LOS ANGELES - Farmers Field (72,000)

[pesto]

Originally Posted by typo86

Long time browser...

Have there been any proposal for the stadium's location to be somewhere on Dodgers Stadiums enormous lot? Looking at Google's satellite photos there seems to be ample room for a pro football stadium...

Welcome to the zoo!

I am not aware of any specific proposals, but the NFL has been open in stating they would like to have a stadium there. This would tie-in to their logic that the next LA team has to have a strong brand, top grade management, very strong funding, iconic facilities, etc., since every other sport seems to be doing extremely well financially in LA and another failure would not look good.

I think we can assume that people like the Guggenheim principles, AEG, Kroenke, Spanos, Blackstone, Colony Capital, etc., have been talking about the relative merits of Farmers and DS for some time now.

[will101]

Originally Posted by pesto

Welcome to the zoo!

I am not aware of any specific proposals, but the NFL has been open in stating they would like to have a stadium there. This would tie-in to their logic that the next LA team has to have a strong brand, top grade management, very strong funding, iconic facilities, etc., since every other sport seems to be doing extremely well financially in LA and another failure would not look good.

I think we can assume that people like the Guggenheim principles, AEG, Kroenke, Spanos, Blackstone, Colony Capital, etc., have been talking about the relative merits of Farmers and DS for some time now.

This is already looking like another failure. DS would be the third proposed location for the current efforts, but nothing is anywhere close to being built. Every existing team would rather suffer their current arrangements than signing over more than $100 million worth of their ownership just for the "privilege" of playing in LA. The league can say 'there should be x,y and z' all wants. But the owners order the league around, not vice versa.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by will101

This is already looking like another failure. DS would be the third proposed location for the current efforts, but nothing is anywhere close to being built. Every existing team would rather suffer their current arrangements than signing over more than $100 million worth of their ownership just for the "privilege" of playing in LA. The league can say 'there should be x,y and z' all wants. But the owners order the league around, not vice versa.

This has really been my point all along. Farmer's was never a live proposition because of the belief that they could get part ownership on the cheap from some desperate owner. Both fans and Leiweke/Roski seem to have honestly believed this; Anschutz seems to have always been dubious. And then you overlay the NFL who wants to make sure that they have a financial and PR winner in LA.

But on the other side, there is plenty of money in the pot and everyone would like some, so the next year or two could be interesting.

[pesto]

useless tidbit of the day: it is reported that Stephen Ross (who effectively controls the Miami Dolphins) is one of the bidders for AEG. Related Companies, which Ross controls, is a major land developer who has recently announced a downscaling of the Grand Ave. Project in downtown LA, just up the street from Farmers and down the hill from Dodger Stadium (maybe a mile from each).

Ross has been pushing for tax subsidies for Dolphin Stadium for some time and is not progressing with the Republican Florida legislature. Could this be another "move to LA threat" scenario? He wouldn't seem to have much interest in their entertainment properties.

[pesto]

more useless tidbits: Ross denies that he will move the Dolphins to LA. This sounds credible (although LA Dolls would have been nice). It also indicates that some bidders may have no interest in the football aspects of AEG, but rather the concert or arena management businesses.

Based on the TWC deal, the Dodgers now seem to have anothe billion or two (less whatever they have to share with MLB). Since they already control the DS parking lots they seem to be the ones with the most potential for taking advantage of synergies.

Based on how much they paid, you have to believe that TWC is hoping to get the inside track on broadcast rights for the LA football team. Conversely, maybe Fox is saving their money because they can't be without the Lakers, Dodgers and football.

[Dale]

So, it seems that regardless the skepticism that abounds - the general impression that numbers aren't working for anybody - there does seem to be some inexorable momentum towards getting some team, any team to LA. A lot of moving and shaking behind the scenes.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by Dale

So, it seems that regardless the skepticism that abounds - the general impression that numbers aren't working for anybody - there does seem to be some inexorable momentum towards getting some team, any team to LA. A lot of moving and shaking behind the scenes.

It does seem that Farmers did not work for AEG and any NFL owner; this is what Anschutz and a number of others claimed. But it also could have been the NFL holding out for better.

I also can't go along with "inexorable" because humans are capable of messing things up in interesting ways. But there is a lot of money around tickets and broadcast rights in LA. I suspect someone willl find enough synergies (that is, other sources of revenue) to justify some team moving. No one doubts that this is getting heavy thought from really bright guys.

[Dale]

Originally Posted by pesto

It does seem that Farmers did not work for AEG and any NFL owner; this is what Anschutz and a number of others claimed. But it also could have been the NFL holding out for better.

I also can't go along with "inexorable" because humans are capable of messing things up in interesting ways. But there is a lot of money around tickets and broadcast rights in LA. I suspect someone willl find enough synergies (that is, other sources of revenue) to justify some team moving. No one doubts that this is getting heavy thought from really bright guys.

That's all I'm really saying.

[will101]

Do we have any numbers of how much money the networks stand to lose by showing one fewer game every Sunday in LA?

