bosrs1 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 According to Ken Rosenthal from Fox Sports this morning, the outgoing owner of the San Diego Padres, John Moores, had whittled the suitors for the Southern California franchise to two groups and planned to have one chosen before the All-Star break. The O'Malley group headlined by long time Dodgers owner Peter O'Malley. The second being a group anchored by Gary Jabara, the CEO of a company called Mobilite. However according to sources the local NBC San Diego affiliate consulted the decision has already been made. The team is being offered to the O'Malley family for approximately $600 million dollars plus they'll have to pay another approximately $200 million to purchase the Padres equity stake in their brand new TV network Fox Sports San Diego. The O'Malley's are the next owners of the San Diego Padres pending negotiation of the specific price ($800 mil is the ballpark figure, proof of having the funds to complete the $800 million combined team/TV purchase and pending MLB's approval. The former seems likely since the same ownership group was in for the Dodgers purchase at the opening price of $1.5 billion and only dropped out when it started climbing up to it's eventual astronomical $2.1 billion final sale price. The second approval seems even more likely given the O'Malley family's half century of MLB ownership and close ties to many who remain in the lodge today. However in the unlikely event that something does come up, Moores is treating Gary Jabara as a fallback plan.Barring anything out of the blue however, the O'Malley family are back from their 14 year hiatus and will be back in the lodge as early as August. http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Sources-Padres-Choose-OMalley-Group-160100255.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Considering the market, the value of an almost brand new ball park, and the price other clubs have been sold for/valued at, $800 million seems like a steal. 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...
bosrs1 Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 Considering the market, the value of an almost brand new ball park, and the price other clubs have been sold for/valued at, $800 million seems like a steal.Well considering they only be paying around $600 mil for the team itself it's even more of a steal. Though you do have to take into account that the Padres only own 30% of PETCO Park and that reverts to the city in 22 years unless they negotiate for it to do otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Ahh, that makes a bit more sense then. I didn't know that. Still not a bad bargain for a pro sports franchise in one of the most sought after real estate markets in the country. 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...
NJTank Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Wont it be a pisser if they move to Brooklyn? www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 Wont it be a pisser if they move to Brooklyn? Actually I'd be more worried they'd move the team to LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Wont it be a pisser if they move to Brooklyn?Yeah it really would be a pisser if they moved from a 10 year old park to the parking lot outside of the Barclays Center. 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...
rebelx Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 24, 2012 Author Share Posted June 24, 2012 Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself.Well to be fair he tried to own the Dodgers again but their price got obscene. So he went with the next team available which just happened to be the next closest NL team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelx Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself.Well to be fair he tried to own the Dodgers again but their price got obscene. So he went with the next team available which just happened to be the next closest NL team.Yeah, odd coincidence, that.In general, I can deal with him owning the Padres, I think. It'll just be a bit strange to see him there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 24, 2012 Author Share Posted June 24, 2012 Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself.Well to be fair he tried to own the Dodgers again but their price got obscene. So he went with the next team available which just happened to be the next closest NL team.Yeah, odd coincidence, that.In general, I can deal with him owning the Padres, I think. It'll just be a bit strange to see him there.Sounds like it's really going to be his kids doing most of the "running" of the Padres. I mean O'Malley is 74 years old so it's not like he's going to be a whirlwind storming through the front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marlinfan Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Considering the market, the value of an almost brand new ball park, and the price other clubs have been sold for/valued at, $800 million seems like a steal.Well considering they only be paying around $600 mil for the team itself it's even more of a steal. Though you do have to take into account that the Padres only own 30% of PETCO Park and that reverts to the city in 22 years unless they negotiate for it to do otherwise.Most teams don't own their ballparks to avoid property taxes. It's seen as a positive for the team. 1997 | 2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself.Well to be fair he tried to own the Dodgers again but their price got obscene. So he went with the next team available which just happened to be the next closest NL team.Yeah, odd coincidence, that.In general, I can deal with him owning the Padres, I think. It'll just be a bit strange to see him there.Sounds like it's really going to be his kids doing most of the "running" of the Padres. I mean O'Malley is 74 years old so it's not like he's going to be a whirlwind storming through the front office.Plus they'll have Lefty to serve as the Friars' Magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 Considering the market, the value of an almost brand new ball park, and the price other clubs have been sold for/valued at, $800 million seems like a steal.Well considering they only be paying around $600 mil for the team itself it's even more of a steal. Though you do have to take into account that the Padres only own 30% of PETCO Park and that reverts to the city in 22 years unless they negotiate for it to do otherwise.Most teams don't own their ballparks to avoid property taxes. It's seen as a positive for the team.Also most teams don't own their ballparks because most teams didn't pay for their ballparks.Peter O'Malley owning one of the Dodgers' divisional rivals? Surreal...If the Giants had been for sale, I would hope that he wouldn't have tried to purchase them; he would've been labeled a traitor by all who bleed blue, including myself.Well to be fair he tried to own the Dodgers again but their price got obscene. So he went with the next team available which just happened to be the next closest NL team.Yeah, odd coincidence, that.In general, I can deal with him owning the Padres, I think. It'll just be a bit strange to see him there.Sounds like it's really going to be his kids doing most of the "running" of the Padres. I mean O'Malley is 74 years old so it's not like he's going to be a whirlwind storming through the front office.Plus they'll have Lefty to serve as the Friars' Magic.And Tony Gwynn. They're reportedly going to get him in on the group in some advisory way just as the Tull group was going to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.