause that allows them to either renegotiate or pay a pre-determined lower price to compensate for the reduced visibility. This is pretty standard across venues such as this. It's not a hand out to split a portion of the revenue with a tenant that directly generated at least some of the value from the naming rights.
That’s how naming‑rights deals work in privately operated stadiums but BC Place is a provincially owned asset run by PavCo. Any naming‑rights revenue is public revenue. PavCo cannot selectively lower rent or share revenue with a private tenant without it being treated as a public subsidy. Yes, sponsors often have clauses tied to event volume or visibility, but those clauses protect the sponsor, not the tenant. They don’t entitle the Whitecaps to a share of naming‑rights revenue. This is exactly what happened with the Expos and Nordiques: governments offered minor rent relief but refused to subsidize operations or share public revenue and it didn’t solve the underlying economics. The real issue isn’t naming‑rights mechanics, it’s that MLS requires a ~$500M USD valuation, which makes the club unsellable locally given its losses and lack of stadium control.
So, the goverment won't try and increase revenue to save a 50-year institution for the city but if we did it would be a subside. Me being a spiteful team owner would remove Vancouver from anything that is in media and direct everyone to call the team, Whitecaps only. Why subsidize the city with free media when the team plays. Zero shots of the beautiful city and just describe everything as live from Whitecap nation.
Premier Eby on the big meeting tomorrow between #VWFC, #MLS, and others.Said tomorrow won't see a resolution but will let the government know what the club and league both need and want and see if all parties can work together. pic.twitter.com/UPx7sphbjq— AFTN (@aftncanada) May 12, 2026 Eby says he wants the Whitecaps to be upfront and say if the decision has already been taken to move team to Vegas.If not, he wants all parties to be creative and he will deliver message that the government want to work to keep the Whitecaps here.#VWFC https://t.co/iZDtzLeRpf— AFTN (@aftncanada) May 12, 2026
^^^ And voila - they don't want to make deals just to see the team bail anyways. Been done before so Eby is correct in his approach
its political posturing by the Premier-- bottom line, he doesnt want to be the person taking the political fall-out for the Caps leaving- his poll ratings are in the dumpster and loosing the Whitecaps would cause them to fall even further- David Eby wants to be the shining knight to save the Caps in Vancouver- its his political DNA and he knows that saving the Whitecaps is a winner in the public eye MLS officials arent coming here for a cup of coffee- its to expedite a resolution for a better BC Stadium deal for the next 4-5 years- lets not forget that MLS owns 51% of the franchise and also dont want to loose over $500 mill on awarding LV an expansion (IMO, LV ownership are entering the race because they are letting MLS HQ know they are a serious bidder for an expansion franchise) with the First Nations also being at the meeting, i assume its because of their casino lease plans at Hastings Park North and who will develop the land adjacent owned by the City- its adds creedence that a new Whitecap stadium as part of an entertainment hub on that huge tract of land is a distinct possibility the room today is going to be full of Whitecap staff and majority owner, Greg Kerfoot, City and Provincial officials, First Nations officials, PavCo staff who run the Stadium, MLS officials, including Don Garber, and a new and serious local ownership group/investors wouldnt i love to be a fly on the wall BOTTOM LINE- THE WHITECAPS WILL STAY IN VANCOUVER
Bottom line is that the Whitecaps name and history will stay in Vancouver. Most MLS fans hope and want the team to stay in Vancouver too. That remains to be seen though.
I guess technically there are three things, but question 2 is all the marbles. You find a venue, owners will come out of the woodwork. You find a good long-term venue, and a relatively suboptimal short-term lease (that's still bound to be better than what they've dealt with the last 15 years) becomes livable.
People on this thread needs to appreciate how delicate this situation is for the BC Government. I do think the current owners want to sell but they’re steering the stadium process so a local buyer will pay the league’s valuation floor. For the BC government - the Montreal Expos situation is the biggest of red flags and exactly the situation they are trying to avoid. Québec gave rent breaks while there were discussions about a stadium plan which was at the planning stage but the new owners bailed anyway and moved the team to the US. BC is trying to avoid “Expos 2.0” giving concessions only to watch a new owner walk away. That’s why the Province is cautious. Nothing stops a new owner from relocating the club in the middle of the planning stage of a stadium to allow all parties to get their ducks in row leaving the government with dealing with the backlash of misusing public funds. The Province is asking : "Are you guys being genuine or using us to by time to reach the most optimal situation and bail"?
It seems to me this would suggest the need to sell the team to a new local ownership group in short order, with a long-term plan in place prior to the sale. The Province won’t be offering up any accommodating deals to the current selling ownership, in other words. Is that accurate? The provincial government would be over-extending itself offering concessions to an ownership group who is predisposed to selling anyway. Is a new ownership group agreeing to complete a purchase the first domino that needs to fall?
