HopefulFuture

There does not need to be any discussion on the Bills at all concerning a new stadium. And I'm well versed int he contract by the way. The entire conversation has gone this route not by my own doing, by others. And if those others believe there is no way a stadium can be built with out the consent of the Bills Toronto group, or their input, they are mistaken as well. As I've stated, I've seen investors do such projects with out any contact to the project owners. You may know them as "Angel Investors", a loose term to be sure for some groups. The point of the conversation was to affirm that yes, when this current lease is up, they can move the team if they choose. bandit pointed to the NFL's comment on Rogers Stadium not being green lighted for use by the league, I must point out some very simple facts here, Rogers Stadium does in fact meet the minimum requirements for an NFL franchise, 50,000 seats or more, the issue most likely comes from luxury boxes which the NFL does not benefit from but the owners do and if they want to submit a team to that stadium until a new one is completed, the individuals in the Toronto Group are quite capable financially of doing so, you are dealing with people with a great deal of money and there is much at stake. Of course the team can be temp. housed in Rogers Stadium while a stadium is built. Ask yourselves this, do you honestly believe those reported land procurement for a stadium reports were for entertainment. This is a 2 billion dollar play at minimum for Toronto, and the parties involved have the ability and/or connections to make it happen. Simply writing it off is complete futility and utter nonsense.

As I said, you believe what you wish. There are many different avenues to get a stadium put up in the greater Toronto region, without public funds, then you are aware of. A prime example is right here in WNY, Jeremy Jacobs. Without him, FNC isn't built. 55 million of his own money in to it. And he's already had a very nice return on that investment. EDIT: Oh, and we went beyond reason the moment you tried to tell me that a stadium in Toronto could never be built, it was, how did you put it, against the law. LOL I did get a chuckle out of that one.

That's funny that you bring up the Rogers stadium comment from the NFL. It certainly was for Bills games in Toronto, wasn't it though. You believe what you wish, but if the Rogers Stadium were to be used as a bridge until a new stadium was completed, the NFL would absolutely rubber stamp it's approval for such use, after all, they did so for Bills games.........see how that works.

Actually, it is. A stadium can be built before the end of the current lease is up. After all, why even pay the small amount in the out clause year when you can simply run out the clock on the lease itself. The escape clause is an interesting concept to temp. move into Rogers Stadium, then commence a build out of a new stadium that would be roughly 5 years max in the making, if the ground work for site procurement is already in place.

Well, yes, it would be the most optimal way to go, I concur. And, maybe, that is what will happen if one of the local bidders gets the team. I cannot see that as a losing scenario. The only counter point I have for this over all post of yours, and it's not really a counter point, more of a what if scenario, is the NFL's willingness to abandon Buffalo on a temp basis, as happened with Cleveland. That is the case study for a situation such as ours if the team is indeed relocated. Things are looking up for WNY, I stated that in other threads, and whether or not people take my word for it (without myself being a Pegula or Galisano, I understand why) it truly has turned a corner here in our community. We have a long road to go yet though, the cleanups need to continue in an effort to lower cancer rates, we have property fights still to come between developers and preservationists in the region, a corrupt, over lapping governmental system to correct, fights at the state level over ridiculous mandates to go, an introduction of new industries for employment growth, a redeveloping downtown area (both in Buffalo, which is already underway, as well as Niagara Falls, which has yet to even have an agreed upon strategy plan in place), a stabilization of the current generational populace as well as the indoctrination of the immigrant populace currently being injected into the region (primarily eastern European and Russian, hey look, more hockey fans LOL) as well as a host of other issues to contend with. But, these things will come, in time. The area's bleeding of our youth is beginning to stabilize and it appears as though we were primarily insulated from the 08 fiasco. Sometimes it pays to already be poor The area has survived much worse than the Bills possibly leaving, she's battered, bruised and somewhat the worse for wear, but she's still here and drawing breathe as a viable community. Yes, I see much hope and promise here, and that bodes well for the future. I've said it before and I'll say it again, many sports fans didn't like Mr. Galisano, I did, he did something that Ralph Wilson was proud of, he invested himself in not only our region as a business leader, he invested himself in the region as himself. He purchased the Buffalo Sabres, then, handed them off to some one we've all come to know and trust to an extent, Mr. Pegula. After all, Mr. Galisano gave of himself for that endeavor, oh sure he said as long as it didn't lose money, and hey, I'd say the same, but he also found a man to carry on the team and that man invested in the region for a sport. Those are the type of people I'd like to see leading our community at large. People invested in more than just a product, people invested in the region, in the city, in us. I believe that is what will happen, and I don't trust any group from Toronto one bit.

