Mr. WEO Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 Not sure which year you saw him make $31M in profit -- I'm not doubting it, I just didn't see it. In '07, the team only made $14.M according to Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/30/sports...lls_301765.html Katrina hit before the 2005 season. This is the same season that Ralph pocketed $31 million. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/30/06nfl_...ons_Rank_2.html The 2006 Forbes story documents the financial info of the 2005 season (as they are all released in Sept, they are giving data on the previous season). For several years before, Benson made it known that he wanted significant upgrades to the dilapidated Superdome or he was going to leave NO. Certainly after Katrina, he had to figure the improvements would not come---in fact, that NO itself would be permanently ruined--his franchise along with it. As I said, he was, for an act of God, being essentially forced to put his investment at risk to make a city feel better. Nothing such as this has ever happened to Ralph, despite his chronic wailing and cries of "po me everybody", from up there in Grosse Pointe.
NobesBLO13 Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 Ralph deserves every ounce of crap we spew on him. I patiently await the day he is no longer invoilved with the Bills... even if that means no more Buffalo
JohnC Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 Ralph agreed to the Toronto venture as a result of the realization that he has tapped out a dying market and needed other sources of revenue APART from WNY. Do you think he WANTS to give away home field advantage? Of course not. He has determined he must in order to survive. Answer me this please. If Ralph is such a blood sucker, why has he NEVER demanded a new stadium from NYS? Why did he also not do so back 10 years ago when HE requested renovations as opposed to a new stadium? Why would Ralph Wilson want a news stadium? He would pay more rent than he currently does. Currently his lease is almost up so when he sells the team there will be no lease buyout encumberances to the prospective owner. At 91 yrs old and counting do you think he would sign a long term lease on a new stadium? At his age would Ralph pay for a segment of a new stadium, as owners do? Of course not. Let's get real here. Ralph is Ralph. He might not know how to field a winning team but he certainly knows how to protect and maximize his financial interests.
Doc Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 Katrina hit before the 2005 season. This is the same season that Ralph pocketed $31 million. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/30/06nfl_...ons_Rank_2.html The 2006 Forbes story documents the financial info of the 2005 season (as they are all released in Sept, they are giving data on the previous season). For several years before, Benson made it known that he wanted significant upgrades to the dilapidated Superdome or he was going to leave NO. Certainly after Katrina, he had to figure the improvements would not come---in fact, that NO itself would be permanently ruined--his franchise along with it. As I said, he was, for an act of God, being essentially forced to put his investment at risk to make a city feel better. Nothing such as this has ever happened to Ralph, despite his chronic wailing and cries of "po me everybody", from up there in Grosse Pointe. "Putting his investment at risk?"
Doc Posted February 11, 2010 Posted February 11, 2010 Why would Ralph Wilson want a news stadium? He would pay more rent than he currently does. Currently his lease is almost up so when he sells the team there will be no lease buyout encumberances to the prospective owner. At 91 yrs old and counting do you think he would sign a long term lease on a new stadium? At his age would Ralph pay for a segment of a new stadium, as owners do? Of course not. Let's get real here. Ralph is Ralph. He might not know how to field a winning team but he certainly knows how to protect and maximize his financial interests. With a new stadium would come higher prices, which would more than off-set the rent increase. And Ralph could have demanded a new stadium back in 1998, when he was a mere 79 years old. At least he never went to another city like, say, Hartford, having a deal in place until backing-out at the last second.
JohnC Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 With a new stadium would come higher prices, which would more than off-set the rent increase. And Ralph could have demanded a new stadium back in 1998, when he was a mere 79 years old. At least he never went to another city like, say, Hartford, having a deal in place until backing-out at the last second. You fawning Ralph zealots are amazing. The owner did threaten to leave the area if the local authorities didn't build him boxes. Don't you remember the "Save the Bills Campaign'? This was during the Flutie era. The state and county built the boxes at no cost to him (of course) and he got the revenue from it. Don't you remember when the 80,000 seat stadium was refurbished and made into a 72,000 seat stadium? How much did the owner pay for the conversion? Nothing. (THIS IS RALPH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.) Repeating what I stated in my earlier post it would be nonsensical for a 91 yr old man to want a new stadium built because he wouldn't agree to contribute a dime to its construction as other owners do. THIS IS RALPH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. Ralph Wilson DOESN'T want a new stadium built, even if it was completely payed for by the taxpayers, because he would not at this stage in his life sign a long term lease deal. Why would he? He is at the tail end of his lease now and when the team is auctioned upon his death (as stated in his will) the franchise would be more appealing to OUTSIDE bidders unencumbered by a previously signed longterm lease. You and others of your ilk continue to repeat the mantra how Ralph has sacrificed out of his good hearted loyalty to the region. What you don't say is that he has made a quater of a BILLION $$$$ over the past decade without investing anything during that period. On top of that he has over the past decade put out an embarrassingly bad and unentertaining product.
ntjacks79 Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 The Packers did it in the 90s when they had games in Milwaukee. And it worked so great that they're still doing it, right? It's a bonehead move.