[pesto]

Originally Posted by will101

Do we have any numbers of how much money the networks stand to lose by showing one fewer game every Sunday in LA?

I had just been thinking that that is a negative from having a team in LA. I have no idea about the numbers but that's why the synergies need to be figured out.

http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/indus...08105082.story

btw, Leiweke had a long interview in Billboard about the slow progress being made on the AEG sale and football was not mentioned once. This is consistent with some analysts who valued the Farmer's deal at zero or maybe the cost of the EIR's. The real interest seems to be on the touring and arena management areas.

That may make it easier for an individual like Dr. S-S to pick up the Farmer's deal. But that's getting very speculative.

[raymondleone]

Exclusive: AEG Bidders Down to Three

Sources tell Billboard.biz that the final three bidders on Anshutz Entertainment Group (AEG) are a group made up of Ron Burkle with Patrick Soon-Shiong and Goldman Sachs; Guggenheim Partners; and ColonyCapital and Qatar Sovereign Fund. A deal could be done as soon as the end of March.

Source

Credit

[pesto]

Sounds like money shouldn't be an issue.

Unfortunately the next paragraph cites a source that says there are no groups and another round of bidding is still ahead. And the rest of the article seems like recycled rumors and quotes from several months ago.

Is Burkle really looking seriously at both the Sacramento Kings and football or hockey or basketball in LA? I would say no, but let's see.

[pesto]

And now there is a report that Westfield is joining in the Qatari bid. Westfield owns a number of shopping centers in the area, including Century City on the westside and two in the SF Valley. One could only assume they have retail on their mind, perhaps in connection with the arenas that AEG owns or services.

[jbradway]

Originally Posted by pesto

Sounds like money shouldn't be an issue.

Unfortunately the next paragraph cites a source that says there are no groups and another round of bidding is still ahead. And the rest of the article seems like recycled rumors and quotes from several months ago.

Is Burkle really looking seriously at both the Sacramento Kings and football or hockey or basketball in LA? I would say no, but let's see.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/01/515...torylink=cpyOK

A longtime friend of Burkle’s, Los Angeles investment banker Lloyd Greif , confirmed Burkle’s interest in AEG and said it would not interfere with his possible bid for the Kings.

“He can do two deals at once, he can do ten deals at once,” Greif told The Bee.

[pesto]

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/360...adium-dispute-

Looks like the arbitrator has decided that the Rams are right about what's needed to keep the existing lease going. This seems to in effect convert the lease to year-to-year until a deal can be worked out on builidng a new stadium or moving somewhere (like LA).

A spokesman for the city says that they are not inclined to meeting those conditions (of course, the real response has to be in writing). So is Kroenke chatting up Dr. S-S, Mark Walter, Tom Barrack and/or the Qatari royal family?

[slipperydog]

Beautiful news.

[madhuckfinn]

With Goodell's February 15 deadline looming for a team to file their intent to move, could it be that the Rams are plotting a buy-out at this moment? Meanwhile all signs point to a narrowing of the field in the AEG purchase. A perfect storm.

[madhuckfinn]

Link to arbitrators' ruling:

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/b...ana=twt&page=2

The arbitrators, I think, fairly interpreted the "first tier" clause. A doozy for St. Louis who negotiated the lease in good faith but didn't have the foresight or the leverage to execute an agreement in their best interest.

[slipperydog]

Originally Posted by madhuckfinn

Link to arbitrators' ruling:

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/b...ana=twt&page=2

The arbitrators, I think, fairly interpreted the "first tier" clause. A doozy for St. Louis who negotiated the lease in good faith but didn't have the foresight or the leverage to execute an agreement in their best interest.

I think it was more leverage than foresight to be honest. The first-tier clause was the glue that made moving the team to St Louis quite worth it. Once that lease was signed, the city was at the mercy of the Rams. We are now seeing why that lease was signed.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by madhuckfinn

With Goodell's February 15 deadline looming for a team to file their intent to move, could it be that the Rams are plotting a buy-out at this moment? Meanwhile all signs point to a narrowing of the field in the AEG purchase. A perfect storm.

Some thoughts:

Could be, but more realistic is that the city gives formal notice in 30 days and then negotiates a deal with Kroenke over improvements to Jones or a new stadium. Let's say 6 months. This is put to a vote, say in November. If rejected, Kroenke thinks about putting more of his money in unless he can get a better deal in LA.

The hang-ups in LA include who owns AEG and what do they have in mind. This will resolve itself in a few months, presumably.

More importantly, it's hard to believe Kroenke or any owner will sacrifice either ownership or control of seat revenues, football related revenues or fan experience. His position is just too strong and he has the money to build his own if necessary.

Assuming this, Kroenke may be willing to buy the Farmer's rights from whoever gets them and fund his own stadium. DS also is a possibility since Guggenheim and McCourt would presumably let him have control of football related income in exchange for rent, a percentage of revenues and shared control of the immediate environment. The NFL would presumably support and participate in this venture.