OaklandRaider Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 As a raider fan from Oakland....I do hope they rebrand and also fail in la. Serves them right imo. I'm with the fans in San Diego on this one. They don't deserve to be treated the way they been by ownership. Mark Davis and the sapnos family both can't afford California and shouldn't even have teams tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
29texan Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 On 12/26/2016 at 8:47 AM, BringBackTheVet said: Just glancing at a map, it's got to be around 200 miles between Dallas and Austin, which is what I'd assume to be the closest medium-to-large city. If it clarifies, by "Dallas" I mean the metro area, including FtW, Irving, etc. Off topic- Texas cities are... different. They're "big", but less dense than even what a lot of people consider suburbs. It seems like you could practically live in Dallas but not really live in Dallas. *Dallas-Ft. Worth... "DFW"... Again, not trying to start another thing with this and go off topic, but Ft. Worth is a major, independent city that just so happens to be 30 miles away from another major, independent city... not another dime-a-dozen suburb of Dallas (as we have our own, as well). Please don't put our city in the same category as Irving or Arlington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 5 hours ago, OaklandRaider said: As a raider fan from Oakland....I do hope they rebrand and also fail in la. Serves them right imo. I'm with the fans in San Diego on this one. They don't deserve to be treated the way they been by ownership. Mark Davis and the sapnos family both can't afford California and shouldn't even have teams tbh So true.The Raiders have had a great season and a chance to capture the bay area with the Niners down this year but does Mark Davis see this.No.If for some unforeseen reason the Chargers decide to bail on the LA move(which they should)and the choice of moving to LA moves to the Raiders Mark Davis would move to LA faster than I can type this.Whoever moves to LA is going to probably have to deal with 2 years of playing in a bad stadium.Makes Qualcomm stadium and Oakland coliseum look pretty good at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wings Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 The Raiders back in LA would instantly be more popular than the Rams and Big Stan doesn't want that especially in his own stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 18 minutes ago, Wings said: The Raiders back in LA would instantly be more popular than the Rams and Big Stan doesn't want that especially in his own stadium. True.But if for some unknown reason the Chargers bail on LA as Big Stan do you #1 want LA All to yourself with All that stadium debt or #2 a chance to reduce your cost with a second popular team.Might push him to field a winning team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 7 hours ago, Pauly said: True.But if for some unknown reason the Chargers bail on LA as Big Stan do you #1 want LA All to yourself with All that stadium debt or #2 a chance to reduce your cost with a second popular team.Might push him to field a winning team. The stadium is 1/2 funded by LA, they'll be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 1 hour ago, dont care said: The stadium is 1/2 funded by LA, they'll be fine. The stadium is half funded by Stan Kroenke. The other half will cost Spanos more than it would to build in San Diego. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 3 minutes ago, Gothamite said: The stadium is half funded by Stan Kroenke. The other half will cost Spanos more than it would to build in San Diego. If I understand things correctly, if San Diego does move they would be a tenant essentially paying rent to use the stadium like the jets did in the giants owned meadowlands stadium Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 2 hours ago, dont care said: If I understand things correctly, if San Diego does move they would be a tenant essentially paying rent to use the stadium like the jets did in the giants owned meadowlands stadium They had that option, but the NFL also negotiated an option for either Spanos or Davis to become co-owners. Kronke hasn't been able to sell PSLs or advertising at the new stadium because he doesn't yet know if he has partners. It it would be profoundly stupid for either the Raiders or Chargers to move to Inglewood as tenants. Sure, it'd be cheaper, but they'd be leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table over the next few decades. Better to beg, borrow, leverage or steal enough cash for an equity stake. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Just now, Gothamite said: They had that option, but the NFL also negotiated an option for either Spanos or Davis to become co-owners. Kronke hasn't been able to sell PSLs or advertising at the new stadium because he doesn't yet know if he has partners. Spanos has already made it clear he'd be the tenant, not the partner. He doesn't have the money to both move and partner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 4 hours ago, dont care said: The stadium is 1/2 funded by LA, they'll be fine. Actually not. The stadium is not being funded by LA at all. It's an entirely private stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 2 minutes ago, bosrs1 said: Spanos has already made it clear he'd be the tenant, not the partner. He doesn't have the money to both move and partner. Spanos would have to find the money. Borrow the money. Sell everything else he owns to get the money. Because he will start seeing a return on that money instantly as Kroenke sells PSLs and advertising and everything else. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Gothamite said: Spanos would have to find the money. Borrow the money. Sell everything else he owns to get the money. Because he will start seeing a return on that money instantly as Kroenke sells PSLs and advertising and everything else. He's going to start seeing a return just on being a tenant, without having to take on the added risk of being a partner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 If they jointly own the stadium will there be 2 PSL's,one for each team or 1 PSL covering both.That's a mighty expensive PSL if that's the case.Don't know if the LA market would embrace that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 12 minutes ago, Pauly said: If they jointly own the stadium will there be 2 PSL's,one for each team or 1 PSL covering both.That's a mighty expensive PSL if that's the case.Don't know if the LA market would embrace that. They're not going to jointly own it. The Chargers applied for and were granted a tenant/lease option by the NFL. They're going to be a tenant of the Rams, there is no partnership or joint ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Okay,what about the PSL's? Would there be one for each team or if the Chargers are only a tenant does Big Stan corner the PSL's all to himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 19 minutes ago, Pauly said: Okay,what about the PSL's? Would there be one for each team or if the Chargers are only a tenant does Big Stan corner the PSL's all to himself? There will be one PSL for each team - PSLs are surcharges on season tickets. Chargers will operate their own ticket operations, I assume. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Why are y'all talking about pumpkin spice lattes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk36 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 If the Chargers do move and do change their look, I wouldn't be surprised to see them think they're being "cool" and go way overboard, beyond the Bucs kind of thing. Basically their way of trying to make a splash and getting attention and, in turn, failing miserably. Design Hovie Studios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Pauly said: Okay,what about the PSL's? Would there be one for each team or if the Chargers are only a tenant does Big Stan corner the PSL's all to himself? The set up would be something along the lines of what was agreed to last January. Quote The Rams and Chargers would combine revenue from non-football events at the stadium, naming rights, personal seat licenses and similar rarely sold items. Each team would receive about 18.75% of the total; the rest would go toward financing the stadium construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.