Bring Back Kelly Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 I agree with the article. He could have worded the blood-sucking leech portion a bit. It comes off as too rash and angry, but when I look at it overall, it was a very good article. I am angry too, and feel the pain of all the losing seasons add up. The reason he stayed in Buffalo is He wouldn't have made enough of a profit. He also did not want to look like Art Modell and root up some place else. He will leave that decision to his kids.
Fezmid Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 He is at the tail end of his lease now and when the team is auctioned upon his death (as stated in his will).... What you don't say is that he has made a quater of a BILLION $$ over the past decade without investing anything during that period. What's the $100+M for player salaries? What's the $12+M operating expenses? That's an investment. And where are you getting the quarter of a billion dollars from? And how do you know what Ralph's will says? Sounds like you're just making crap up and calling it fact, unless you have some proof?
Doc Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 You fawning Ralph zealots are amazing. The owner did threaten to leave the area if the local authorities didn't build him boxes. Don't you remember the "Save the Bills Campaign'? This was during the Flutie era. The state and county built the boxes at no cost to him (of course) and he got the revenue from it. Don't you remember when the 80,000 seat stadium was refurbished and made into a 72,000 seat stadium? How much did the owner pay for the conversion? Nothing. (THIS IS RALPH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.) Repeating what I stated in my earlier post it would be nonsensical for a 91 yr old man to want a new stadium built because he wouldn't agree to contribute a dime to its construction as other owners do. THIS IS RALPH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. Ralph Wilson DOESN'T want a new stadium built, even if it was completely payed for by the taxpayers, because he would not at this stage in his life sign a long term lease deal. Why would he? He is at the tail end of his lease now and when the team is auctioned upon his death (as stated in his will) the franchise would be more appealing to OUTSIDE bidders unencumbered by a previously signed longterm lease. You and others of your ilk continue to repeat the mantra how Ralph has sacrificed out of his good hearted loyalty to the region. What you don't say is that he has made a quater of a BILLION $$ over the past decade without investing anything during that period. On top of that he has over the past decade put out an embarrassingly bad and unentertaining product. Ah yes, threatening to move but not even looking into other venues is much worse than what Kraft pulled. And clearly Ralph hasn't demanded a new stadium be built because he's worried about his increased rent payments and not the economic burden it would place on the county for covering most of the cost (like every other NFL stadium) and higher prices. And Ralph has purposely been trying to lose because top coaches and players are dying to come to Buffalo, but he doesn't want to pay them. Got it. You and other Ralph bashers of your ilk are all the same. When you realize that Ralph owes you nothing, and vice versa, as well as the hindrances Ralph faces in Buffalo, NY, you'll have a firmer grasp of the situation.
Mr. WEO Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Ah yes, threatening to move but not even looking into other venues is much worse than what Kraft pulled. And clearly Ralph hasn't demanded a new stadium be built because he's worried about his increased rent payments and not the economic burden it would place on the county for covering most of the cost (like every other NFL stadium) and higher prices. And Ralph has purposely been trying to lose because top coaches and players are dying to come to Buffalo, but he doesn't want to pay them. Got it. You and other Ralph bashers of your ilk are all the same. When you realize that Ralph owes you nothing, and vice versa, as well as the hindrances Ralph faces in Buffalo, NY, you'll have a firmer grasp of the situation. Ralph doesn't want a new stadium because he would be expected to pay a good chunk of it. Why on earth would he want to do that?? Should logic lead you to conclude that if he was actually concerned with the financial situation of WNY he would have paid for the renovations (or at least offered to HELP pay) back in 98? You have no grasp on the situation. And what, exactly are the "hindrences" he "faces" in WNY?? What is keeping him from making tons of money every year? And while we're at it, you are the only one who hasn't figured out that the only hindrence to getting a top HC here IS Ralph and his chronic mismanagement of the TEAM (not his investment)---your claim of huge salary promises by Ralph not withstanding. "Putting his investment at risk?" What, you don't get this one either? The place where the owner's team plays is wrecked as is the city they play in. Given the poor financial shape of NO before the hurricane, you don't think it was unreasonable for Benson to think his forced stay in NO had the potential to ruin his investment? Really? You can't conceive of that? OK. What's the $100+M for player salaries? What's the $12+M operating expenses? That's an investment. And where are you getting the quarter of a billion dollars from? And how do you know what Ralph's will says? Sounds like you're just making crap up and calling it fact, unless you have some proof? The $100+ mil for players salaries and the operating expenses are covered by the TV shared revenue ($120 mil/yr). Throw in also 40% of the away gate when his team plays on the road and the vast majority (or all, really) of Ralph's nut is covered before he sells one ticket or "Owens" jersey. The quarter billion dollars is based on operating margin over the past 8 years, actually ($247.1 million--not yet including this past season). Forbes reports on this yearly, brother. Look it up. Some hinderence!! There is no easier or financially rewarding "job" than being the current owner of the Buffalo Bills.