Now here, you may be correct. Toronto, with it's large influx of immigrants, particularly from nations known to support what we call soccer, has more of a chance to field a team in that sport with little risk. The only problem I see there is who would they play that isn't 12 hours or so travel away via flight on a regular schedule. I can't see soccer taking off on a larger scale here in the states than it already is, even with the recent world cup run it shows that the sport is growing, but not significantly enough to challenge the big 4 currently. This is a great point though k-9, and it's a part of that risk I speak of. What is the strategic plan of the NFL when it comes to a scenario such as Toronto? I would be of the mind that they fully realize it would take several generations to truly indoctrinate the larger immigrant population to American football. I could be off on that, it's merely a common sense guess, and since we are looking at market share, just what is the real market share they would be looking at? The first non-American NFL team, in Canada? Could they be viewing that as drawing on support from other Canadian cities in a playoff run year based on nationalism? I think they are. And they'd most likely be correct. National pride runs rampant in western nations when it comes to sports, even intra-league sports, especially those nations with strong ties to Europe, such as Canada still has via it's heritage and so on.

I've been involved in projects where it was never known who the larger investor was, in one case 85% of the over all cost with no government funding, 0. And it was never disclosed what the pay back was to that investor. So yes, it's more than possible, I've seen it first hand. There really is no debate between us. Your attempt to site other teams and their revenue streams given their market size does not take in to account a whole slew of variables. You failed to mention that NY, the first one you pointed out is a vastly larger market share than Buffalo, why is that? Because it's a larger market region that is why. Other teams have owners with vested interests in their local ownership of the clubs you listed. The TV share argument won't hold water, no matter how much you attempt to slice it or dice it. Toronto is a vastly larger population center, and hence, a larger potential reward. Certainly your not suggesting other wise, are you? Ah yes, the Arg's attendance record. It is bad isn't it. But then again, the Arg's aren't in the NFL, are they now? Surely once again your not suggesting that the CFL has nearly the amount of money to throw at putting a team in the spotlight from the NFL, are you? And, as I've stated from the beginning once again, there is always risk, but the NFL has proven more than once it is more than willing to take those risks for the potential of higher reward. Look at this way, if the team were to move to Toronto, they can always move it back, it's been done before, check out the history. None of what you put up has merit with what the NFL over all strategic plan for the brand is considering they have already shown their willingness to attempt to increase that brand through moving teams. And it's been done more than several times. Keep telling yourself what you'd like if it makes you sleep better at night, but I know in my personal experiences in business it's much much different. There is always risks with any scenario, but the reward side is the focus. There is very little loss of money here in the end. You may look at 30 million a year for 5 to 10 years or so of losses as a great deal of money, but when your dealing with entities or individuals that play at this level, it's a drop in the bucket when viewing the risks to reward ratios.

I need a question. You stated you had a question for me. As for your post, I don't disagree entirely save this, they had vested teams making money in both Oakland and Cleveland and still allowed the teams to be moved to LA. The Cleveland Rams are now what you see as the St. Louis Rams, and that team wasn't loosing money in Cleveland, the owner at the time went for more. The same with Al Davis, he wanted those luxury boxes to increase revenue. This all comes back to economics and risk. The NFL has shown they are willing to take risks. The economics show that the potential reward for those risks are of a greater scale in larger markets in most cases. Brand, it's all about that brand and it's ability to extend itself for further revenue.

