Catch 22 in regards to selling the team | Page 2

area49 · 2010-10-07T16:44:05-07:00

I know I've been sort of pulling everyone's leg about how the Yorks should sell to Ed Roski, and it may have gotten on everyone's nerves. Sorry about that. However, in May 2010, Tim Kawakami raised a really good related point about what could happen if the Yorks are forced to sell. While reading this article, keep in mind that both Ed Roski AND the Wassermans (who are good friends with the Yorks) are planning on building 100% privately financed stadiums in the number 2 media market in the United States. Also keep in mind that, even though the 49ers have a lot of history and a huge fan base in the Bay Area, the Cleveland Browns and Houston Oilers also had huge fan bases and great histories in their respective hometowns. Finally, keep in mind that, even though the stadium has passed, several notable economists (like Roger Noll of Stanford, who specializes in the economics of stadiums) think that it's quite possible, if not probable, that the stadium deal will originally collapse. Santa Clara Plays Fair and Cedar Fair are attacking from both sides. After this season, it's highly unlikely that people will want to buy SBL's and it's highly unlikely that any companies or banks will want to lend money to us. Plus, it's just been revealed that the team is using taxpayer-funded Santa Clara police escorts for security, even though they promised not to during the campaign. Just look at the way the Yorks run this football team. You really think they can get a billion-dollar stadium built? Anyway, here 's the article: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The real threat: The Yorks might eventually have to sell the 49ers if they don’t get a new stadium Posted by Tim Kawakami on May 30th, 2010 at 10:56 am | Categorized as 49ers, NFL, Raiders * 11:32 a.m. update: I should add tardily that the Yorks could be forced to sell to a local buyer with greater wherewithal to build a new stadium in the Bay Area. Sort of the proto-Warriors/bye-bye Cohan model. I can anticipate most responses, all of them furious and directed largely at my obvious, inherent wickedness for daring to question the motivations of powerful people who have a lot of people on their payrolls… But I admit the one that always slightly surprises me is when fan-commenters/e-mailers go out of their way to praise franchise owners who have never won anything, and attack some of us for making sure these owners don’t get a free pass. I don’t include knee-jerk defense of Al Davis here, because he has won a lot of things–long ago, but he still has won; he’s a Hall of Famer. But I do include, for the purposes of this conversation: Chris Cohan (defended rabidly by a small percentage until lately) and Jed York. Just because somebody owns a team, are they owed abject, unearned loyalty, especially from the ticket-buying public or the independent media? No chance. It’s the opposite, in my view. These owners ought to be held accountable. They’re powerful and the most powerful must be held accountable by somebody or else let’s just make them Dictators and be done with it. If they earn respect, that’s good. Let them earn it. Then they get the praise and benefit of the doubt, and not until then. And what precisely has the York family done to earn your frantic, blood-curdling praise? I’m thinking… I’m thinking… To me, it’s a no-brainer. You don’t inherit respect, you earn it, particularly if you’re powerful. It’s just my nature, and I think it’s in the nature of any group of observers who has an interest in the team and isn’t a corporate partner of the team or isn’t directly employed by the team. So that’s a long way of making one more small point about York’s little hint about the passage of the Santa Clara stadium proposal, and how he sadly watched the Browns move from Ohio years ago and he doesn’t want that to happen here. Matt Maiocco asked about never mentioned LA in his questioning, but Jed never mentioned LA back. Still, the context is clear, though I know there was a lot of general backpedaling going on. By the way, I’ve since heard that this was not the only time Jed has offered that anecdote in the context of asking for Santa Clara approval. Why would this be part of Jed’s talking points? Because it’s the LA card. He doesn’t have to say it, he doesn’t have to threaten to move or demand anything. He just has to say, gee, it was sad when the Browns moved from Cleveland, wouldn’t want that to ever happen again, hint-hint-hint. I called it clumsy. People either agreed with me or disagreed with me. Lots of pro-Jedsters came out of the woodwork. And amid the backpedaling, it was made clear that the Yorks aren’t moving the team to LA, that the NFL would never allow a team with this tradition to move, and that they realize they’d be hated forever in the Bay if they did. However… -The Rams had a lot of tradition in Southern California, the Browns a lot of tradition in Cleveland (before getting the expansion team), the Colts had a lot of tradition in Baltimore and yes, the Raiders had a lot of tradition in Oakland before all of those teams moved (and one of them moved back). Roger Goodell is a very powerful commissioner, but he so was Pete Rozelle and so was Paul Tagliabue and all of those things happened. -I’m not saying the Yorks could move the 49ers. I’m saying that if they don’t get a stadium in Santa Clara, they could be in some financial distress. They’re not in this forever. If they are stuck at Candlestick, things could get dicey. That just has to be the truth here. So if they can’t get a new stadium in the Bay Area… Denise DeBartolo York might pull the plug at some point. She hates when her name comes up, but she’s the owner, and the team is being run by Jed at her behest. And if somebody from LA offers outlandish money for the team, and there’s a stadium down there, why wouldn’t Denise think about selling the 49ers? I’m actually doing a favor for Jed here, though I’m sure he doesn’t see it that way. Never does see it that way. There are larger consequences to a stadium vote, and to the 49ers getting a new stadium, at some point. It’s not a threat that the Yorks could move the 49ers to LA. It’s that they are not the strongest ownership group in the whole world (sorry!), and if they can’t get a stadium done soon, they could end up selling, and we don’t know who’d be making the next decision.

