throwuascenario Posted December 15, 2023 Share Posted December 15, 2023 3 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: You play the season to determine a champion. In order to do that, every single game does not need a winner. This is truest of all in the sport with the most games in its season. Even though I no longer have time to follow soccer, as I did for about fifteen years, the one piece of wisdom that I retain from that experience is an understanding of the validity of a draw. Overtime should be strictly for playoffs in all sports. I guess we'll just have to disagree to agree. Ties are fine for 10U youth soccer, but when people buy tickets to see who wins, someone should win. Buying a ticket to a game that ends in a tie is like buying a car with no key. It has all the parts it needs to work, but doesn't deliver on its central promise. I go completely the opposite direction, I'd rather see a coin flip determine a winner than a tie. 1 2 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 I still don't think anyone can dethrone the Chargers for the dumbest and most ill-advised relocation in sports history, but dammit, Fisher and Manfred sure are trying. 2 Quote POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 I'm still not 100% sure this move ends up happening. 2 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeypower Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 A Twitter thread continued in the quote underneath Quote When a lender looks at providing financing for a project they look at MANY variables, but the one that is often the most important is CASH FLOW. Lenders don't want your assets (ie your home, business, car, etc)- they want to get paid back w/ interest. Cash flow is the money that the business generates that is NOT being used for operating expenses or to service other debt (highly oversimplified). A business that is printing cash will have more financing opportunities and favorable terms than a business showing losses. Fisher is claiming that the A's lost $40m in 2023. While that figure itself is HIGHLY questionable, if he is accounting in such a way to minimize profits and avoid taxes THOSE are the numbers a lender is going to use to calculate cash flow. Doesn't look good to start. A lender may overlook negative cash flow if the borrower has significant cash on hand (excluding investments, businesses, or art). Fisher had to sell a bunch of GAP stock to satisfy his $45m debt on the coliseum; he likely doesn't have a lot of cash on hand. When lenders are taking on more risk they offer less favorable terms to the borrower. Probably why he is looking at Goldman Sachs rather than a conventional bank. Sachs is an investment bank - they are in the business of taking on greater risk for higher reward. But even investment banks have their limits and are going to wonder HOW they are going to get repaid by someone who has no cash and a business that is "losing money". I can guarantee Fisher needs financial support for even Goldman Sachs to consider his loan request The Fed Funds rate (rate at which banks can borrow from the fed) is approx. 5.5% as a result home mortgage rates are around 7.5% - a high risk loan might be around 10%. For Fisher to finance a $1.5b stadium (minus $380m NV$) he'd need to borrow $1.12b - a big ask. A $1.12b loan amortized over 30 years would look as follows: @ 5.5%: $6.4m/month ($1.2b total interest) @ 10%: $9.8m/month ($2.4b total interest) If the A's are losing $40m a year and Fisher has no cash, how is he going to service another $1.12b in debt? Obvious answer (as @VitalVegas has alluded to) is to take on other investors and sell equity in the team. If he has an injection of say $500m in cash AND another owner that has sufficient cash flow the loan request is looking far more palatable - one issue... No investor is going to invest based on the FUTURE value of the business - they will only look at the CURRENT value - meaning the value of a team that is "losing money" each year playing in a decrepit stadium with fanbase that is actively boycotting. Uh oh. Also Fisher's desperation means more leverage for a potential investor. Forbes values the A's at $1.2b - to get $500m at that valuation he'd be giving up 42% of the team. Like Shark Tank he's likely asking for $500m for 25% but at a $2b valuation the sharks won't bite. So as @VitalVegas (a proven accurate source) has stated since the start - he doesn't have financing. Bally's likely can't bail him out with their own financial issues. He needs outside money, wont give up enough equity; and here we are. No renderings and no plan. With his CBA deadline of 1/15 to get a "Stadium Deal" in place to continue to collect MLB profit sharing he has 2 weeks to get a lot done. If he doesn't his cash flow is EVEN UGLIER and his options will become even more limited. This is NOT a slam dunk by any means. The part I don't think I agree with is the part about investors not going to invest based on the future value of the business. People do that all the time. Also, I don't know if the Forbes values are taken into consideration or how actual they are because IIRC, some of the sales related to this most recent Ottawa Senators purchase didn't match the Forbes value. But Fisher clearly has money issues right now. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 27 minutes ago, the admiral said: I'm still not 100% sure this move ends up happening. At this point it's pretty much certain that A move is going to happen but the uncertainty is who ultimately accomplishes it and where the team ultimately goes to. Oakland just cannot support major professional sports anymore and lacks the political will and capital to get anything done. So, either Fisher gets the financing and completes the move or he ends up selling to a group in another market because any more delays with the septic tank they currently play in aren't going to be tolerated by Manfred and the rest of the league ownership when it's putting the brakes on sweet sweet expansion revenue. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dilbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 The new Pioneer League Oakland B's wanted to play a game in June at the Coliseum. The Oakland A's said no Quote Signature intentionally left blank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk-Off Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 As far as I know, January 15, 2024 -- the supposed deadline for the A's to have a firm deal on a new ballpark in order to remain a revenue sharing recipient, according to the current collective bargaining agreement between Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association -- came and went with neither the commissioner's office nor the union ruling one way or another on whether the A's had met that criterion. Meanwhile ... Los Angeles Times: Who's not funding push for Nevada vote on A's stadium funds? Nevadans 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 6 hours ago, Walk-Off said: As far as I know, January 15, 2024 -- the supposed deadline for the A's to have a firm deal on a new ballpark in order to remain a revenue sharing recipient, according to the current collective bargaining agreement between Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association -- came and went with neither the commissioner's office nor the union ruling one way or another on whether the A's had met that criterion. Meanwhile ... Los Angeles Times: Who's not funding push for Nevada vote on A's stadium funds? Nevadans Didn't see this, but it was already reported that they will continue to do so. https://www.si.com/mlb/athletics/relocation/as-will-continue-to-receive-revenue-sharing Also, Sacramento seems to now be in play as a potential temporary home. https://www.si.com/mlb/athletics/relocation/oakland-as-interim-home-before-landing-in-las-vegas Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Year in Sacramento. Foolproof plan. Oracle Guy, where are you? 2 Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 11 minutes ago, The_Admiral said: Year in Sacramento. Foolproof plan. Oracle Guy, where are you? I think its three years because the rumored Las Vegas Ballpark won't open until 2028.....if it ever happens. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Nobody there will care about or support the A's, but at least it provides people an opportunity to see star players on visiting teams, kinda like when some superstar is rehabbing in AA. If I was in Sacramento, besides working on a plan to not be in Sacramento, I'd certainly buy tickets to see Ohtani and company. 1 Quote "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowler2 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 The A' playing their home games in the same stadium that houses the Giants AAA team. Fun stuff. I know the River Cats used to be the A's affiliate but still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I just don't understand why they wouldn't, if they were faced with an AAA stadium hosting the team, get them into Las Vegas Ballpark, deal with the small crowd, but start growing the fanbase asap. Move the Aviators for a few years if needed to avoid competing directly for dates or ticket sales. You'd at least have the fans of the city have the team branded Las Vegas playing in, proverbially, Las Vegas, and though the threshold to get in to see a game would be quite high with ticket prices, at least they'd be there. In Sacramento, or three years with triple-digit fan support in Oakland is not the way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 4 hours ago, BBTV said: Nobody there will care about or support the A's, but at least it provides people an opportunity to see star players on visiting teams, kinda like when some superstar is rehabbing in AA. If I was in Sacramento, besides working on a plan to not be in Sacramento, I'd certainly buy tickets to see Ohtani and company. Ehh. As long as I’ve been here I’ve wanted to see the Sacramento A’s become a reality. But not this way. That would be a real twist of the knife for my sports soul after all the I went through with that doomed Republic MLS bid. I’m not really that interested in going to MLB games anymore, but I think I’d still rather go the extra 100 miles west to see the Giants. Also, housing that clown show for 3+ seasons is basically a guarantee that the RiverCats are toast once this is all said and done. Absolutely not worth it in any way. 4 Quote On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Not A's or Rays related, but another MLB team is looking at replacing their old one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk-Off Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Apparently, the White Sox have considered building a ballpark in Chicago's South Loop area at least twice before (and under at least two different ownerships). Both links below are from SB Nation's South Side Sox blog. South Loop Sox? (November 9, 2012) South Loop Sox ... again (January 18, 2024) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 25 minutes ago, Walk-Off said: Apparently, the White Sox have considered building a ballpark in Chicago's South Loop area at least twice before (and under at least two different ownerships). Both links below are from SB Nation's South Side Sox blog. South Loop Sox? (November 9, 2012) South Loop Sox ... again (January 18, 2024) It's better than a move to the Suburbs or Nashville. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Meanwhile, in Kansas City.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 A Chicago stadium with full skyline view would be freakin epic. It's one of only two "iconic" skylines in the US (or at least one of two that has legitimately iconic buildings), and it's a shame that only the Bears stadium lines up for a view of it (though football stadiums by nature are too high all around to give that view. I'm not sure if this proposed location is still considered "south side", as it looks pretty further north (though article I read on WGN says it's not far), but regardless of where a new park goes, it has a chance to be incredible. Quote "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 It's not the south side the same way that Bridgeport is, no, but would still be at 1200S (one mile south of the baseline, Madison Street) rather than 3500S (3.5 miles south: the first few miles go 12, 22, 31, 39 blocks for Reasons). "The South Loop" seems to be very elastic, but to the extent that it exists, all the highrises around Roosevelt would have to be considered the South Loop. This could have been a huge game-changer for the Sox pre-pandemic when there were more people working in the Loop. A park at Roosevelt/Clark becomes a very attractive place for business outings and such. I hope it doesn't happen. It's a better fit for the Bears, in my opinion, and Comiskey is practically new anyway. Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.