I am not in full on panic mode, I am merely stating my thoughts on the Toronto group and putting out words of caution with sound reasoning as to such. I referred directly to the bidding process itself. The trust is going to get a number that is within it's ability to get. You cannot seriously believe that the trust is going to hum-ho itself and take the owner that will keep the team in Buffalo. That is not the reason for it's existence. If that were the case, the Toronto group wouldn't even be considered given all of the circumstances surrounding it's already publicly known intentions prior to their statement of keeping the team in Buffalo (which by the way doesn't state indefinitely, it merely states they will keep the team in Buffalo, no time line given). As for your numbers on viewership, per capita is everything. You don't need markets like NY to have heavy saturation on viewership on the over all populace because the area is so massive the numbers over all the sponsors running their ads reach is of such a large number it's prices to run in those markets are larger, i.e. the NFL makes more money. This is rocket science here, the larger the market, even with lower viewership ratings, the larger the target audience that can be saturated with ads. This is simple supply and demand economics here. Jacksonville is in trouble, I used to live there, not a good example, New Orleans was torn to shreds by Katrina, they weren't always this low in population, Green Bay? Really, Green Bay? You actually use that as an example, the only team that will never move because it's owned by the community. It's irrelevant if they lose or make money, the NFL is forced to pay for that team if it was ever to go in the red. That team is going nowhere and the NFL knows it, that is why they made a rule forbidding it again. So, all 3 examples are poor attempts at counter points to say the least. The LA example is a good one however, but take in to consideration the NFL did in fact, attempt it, twice. And, as you can see, I've pointed that out more than several times. It only lends credence to my statement that the NFL will do it if it feels it's in the NFL's best interest. And what might that interest be? Well looky here, it happens to be broadening the brand, well, gees, why would they want to broaden their brand? I don't know, maybe to draw in more revenue? They will try the LA market again. Once again, this is all common sense economic practices. In a world where growth is the only true way to increase revenue for non-financial entities, either through growth of the brand via diversity (which, the NFL only sells one product, football) or growth of the customer base (market share in the entertainment industry). A shovel can touch the ground anytime it wants in Toronto, because a 3rd party with no links to the Toronto group is not beholding the legal formalities of the County and Bills situation. If you honestly believe that Erie County and the Buffalo Bills can tell a 3rd private party not connected to this process directly up in Ontario it cannot build a new stadium, you seriously need to look at law more closely. They have been talking about an individual stadium for the Arg's for the better part of 15 years now. Smaller, Larger, non dome, dome, the conversation has been happening none the less. The province won't pitch in, they learned their lesson from the cost over runs of the sky dome, currently known as Rogers Stadium, but that doesn't mean a private entity could not build one. Pulling that series I believe was a part of diffusing the Toronto groups intent theory running rampant. As I've stated over and over again, these individuals with money, they didn't get it or maintain it by being foolish. There is always strategic concepts in play, especially when your playing at this level where so much money is on the line. This group doesn't want to loose any more money than it has to should it win the bid and the fears of the fan base here, in WNY, come in to full focus. Of course, this my thoughts on this, and I'm sure it's not far off the mark. After all, if the intent originally was to draw a larger fan base to WNY for the Bills, why stop the series, the team was still in the financial black even with the lack of attendance. And, has been pointed out through out the years since the series inception, particularly by some prominent politicians at the Toronto and provincial level, if the team was Toronto's own, that attendance would surely increase as the community would feel vested in the product, like it was their own, something else I pointed out earlier and absolutely correct. Take a look at us, as Bills fans, we are vested in our product. People are people, their passions are tied to coveting what they know, the NFL is full aware if the team goes to Toronto, there is an opportunity to vest in a large market base community. I will say it's similar to the LA situation. Is it a risk? I've always stated such, but the NFL is not beyond taking risks, they've proven this already.

That is possible, none of us no for sure what is going on entirely behind the scenes. My one differing opinion with you is that 900 million number. I just don't see that happening. I see it going higher, much higher. An NFL franchise is in demand, not in supply, the basic economic principles apply here I would say. I say 1.25 to 1.5 billion, that's where my number sits right now. Somewhere in that area. If it goes higher, I wouldn't be surprised, but I'll sit in that number area I just posted. As for the over all situation, I to believe it goes to a locally vested owner, I've often posted on Pegula. He's building an entertainment company for sure with all of the varying entertainment venues he's got his fingers in to.