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:12 PM

#16

49erForLife420
Veteran
Posts: 456

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:
Too much to read Bottom Line: Niners will never move from the Bay Area.

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:13 PM

#17

DonnieDarko
Veteran
Posts: 67,074

THE YORKS WILL NEVER SELL!! DEAL WITH IT

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:13 PM

#18

area49
Member
Posts: 1,315

Originally posted by rapid4:
Let Yorks move. Then we get a new SF franchise, just like Baltimore, with an ownership group including Steve Young and Brent Jones which has already tried to buy the team (but Yorks won't sell) and who have the resources lined up to build a new stadium right away.

The Yorks have refused all overtures to sell out. They are the problem with the team (no GM, a HC with no HC experience, allergic to ties with the 49er greats of the 80;s and 90's) so let's get rid of them before they appoint a successor GM to TDON-McCloughan-No one and a successor HC to Erickson-NoWin-Sing.

They don't have a stadium, at least yet, because they were too cheap to build it with their own money 10 years ago when the total cost would have been far less than what they will end up paying now after milking the taxpayers and season ticketholders (or trying to, anyway).

Nope. The league won't award us a new franchise. We'll have to be able to build a new stadium, and I'm pretty sure Steve Young and Brent Jones will be too busy with something else by that time. Besides, the league won't want to disturb the 32-team, 8-division set up they have by adding a 33rd team.

Even if they do, it won't be the 49ers. It'll be a new team with a new name and new colors.

[ Edited by area49 on Oct 7, 2010 at 17:13:50 ]

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:17 PM

#19

Oscar
Hall of Fame
Posts: 10,240

Originally posted by boast:
Originally posted by Oscar:
Originally posted by ninerfan4life:
Too much to read Bottom Line: Niners will never move from the Bay Area.

This makes me sad.

but but but the Giants are about to play.

In THAT case - you're excused

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:18 PM

#20

SanDiego49er
Veteran
Posts: 52,492

Originally posted by area49:
Originally posted by rapid4:
Let Yorks move. Then we get a new SF franchise, just like Baltimore, with an ownership group including Steve Young and Brent Jones which has already tried to buy the team (but Yorks won't sell) and who have the resources lined up to build a new stadium right away.

The Yorks have refused all overtures to sell out. They are the problem with the team (no GM, a HC with no HC experience, allergic to ties with the 49er greats of the 80;s and 90's) so let's get rid of them before they appoint a successor GM to TDON-McCloughan-No one and a successor HC to Erickson-NoWin-Sing.

They don't have a stadium, at least yet, because they were too cheap to build it with their own money 10 years ago when the total cost would have been far less than what they will end up paying now after milking the taxpayers and season ticketholders (or trying to, anyway).

Nope. The league won't award us a new franchise. We'll have to be able to build a new stadium, and I'm pretty sure Steve Young and Brent Jones will be too busy with something else by that time. Besides, the league won't want to disturb the 32-team, 8-division set up they have by adding a 33rd team.

Even if they do, it won't be the 49ers. It'll be a new team with a new name and new colors.

And it will be a lot better than a York owned team so you will learn to like them.

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:19 PM

#21

Otter
Veteran
Posts: 22,936

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by area49:
Originally posted by rapid4:
Let Yorks move. Then we get a new SF franchise, just like Baltimore, with an ownership group including Steve Young and Brent Jones which has already tried to buy the team (but Yorks won't sell) and who have the resources lined up to build a new stadium right away.

The Yorks have refused all overtures to sell out. They are the problem with the team (no GM, a HC with no HC experience, allergic to ties with the 49er greats of the 80;s and 90's) so let's get rid of them before they appoint a successor GM to TDON-McCloughan-No one and a successor HC to Erickson-NoWin-Sing.

