Review: NY2: What do we really know after... years?

So we have a few rumors, a possible stadium plan, on-again/off-again suitors, and a few names being trademarked, but what do we really know and what will we know and when will we know it?

First off, the trademarks like NYC FC. It doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things. From what I've read, this isn't the first time that MLS has taken out that particular trademark. All it is is an intent to use. It clears the trademark from being used by any other entity for three years.

We won't know anything about a potential name until the ownership is awarded and we won't have any ownership groups being awarded until we have official declarations of intent much like we've had in other expansion years and that won't happen until MLS finalizes a stadium deal. It is nice to get a list of possibilities, just don't hold your breath on it happening before the stadium deal is done. Once that happens, we'll finally be able to separate the rumors and pretenders from the real contenders in this game. Who knows if Man City won't finally declare interest once a stadium deal is determined but won't now for fear that a Middle-Eastern investor could become a lightening-rod for opposition to the Queens deal.

And that brings us to ownership groups. Could MLS' cause in Queens (or Brooklyn) by announcing who these parties are? Perhaps a popular businessman on the lines of a George Steinbrenner might. People love the Yankees and have nothing bad to say about how the Steinbrenner family has run that franchise. But that's not happening. Not even close. What we do have is whiffs of the Wilpons, Man City, the Cosmos/Sela/Obrien triumvirate, and Chuck Blazer's group. Which of those fellas would add anything to the discussion by inserting themselves into the conversation now? It's arguable that any one of them might do as much to distract from the stadium negotiations as anything that they might add. Not to mention the fact that MLS might actually be selling themselves short by selling now. Just knowing that a stadium deal is finalized might draw out more parties to the process and provide grist for the argument that MLS#20 is truly worth up to, and perhaps exceeding, 100 million dollars. You can't really determine what a person might pay until they're forced to pay it. Also it enables potential parties to actually know what they're dealing with in terms of what it will cost once the stadium is figured into the equation. So the likelihood of anyone stepping up until the stadium deal is finalized is slim.

So we get back to the most important part of this equation, the stadium. Everything hinges on this. Where it will be, and how much it will cost. A year from now the costs could increase by a significant margin. Pier 40 has been eliminated and was an idea that never seemed to be realistic. Now we have Queens, as our primary with Brooklyn rumors that may be no more serious than any other we've had. Is MLS pushing this rumor to speed the negotiations in Queens? Is there any coming back from the brink if Queens fails? Can MLS' NY2 plans truly regroup from a loss here? MLS has already spent as much money lobbying this as is spent by teams in bigger sports in this country.

Now we remember that DC United was able to regain their footing when Poplar Point fell through, only to then fail again in Prince Georges, Md. After that, it seemed that the air had finally been let out of the balloon. What's good is that MLS didn't try to push Pier 40 and chose their final target wisely. That's not to say that DC didn't. Ppl from DC can chime in on what seems the more difficult city to develop in. What's clear is that DC didn't spend what MLS is spending in NY. That's not applying blame, that's just stating a fact. So that means that MLS may be putting all of their eggs in this particular basket, as opposed to DC who was able to reload after Poplar Point.

And what about the supposed opposition from the Wilpons? DG still seems to mention talks with this group even though it seems unlikely that they will be a majority owner at any rate. Could they be funding the NIMBY opposition groups in Queens? It wouldn't be the first time that a group would use other interest groups to wage war against a rival. The striking Station Casinos employees unions struck a blow against the UFC with their allies in NY's union community...or so the Fertitta Brothers would have us believe.

The Wilpons interests in this, however, are somewhat tied to their relationship with MLS. They don't really want a rival for summer soccer friendlies in Queens. Many of those contracts come through SUM, so it wouldn't make sense to totally blow up their relationship with MLS. But outside of those interests, is there really any other reason that the Mets would really care about MLS becoming their neighbors? They have their own problems. What seems to have hurt MLS more is the fact that their announcement of intent seems to have woken up everyone else who wanted to build in that area as well, as though attempting to build after MLS got their way would lower their own ability due to the ever increasing voice of the NIMBY's vis-a-vis the ever increasing scarcity of parklands. Might as well jump in now and take the hit together than on their own later.

So just wanted to kinda throw that stream of consciousness at you... assuming anyone's still interested in reading anything concerning NY2 at the moment.

E2A: This isn't really about speculation so much as it is about what significant improvements could be made to the process, or who's actions might make it all more or less likely to succeed. Is there anything that MLS is doing wrong? What are they doing right? And when I ask that, pretend that New England, Chivas, and DC don't need MLS' investment. This is just about how MLS is handling their ambitions in NY2, so comparing what MLS is doing to in NY to what could have been done in those cities is valid so long as this doesn't get dragged down by the debate concerning priorities.

 

I did leave out the RB equation in all of this...

I doubt it.

The most I could see is a brand-merger. They will not leave the Red Bull name completely off of any of their properties. The point is that they want RB to be seen as a lifestyle brand, I believe, not necessarily just to own teams. Without visibility, what's the point?

What's more likely is that the Cosmos either sell to, or merge with a potential winning bid. A NY2 winning big would have more need of the brand name than RB would feel a need for.

Possible, but not likely since MLS also wants 100 mil and a stadium built. RB spent around 50 mil and another 250 mil to get into RB Arena. They're not getting recouped for all of that, even if they sell RB Arena to NY2. I'm not certain that the BoG would allow it anyway.

Being a member of the BoG, I'm not certain that that wouldn't be against the bylaws if they were found to be engaged in such activity. It's even more of a risk for them than the Wilpons. Any opposition would have to be exercised from within MLS.

Maybe ten years from now when they're ready to lay RB Arena to rest. That is, if Marty Markowitz is even still alive or in office by that time.