Your statement on loyalty for WNY for the Toronto group has no backing considering the flip flopping that has been done by some of the groups members. They were searching and doing due diligence on stadium sites as late as this past winter. Re: suntimes article. Are you implying because they have done a 180 verbally that this search has ceased? If so, I'd like a documented source, thank you. Your 11th largest viewership market is also deceptive, that is per capita, and the last time I checked (RE: 2010 census) Toronto is a market of 5.5 million people (surely to be over 6 million by now) and Buffalo, well, not so much. Care to take another look at this comment? I never stated the highest number wins, that is coming from you, not from me. I have stated I believe it will come down to a locally vested entity (whether it be a team up or individual) and the Toronto group given the financial resources at their disposal combined with what I feel is their commitment to see this process through with counter bids. I don't see the team selling for a penny under 1.5 billion to be honest. Now the stadium question with the time lines is an interesting one, but you do not have to be directly involved in building a facility, all you have to do is have one available when the lease is up. Here is a good example, Jeremy Jacobs can not own the Bills, but, he is more than interested in getting a new stadium put up here. He put a great deal of money in to what is now known as First Niagara Center when it was built. That was one of the catalyst that helped keep the Sabres here. I am sure a similar situation can be achieved in Toronto, a 3rd party builds the stadium while the Toronto group waits, they don't have to be involved. It's not uncommon for varying parties to come together for a common cause without being linked directly. I believe they pulled the Toronto series for other reasons. You'll learn about them as this process finishes up. And this is where bandit, yourself and individuals such as myself disagree. There is no document keeping the team here at all. There is nothing that states on paper the the Buffalo Bills could not be moved period, end of conversation. There are built in dynamics to the lease agreement along with varying parties stands on are on the issue, but even in the lease agreement it's a penalty, not a "do not move clause". I have read reports from reporters on some undisclosed rumblings of keeping the team in WNY, but they are merely rumblings. Until I see something on paper, as others have pointed out, signed, sealed and delivered that the Bills will sign a new lease, either with the Ralph (this is where I come in, it won't be the Ralph, rest assured) or a new stadium, then if the Toronto group gets the bid it's every bit a reality they could move the team. And since I've been touting the financial side of this, they'll most likely move it if the do get it in the clause year or at the end of the lease. Either way I don't see them keeping the team here.

This is where your incorrect in so far as moving a team is concerned. The NFL has documented history of doing so, both in St. Louis and Oakland. They aren't interested in an established market if there is a larger market to be had and they've shown more than willing to make that happen. You are however correct on viewership. The real money is indeed in those Television contracts to be sure. And when you look at the market demographics of Toronto vs Buffalo, the numbers speak for themselves. Is it a gamble? Absolutely it is. But in the end they have proven in the past that as a group (the owners) they are willing to take that risk. I for one am very excited about Pegula's silence. I suspect your going to see some sort of consortium come out of his side of the situation in an effort to match any offer which is larger than he is willing to put in alone. I believe he has the ability to do so. But this thread is about the Toronto group, and as of now, there is a very cheap out clause for that group in a handful of years. I have every belief they'll use it. LOL, ok, you believe what you wish, money talks, bull **** walks. These individuals didn't gather and maintain wealth by leaving money sitting on the table. You are completely blind if you believe for a second these owners aren't financially driven. The breed RW was is rare, very rare.

