Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[BBTV]

42 minutes ago, McCall said:

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, even if less likely, that they could come to a mutual agreement with Oakland to end the lease after this season and they begin playing at Las Vegas Ballpark next year. Although I think they'd at least want a concrete stadium plan in the works before they move.

Yeah I think that’s extremely unlikely, since it’s still not a done deal and there’s still the matter of securing the $500M in public money they’re asking for. That could still take a few months. 
 

Besides that, while I’m assuming that they’ve been preparing for this and have some idea of the mechanics involved, I can’t imagine that securing office space, hiring new staff (for the non-baseball-ops positions that people may not want to move for), and all the other logistical challenges could be worked out in that time. 
 

they could possibly just move their equipment and on-field staff while continuing to operate all the business stuff from Oakland for another year. It’s probably not as important for that stuff to be based locally as it used to be. 

[McCall]

27 minutes ago, BBTV said:

Yeah I think that’s extremely unlikely, since it’s still not a done deal and there’s still the matter of securing the $500M in public money they’re asking for. That could still take a few months. 
 

Besides that, while I’m assuming that they’ve been preparing for this and have some idea of the mechanics involved, I can’t imagine that securing office space, hiring new staff (for the non-baseball-ops positions that people may not want to move for), and all the other logistical challenges could be worked out in that time. 
 

they could possibly just move their equipment and on-field staff while continuing to operate all the business stuff from Oakland for another year. It’s probably not as important for that stuff to be based locally as it used to be. 

Yeah I think 2025 is the earliest we would see them playing in Las Vegas. It may really come down to what they and Oakland can agree to going forward or if one side wants to end the "relationship" as soon as possible. Either side, really.

[FiddySicks]

2 hours ago, McCall said:

Again... the Aviators will NOT be displaced.

Which is crazy considering Fresno has a AAA quality park and a  Single A level team. 

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

9 hours ago, LMU said:

RACK HIM!

 

I'll never understand why "RACK HIM" didn't make it as a popular Internet meme.

 

Jim Rome literally invented take culture, and was doing poscast-style broadcasting before there were podcasts, yet he has zero online presence.  Makes no sense.

 

I remember working for $8.50/hour in a summer job, sitting in my car eating tuna fish on lunch, listening to Jim Rome. Great days. Afternoons were for Don & Mike (everybody loves Don and Mike).

 

On the topic, I don't think it's any great reach to say Vegas has been a huge success as a sports market. That they managed to build two huge, modern sports facilities right off the Strip is incredible.

[LMU]

Reggie weighing in. And, he’s not wrong.

 

 

Quote

“You’re going to lose the team,” Jackson told Sportico’s Barry M. Bloom. “The city, I thought, really needed to do something. Save the A’s. You lost the Warriors. You lost the Raiders. What the hell’s wrong with you? You can’t see that coming? The fans don’t deserve that. I blame the people running the deal. You’ve got to keep the team for the benefit of the city. They lost all three of them.”

Quote

“I think the Fishers did their best trying to get something done,” Jackson said. “At the same time, no matter how wealthy you are, you can’t continue to lose money every year. So, you have to go whether you want to stay or not. I always thought they bought the team to try to keep it there.”

 

[BBTV]

1 minute ago, LMU said:

At the same time, no matter how wealthy you are, you can’t continue to lose money every year.

 

I doubt Reggie has facts that support this claim.

[LMU]

And, in more awkward development news:

 

[crashcarson15]

The :censored:ty thing about the A's leaving Oakland is that the market really hasn't had the chance to show itself over the last 30 years given the stadium situation, but Oakland is also one of the like, 15 markets in MLB that is perfectly expendable for any number of other places if the stadium situation is bad. This is probably true of every pro sports league (well, except the NFL, where like, every team is expendable), but it's exacerbated in baseball because (a) 81 home dates and (b) baseball stadiums don't lend themselves to other uses the way NBA and NHL arenas do.

 

I don't know that Las Vegas will necessarily work for MLB, but I think it'll probably be as fine as any other place would be and will be a neat park to visit.

[GDAWG]

The A's want $500 million from Nevada by June 5th.