They don't have a stadium, at least yet, because they were too cheap to build it with their own money 10 years ago when the total cost would have been far less than what they will end up paying now after milking the taxpayers and season ticketholders (or trying to, anyway).

Nope. The league won't award us a new franchise. We'll have to be able to build a new stadium, and I'm pretty sure Steve Young and Brent Jones will be too busy with something else by that time. Besides, the league won't want to disturb the 32-team, 8-division set up they have by adding a 33rd team.

Even if they do, it won't be the 49ers. It'll be a new team with a new name and new colors.

And it will be a lot better than a York owned team so you will learn to like them.

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:20 PM

#22

SanDiego49er
Veteran
Posts: 52,492

Originally posted by Otter:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by area49:
Originally posted by rapid4:
Let Yorks move. Then we get a new SF franchise, just like Baltimore, with an ownership group including Steve Young and Brent Jones which has already tried to buy the team (but Yorks won't sell) and who have the resources lined up to build a new stadium right away.

The Yorks have refused all overtures to sell out. They are the problem with the team (no GM, a HC with no HC experience, allergic to ties with the 49er greats of the 80;s and 90's) so let's get rid of them before they appoint a successor GM to TDON-McCloughan-No one and a successor HC to Erickson-NoWin-Sing.

They don't have a stadium, at least yet, because they were too cheap to build it with their own money 10 years ago when the total cost would have been far less than what they will end up paying now after milking the taxpayers and season ticketholders (or trying to, anyway).

Nope. The league won't award us a new franchise. We'll have to be able to build a new stadium, and I'm pretty sure Steve Young and Brent Jones will be too busy with something else by that time. Besides, the league won't want to disturb the 32-team, 8-division set up they have by adding a 33rd team.

Even if they do, it won't be the 49ers. It'll be a new team with a new name and new colors.

And it will be a lot better than a York owned team so you will learn to like them.

Probably the best thing for everybody. If the YORKIES just get the hell out one way or another.

Oct 7, 2010 at 5:31 PM

#23

billbird2111
Veteran
Posts: 18,101

I don't see this team going anywhere. When Al Davis moved the Raiders it sparked a legal battle that raged for decades. Don't think that hasn't been lost on anyone. Nobody wants that.

There are plenty of owners and ownership groups within the San Francisco Bay Area that would jump at the chance to buy this team. My goodness -- this is the heart of Silicon Valley people! The home of instant billionaires -- or mega millionaires.

Larry Ellison is just one name that has been tossed about. There are FIFTY MORE JUST LIKE HIM -- but would rather stay out of the press limelight. Do you think there might be more than one Niner fan there?

Gee -- ya think? I'll tell you something else. I know someone right now who has the financial "means" to be part of a group like this -- provided he's given the chance. Where do you think my five seats on the fifty yard line come from anyway? The Fairy God Mother? I certainly can't afford them. I'm pleased that someone in the family can -- and that these seats are occassionally offered to me and my wife and friends.

Nobody is moving this Niner team anywhere. There's a wealth base in the San Francisco Bay Area than can compete with anyone -- even those down in the south. Ya'll really need to stop worrying yourselves about this.

Oct 7, 2010 at 6:58 PM

#24

area49
Member
Posts: 1,315

Originally posted by billbird2111:
I don't see this team going anywhere. When Al Davis moved the Raiders it sparked a legal battle that raged for decades. Don't think that hasn't been lost on anyone. Nobody wants that.

There are plenty of owners and ownership groups within the San Francisco Bay Area that would jump at the chance to buy this team. My goodness -- this is the heart of Silicon Valley people! The home of instant billionaires -- or mega millionaires.

Larry Ellison is just one name that has been tossed about. There are FIFTY MORE JUST LIKE HIM -- but would rather stay out of the press limelight. Do you think there might be more than one Niner fan there?

Gee -- ya think? I'll tell you something else. I know someone right now who has the financial "means" to be part of a group like this -- provided he's given the chance. Where do you think my five seats on the fifty yard line come from anyway? The Fairy God Mother? I certainly can't afford them. I'm pleased that someone in the family can -- and that these seats are occassionally offered to me and my wife and friends.

Nobody is moving this Niner team anywhere. There's a wealth base in the San Francisco Bay Area than can compete with anyone -- even those down in the south. Ya'll really need to stop worrying yourselves about this.

It's not just about wealth. It's about profile. LA is the second largest media market in the US, after New York. If the Yorks decide to keep the team and move, they won't have to pay a penny for a new stadium.

If they decide to sell, the league will prefer the buyers to be Roski or the Wassermans.

I think the most important thing is that the Yorks will actively want to move the team out of the Bay Area. Call it revenge.