This individual gets it. Reading between the lines is a nifty thing to do, what brought my attention to the JBJ situation was the teaming up with a Toronto based group combined with the series the Bills attempted to instill there. For those stating it was revenue generating, I merely chuckle. A few million is a drop in the bucket when you run the demographics on populace in the greater Toronto region. Merchandise alone will exceed 20 or more of the current NFL franchises simply due to numbers. Then there is the comments from Jerry Jones, not just another pundit, but an NFL owner who clearly supports JBJ and his drive to own a team. Here is the quote from Jones that really raised some eyebrows: "We certainly want to create every opportunity we can to involve more fans. At the end of the day, it's my town against your town, Cowboys against whoever we're playing. To the end that we can create more rivalries and involve larger viewing audiences, populations, that's something that you have to look at when you get a chance to, and that's the debate between Buffalo and Toronto." As you can clearly see, Jones does not support one way or the other keeping the team in Buffalo, he clearly makes a point in this comment however on viewer audiences and rivalries. Toronto has the ability to garner more monies due to those populace demographics I mentioned above, and not by importing the Bills via TV viewership, but by importing the Bills to Toronto themselves. You must look at it this way, it's easier for the NFL to grab a smaller Buffalo TV viewership, even if it's downsized by the teams move because Buffalo has already been saturated by the NFL due to a team being here. They are aware they will lose fan base for the NFL product over all here. But the Toronto market more than 10 fold makes up for the difference in lose and expands the NFL product. This is simple economics here, there is no loyalty from any of the owners to Buffalo, that went bye bye with Ralph Wilson. The Toronto Group has the ability to bid, and bid high. The only 2 individuals with local vested interests in the region that can go up against them or Pegula and Galisano. It will most likely come down to a Pegula vs JBJ group situation I would imagine. But if I'm a Buffalo native, and the JBJ group is saying they have no intention of moving the team after all that's gone on and a member of that group is entrenched in Toronto, I wouldn't believe a word out of their mouths.

Explain something to me for a moment if you would. How does what I just posted about the intent of the Toronto Group have anything to do with what you just asked me? My post is pretty clear, I'm sounding off caution about JBJ and his group and what their intent is. Is there something specific you wanted to ask me? Something about my post perhaps? Are you implying that I stated that Toronto will win the bid? Is this your idea of attempting to revisionist my post in an effort to down play the situation? Please, I'll sit back, while you explain yourself. Can't wait to hear.

I'll fore go the rest of your post save this entry. My guess is if the NFL didn't want to explore the Toronto market, they wouldn't have allowed games up in Toronto by Bills. Regular season games at that. No one should be fooled here. That Toronot series had little to nothing to do with gauging or gaining market share from Toronto, it was a test run pure and simple. The out come is pretty easy to see, a team will need a permanent residence in Toronto to garner significant share of that market, as it vests the area in to the sport. I.E. These are the Toronto Bills, this is our team, type of atmosphere. You can bet your bippy, it the Toronto group wins the bid, the Bills are gone in 2020. That should be a foregone conclusion by now. All this talk about it being anything other wise is pure hog wash. Fans really need to come to their senses, I see much to much nonsense talk. It's a business decision and numbers are not on Buffalo's side when it comes to market viability against a Goliath like Toronto. Hell, the league tried twice to install teams in LA already, don't kid yourself, they'll move the team happily. If it doesn't work out, they know they can move it back, or elsewhere. Wake up people, smell the coffee here.

I am aware. You didn't specify a group in your question, you gave individual names. I responded accordingly.

Gates no longer has the liquidity to do so. Yes, he retained some of his wealth, but a majority of it is now vested in his foundation, which by the way, creates a nifty tax shelter for those monies. Interesting isn't it.

Well, you didn't ask me if he would be approved, only what my choice would be amongst the 3 you gave, out of them, he is the one that I would look to the most. The reasoning for me is simple, he doesn't back down from a challenge and he backs up what he says. I've never known Trump to shy away from what he stands for or believes in or has publicly stated. The other 2 choices you gave I've just never seen them as serious purchasers, not when you have other major players in the game. To me, in any event, it will come down to 2 sets of groups. Pegula and Galisano on the local front, JBJ/Rogers and an as yet to be named individual on the other front. Don't ask me why I feel this to be the case, just know that I feel that will be the case. And, a stadium will be coming with the 2 local front guys. As for the others, that remains to be seen as of yet as I am unaware if they pitched one to the NFL.

You are correct in so far as RW not being local, but then again, that's an after thought as he is gone and the team remained in what he referred to as his "second city" due to his love for the region. That individual no longer exists, god rest his soul. Pegula is local however, not directly, but through family ties and he has proven to be more than willing to invest in the region, see Harbor Center for details. Galisano has been invested in the region because he built a defining business from the region and take a look at what he did for the other pro sports franchise in the area. He turned down lucrative offers from individuals known to want to move that franchise to fine the "right guy" for the franchise. If you don't believe these 2 individuals are invested in the WNY region, then may I suggest you research the situations. It will help a great deal to see where these 2 individuals sit in so far as WNY are concerned. And yes, I would have moved to florida as well if I had that kind of cash and NY was raping me income tax wise, but look, his business remains, kind of makes you go hmmmmmm.........doesn't it now, or at least it should. Honestly, I would go with Trump. Believe it or not, I believe him when he says he'd keep the team in Buffalo, It's an ego thing with him, a challenge as well. He feels up to the task, and he most likely is. As for the D/B scenario, I'm not stating Galisano made the right choices with partners and/or management of the franchise, merely that he was willing to leave money on the table to ensure the franchises existence in WNY, that alone speaks volumes to me.