 

A’s Want $500M from Nevada by June 5 (frontofficesports.com)

 

Quote

The Oakland A’s took major steps to move to Las Vegas this week — but still have to strike a deal with state and local governments for public funding. 

The team is planning a $1.5 billion stadium and entertainment complex west of the Las Vegas Strip that would seat 35,000 and boast a retractable roof.

A’s leadership is seeking $500 million in public financing through bonds issued by Clark County, to be repaid through stadium-related taxes and the surrounding development of the 49 acres purchased by the team.

Nevada hasn’t introduced formal legislation around this issue, and its current legislative session ends on June 5, though negotiations could be extended. The A’s must come to an agreement on a new stadium by January 2024 to remain recipients of MLB’s revenue sharing.

The team could withdraw from their land-purchase agreement if no deal is reached, according to the Nevada Independent.

 

[BBTV]

Seems like an aggressive deadline, though I can't imagine the debate hasn't already started since this wasn't exactly an out-of-the-blue move.

[who do you think]

Didn't a prior article say the A's were covering the costs of this stadium? Or have I lost my mind?

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

All blame here goes to A's ownership.  The Giants demonstrated that a committed ownership that is willing to pay the majority of the costs for a new park can turn a struggling Bay Area team into an overwhelming success.  Even those who (correctly) criticise public expenditures for sports teams, such as Neil DeMause, acknowledge that the Giants, with their minimal public involvement, did it the right way.

[BBTV]

1 hour ago, who do you think said:

Didn't a prior article say the A's were covering the costs of this stadium? Or have I lost my mind?

 

Looks like it's 2/3.  Between stadium and infrastructure, it's estimated at 1.5B.  A's want to put up $1B, and then want $500M from LV.  I think I read that the A's would absorb overruns, which is pretty significant.

[GDAWG]

Meanwhile in Tampa.....

 

 

[FiddySicks]

Lol OF :censored:ing COURSE the A’s are already demanding half a billion dollars from the state of Nevada now That’s been the grift the entire time! Take public money from whatever idiot municipality will give it to you and keep all the profits. And Nevada, for as flat broke as they are, are ABSOLUTELY stupid enough to just give it to them. It’s infuriating but what can you do about a city/leaders who are just dying to be the mark? Just absolutely desperate to get played. I’ll never be able to wrap my head around that. 
 

Fisher and the A’s, after all of this nonsense, are going to walk away from this with exactly what they want. All of the benefits for themselves and all of the risks on the tax paying public. What a useless state I’m from. What a dumb country this is. 

[Sport]

16 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

Lol OF :censored:ing COURSE the A’s are already demanding half a billion dollars from the state of Nevada now That’s been the grift the entire time! Take public money from whatever idiot municipality will give it to you and keep all the profits. And Nevada, for as flat broke as they are, are ABSOLUTELY stupid enough to just give it to them. It’s infuriating but what can you do about a city/leaders who are just dying to be the mark? Just absolutely desperate to get played. I’ll never be able to wrap my head around that. 
 

Fisher and the A’s, after all of this nonsense, are going to walk away from this with exactly what they want. All of the benefits for themselves and all of the risks on the tax paying public. What a useless state I’m from. What a dumb country this is. 

 

It blows my mind that Vegas is growing at this rate when they won't have water in a decade. Nobody should be moving there, but especially not a baseball team. 

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Can anyone enlighten on me why we're talking about expansion?  I mean 20 years ago we were talking about contraction. 

[McCall]

13 minutes ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

Can anyone enlighten on me why we're talking about expansion?  I mean 20 years ago we were talking about contraction. 

20 years was a long time ago.

[MiK]

Yup. MLB revenue has skyrocketed with TV deals even as stadium attendance continues to decline. If there are sizable untapped TV markets to exploit, MLB is going to be interested.

[BBTV]

From a quality of play/players and competitive standpoint, I totally support contraction.  But since those discussions, pretty much every team (except for... the A's and Rays) has built a new stadium and has the ability to generate revenue... though they might not necessarily have ownership that's interested in spending money to be competitive and maximize the potential of the market.