[/QUOTE]For the BC government - the Montreal Expos situation is the biggest of red flags and exactly the situation they are trying to avoid. Québec gave rent breaks while there were discussions about a stadium plan which was at the planning stage but the new owner bailed anyway before moving the team to the US. BC is trying to avoid “Expos 2.0” giving concessions only to watch a new owner walk away. it also has to do with the NBA Grizzlies leaving the city by- IMO- a lying owner- Michael Heisley, who said he would not take the team to another and then within 2 years, took them to Memphis- BUT, the NBA will return- Vancouver is now in the top 3 of the list for the next NBA expansion
the meeting today is more than an exploratory talk- its about putting meat on the bones-- the discussions and details of a new and better lease for the Whitecaps at BC Place Stadium for 4-5 years- the Premier has already stated to the Whitecaps- BRING US YOUR IDEAS of a new and better lease - and MLS and present and new owners will have to agree to the meat (PavCo are directed by the BC Government) and then discussing what comes after 2030- stay at the Stadium or plan for their own stadium at Hastings Park North (and that would include a Skytrain connection from DT to the North Shore with a stop at Hastings Park North; and a future Skytrain link from Brentwood Mall and Metrotown Skytrains)- and that is why the First Nations are at the meeting
Ummm.... the stadium is run by the Provincial Crown Corporation. PavCo is a for profit business. These aren't subsidies per se. PavCo is in place so that the Province DOESN'T have to use public funds to operate and upkeep these venues. While, yes, PavCo reports to the BC Gov't, the Gov't allows them to run this corporation as a for profit business to bring in money to fund these venues, as well as bring in money for other projects and services that serve the public's best interests. The question is whether or not being the home of professional teams serves the public's interests. The BC Lions have resorted to holding first kickoff concerts to bring in more revenue once a season to offset the lack of money they receive from playing at BC Place. Yes, the Lions and Whitecaps get a preferential rent deal, however, they both forgo a substantial amount of gameday revenue. Revenue that would otherwise not be there were it not for the Lions and Whitecaps using the facility. There are only so many concerts that you can hold that will make up for that lost revenue. Taylor Swift and Bruno Mars aren't playing BC Place 4 nights every year. Do you know what looks worse than giving the Lions and Caps a bigger slice of the revenue pie (that they help generate)? Losing the revenue all together because one or both no longer plays in the building. Giving both teams greater incentives will help them bring in more fans per game, which can increase the amount of money coming in for all parties. Are tickets for BC Place events taxed? Why not have a 3% tax added to ticket sales that goes directly to PavCo for Lions and Whitecaps games in exchange for more revenue going to each team? That way, more tickets sold = more revenue for all parties.....
PavCo isn’t a private for‑profit landlord, it’s a provincial Crown corporation with a mandate to protect public revenue not redistribute it to private teams. Calling revenue‑sharing “not a subsidy” doesn’t make it true. The Whitecaps have ~20 dates out of 365. BC Place has repeatedly displaced them for higher‑value events, which shows they’re not irreplaceable. PavCo can fill those dates easily :concerts and trade shows often generate more revenue per night than MLS games. The province isn't without leverage either since those facts aren't lost to them A ticket tax to subsidize private clubs is politically impossible in BC when that money could go to public services. Yes the Whitecaps are important to the cultural landscape of Metro Vancouver just like the Expos and Nordiques were in Quebec but there are limits to where a government will go to save a pro club. US leagues have a tendency to overestimate their importance in Canada over general government priorities - which tends to annoy local politicians, in this case - the BC government.
MLS doesn't "require" a US$500M valuation. That valuation is an estimate from Forbes and Sportico based on actual shares traded across the league. Getting the Whitecaps for less than $500M would give an ownership group a significant discount on the next probable expansion fee and the cost of setting up a new club from scratch. Nash and co could sell their shares for $5 if they wanted.
Politicians aren’t always 100% honest. Unconditionally believing politicians when they say what you want them to say is the sign of an argumentative mind, not a seeking mind.
I’m not “believing politicians.” I’m recognizing institutional risk. Governments act cautiously because they’ve already lived through situations like the Expos : give concessions, start planning, and then watch a new owner walk away with public funds being wasted. No, they have no reasons to just have "blind faith" in Garber Add: --> This won't help to convince Eby to be more accommodating : According to this sport journalist in Quebec, clubs are being told to expect relocation. He's not the only one who has said the same...to be continued Two sources are telling me that the @MLS teams have been told to expect a relocation of the @WhitecapsFC. Unless there's a major turning point in this Caps saga, the team will be in Vegas next year. Extremely sad situation. Deux sources me parlent du fait que les équipes de la @MLS se sont fait dire de s'attendre à un déménagement des @WhitecapsFC . À moins d'un tournant majeur dans cette saga des Caps, l'équipe sera à Vegas l'an prochain. Situation extrêmement triste. https://t.co/VpPChaWgyL— Jeremy Filosa 🎙 (@JeremyFilosa) May 13, 2026