I would normally concur with your thoughts here. But I know hedge fund operators. Their MO has always been, to date, money. I'd like to believe that this individual is different, and, maybe he is, but in the end, I'm not willing to let myself be deluded into that thought process, it only skews my focus on the facts at hand for the franchise remaining in Buffalo. I to want Pegula by the way, but would be more than satisfied with Galisano. Both have proven worthy area investors who believe in the region, Pegula has even taken steps to substantially enhance the area in a sport, I believe Galisano learned something from that and would be willing to do so as well.

You believe what you will. I happen to believe differently. I've heard no direct talk from any group save the Galisano and Pegula groups that have a vested interest in the area. So yes, you are incorrect and it is true. You can attempt to say as loud as you like other wise, but show me the vested interested from any other known group. You can't. Say good bye to the team if they are not willing to invest in the area, because the only way to increase revenue (in case you haven't noticed, the NFL and the teams are a business first and foremost, even for the rich) is to find a way for yourself, as an individual owner, or a group to invest in the community in a larger scale to strengthen the market. Like I said, you only lie to yourself to believe otherwise. Stop thinking with passion, start using your brain. This is about money, nothing more, nothing less. The only 2 individuals that have been reported to be interested to buy the team with local vested interests are Pegula and Galisano. So please, just stop the nonsense talk. While that is possible, it's highly unlikely. There are philanthropists. But in the Bills case, there is a great deal of money at stake. I've seen the number 1.2 billion for the team bantered about, believe me, this team is going to sell for more than that, perhaps approaching the 2 billion mark. It's an NFL franchise, with a very attractive out clause in a handful of years. Power players take note of that for sure, you can bank on it.

Anyone who is honest with themselves, forget others for a moment, but honest with themsevles, that believes an owner other than a locally vested individual or group are going to keep this team in Buffalo are only lying to themselves. If the team is bought by an entity, individual or group, that is not vested in the area, say goodbye to the team.

There is no reason to be rude mrags, I agree. I'm assessing the situation as I see it unfolding not only in recent years, but across many decades. I do have a love for the Bills to be sure, but I cannot sugar coat what has gone on in WNY, and the Bills in general. I realize you believe what you believe, but I work in the industry, and I can tell you directly, whether you realize it or not, Buffalo is more of a hockey town as opposed to a football town. Not by a large margin, but it is none the less. I do hope all that respond to this post understand it is beyond opinion. You can put up all of the stats and articles you like, but I run numbers on the E industry here in WNY currently, and the Bills are not high on the list as of late. Sorry to burst your bubbles, but it is what it is.

Actually, I'm 43 and every bit aware of what constitutes the larger market share for the sports franchises in the region. It's not a matter of myself choosing one sport over the other, the fact the region is located virtually right next door to a nation that thrives on hockey as opposed to football has a direct impact on that market share. It also hasn't helped football that the product has been substandard for many years now, while hockey has remained flexible with it's semi success in the mid 2000's and now appears to be righting the ship again. There is also the secondary situation of ownership. Having one of the wealthiest sports franchise owners in all of sports own the Sabres has boosted that brands public image, especially the work that individual has done for the sport in general, not just the Harbor Center. You don't have to like the analysis, but as I said, it's a geographical circumstance. Uh, yes.

The Sabres are more exciting than the Bills are. It's really that simple. The Sabres tore it all down and are rebuilding correctly as where the Bills have been in a bad way for many years. The Bills are not the core or premier sports team in town, that is for sure. The Sabres are, Buffalo is much more of a hockey town than football town and that's not a knock on football, it's a geographical circumstance.