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:01 PM

#25

9erfanAUS
Veteran
Posts: 16,281

Originally posted by boast:
Originally posted by defenderDX:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by ninerfan4life:
Too much to read Bottom Line: Niners will never move from the Bay Area.

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:01 PM

#26

backontop
Veteran
Posts: 14,346

Originally posted by area49:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
I don't see this team going anywhere. When Al Davis moved the Raiders it sparked a legal battle that raged for decades. Don't think that hasn't been lost on anyone. Nobody wants that.

There are plenty of owners and ownership groups within the San Francisco Bay Area that would jump at the chance to buy this team. My goodness -- this is the heart of Silicon Valley people! The home of instant billionaires -- or mega millionaires.

Larry Ellison is just one name that has been tossed about. There are FIFTY MORE JUST LIKE HIM -- but would rather stay out of the press limelight. Do you think there might be more than one Niner fan there?

Gee -- ya think? I'll tell you something else. I know someone right now who has the financial "means" to be part of a group like this -- provided he's given the chance. Where do you think my five seats on the fifty yard line come from anyway? The Fairy God Mother? I certainly can't afford them. I'm pleased that someone in the family can -- and that these seats are occassionally offered to me and my wife and friends.

Nobody is moving this Niner team anywhere. There's a wealth base in the San Francisco Bay Area than can compete with anyone -- even those down in the south. Ya'll really need to stop worrying yourselves about this.

It's not just about wealth. It's about profile. LA is the second largest media market in the US, after New York. If the Yorks decide to keep the team and move, they won't have to pay a penny for a new stadium.

If they decide to sell, the league will prefer the buyers to be Roski or the Wassermans.

I think the most important thing is that the Yorks will actively want to move the team out of the Bay Area. Call it revenge.

I'm pretty sure the 49ers will never leave the bay area. They have to much history in the bay area. That would be like the Cowboys moving to San Antonio.

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:01 PM

#27

kingairta
Veteran
Posts: 1,788

If LA is so great then why did not one but two teams leave?

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:02 PM

#28

backontop
Veteran
Posts: 14,346

Originally posted by kingairta:
If LA is so great then why did not one but two teams leave?

because LA is so awesome they don't deserve a team.....and it should stay that way.

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:14 PM

#29

area49
Member
Posts: 1,315

Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by area49:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
I don't see this team going anywhere. When Al Davis moved the Raiders it sparked a legal battle that raged for decades. Don't think that hasn't been lost on anyone. Nobody wants that.

There are plenty of owners and ownership groups within the San Francisco Bay Area that would jump at the chance to buy this team. My goodness -- this is the heart of Silicon Valley people! The home of instant billionaires -- or mega millionaires.

Larry Ellison is just one name that has been tossed about. There are FIFTY MORE JUST LIKE HIM -- but would rather stay out of the press limelight. Do you think there might be more than one Niner fan there?

Gee -- ya think? I'll tell you something else. I know someone right now who has the financial "means" to be part of a group like this -- provided he's given the chance. Where do you think my five seats on the fifty yard line come from anyway? The Fairy God Mother? I certainly can't afford them. I'm pleased that someone in the family can -- and that these seats are occassionally offered to me and my wife and friends.

Nobody is moving this Niner team anywhere. There's a wealth base in the San Francisco Bay Area than can compete with anyone -- even those down in the south. Ya'll really need to stop worrying yourselves about this.

It's not just about wealth. It's about profile. LA is the second largest media market in the US, after New York. If the Yorks decide to keep the team and move, they won't have to pay a penny for a new stadium.

If they decide to sell, the league will prefer the buyers to be Roski or the Wassermans.

I think the most important thing is that the Yorks will actively want to move the team out of the Bay Area. Call it revenge.

I'm pretty sure the 49ers will never leave the bay area. They have to much history in the bay area. That would be like the Cowboys moving to San Antonio.

Damn it, I am SO sick of that argument. Guess what. The Browns had "too much history" in Cleveland. The Oilers had "too much history" in Houston. The Rams had "too much history" in St. Louis. The Colts had "too much history" in Baltimore.

Oct 7, 2010 at 7:29 PM

#30

RedWaltz24
Veteran
Posts: 4,121

L.A. is the worst sports town in the nation. I am pretty sure they invented the term "fair weather fan". Seriously, they had two football franchises and lost both and they didn't seem to care one bit. If the Niners ever moved there they would lose a lot of good fans, who would be replaced by fans that only show up if they are winning.

Not to mention that they would have to change the name, since the L.A. 49ers makes no sense, which would basically eliminate any connection the franchise had with it's storied history of 5 Super Bowl wins. So a move would basically kill the Niners.