Fezmid Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 The $100+ mil for players salaries and the operating expenses are covered by the TV shared revenue ($120 mil/yr). Throw in also 40% of the away gate when his team plays on the road and the vast majority (or all, really) of Ralph's nut is covered before he sells one ticket or "Owens" jersey. The quarter billion dollars is based on operating margin over the past 8 years, actually ($247.1 million--not yet including this past season). Forbes reports on this yearly, brother. Look it up. Some hinderence!! There is no easier or financially rewarding "job" than being the current owner of the Buffalo Bills. Assuming your numbers are correct, what about your part on his will?
Mr. WEO Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Assuming your numbers are correct, what about your part on his will? Again, those are not my numbers. Ralph has never disputed those figures. Also, I did not comment on Ralph's will. However, he's made it quite clear that the team would be sold only upon his death, so that would imply that it would go to the "highest bidder" (as someone else stated above).
Doc Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Ralph doesn't want a new stadium because he would be expected to pay a good chunk of it. Why on earth would he want to do that?? Should logic lead you to conclude that if he was actually concerned with the financial situation of WNY he would have paid for the renovations (or at least offered to HELP pay) back in 98? You have no grasp on the situation. And what, exactly are the "hindrences" he "faces" in WNY?? What is keeping him from making tons of money every year? And while we're at it, you are the only one who hasn't figured out that the only hindrence to getting a top HC here IS Ralph and his chronic mismanagement of the TEAM (not his investment)---your claim of huge salary promises by Ralph not withstanding. Ralph would be expected to pay a good chunk of a new stadium? Really? Like say, the Colts did with Lucas Oil field, which cost $720M and to which they contributed a whopping $100M, with the rest being paid by the citizens of Indiana? And with gameday prices being among the higher ones in the league? How do you think Erie County would do with a $620M (at least) bill for a new stadium, the cost of upkeeping it, AND jacked-up prices by even $20 more? Versus $10M/year in stadium upkeep, which Ralph has forgiven during certain years? Oh wait, that's right. There are untapped rich people in the WNY market that are just waiting for a new stadium to be built. And you're really saying that the only thing keeping coaches and players from Buffalo is Ralph? You really do have no insight. What, you don't get this one either? The place where the owner's team plays is wrecked as is the city they play in. Given the poor financial shape of NO before the hurricane, you don't think it was unreasonable for Benson to think his forced stay in NO had the potential to ruin his investment? Really? You can't conceive of that? OK. Gee, I guess if maybe the players were washed-away in the flood waters, you'd have a point. Because that's the only thing of value that can't easily be replaced like the venue (the Alamodome is basically the same as the Superdome), or isn't on paper (like team value, which means nothing unless/until he's looking to sell, and he's not). He didn't lose his share of the TV money, which according to you and thanks to that great 2006 CBA, is making him rich. Benson's "investment" is wholly tied to being a part of the NFL. And the NFL is image-conscious enough that they wouldn't dare face the public backlash that would come if THEY approved a move of the Saints to San Antonio. IOW, it's the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few, if even since Benson hasn't lost money. So ultimately the decision to stay wasn't his. Unlike in Ralph's case.
billsfreak Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 And it worked so great that they're still doing it, right? It's a bonehead move. More like a greedy move. My pockets over our fans!
Mr. WEO Posted February 12, 2010 Posted February 12, 2010 Ralph would be expected to pay a good chunk of a new stadium? Really? Like say, the Colts did with Lucas Oil field, which cost $720M and to which they contributed a whopping $100M, with the rest being paid by the citizens of Indiana? And with gameday prices being among the higher ones in the league? How do you think Erie County would do with a $620M (at least) bill for a new stadium, the cost of upkeeping it, AND jacked-up prices by even $20 more? Versus $10M/year in stadium upkeep, which Ralph has forgiven during certain years? Oh wait, that's right. There are untapped rich people in the WNY market that are just waiting for a new stadium to be built. And you're really saying that the only thing keeping coaches and players from Buffalo is Ralph? You really do have no insight. Ah, yeah thosee are some of the reasons why Ralph would have to contribute a big chink to a new stadium. You're catching on. Gee, I guess if maybe the players were washed-away in the flood waters, you'd have a point. Because that's the only thing of value that can't easily be replaced like the venue (the Alamodome is basically the same as the Superdome), or isn't on paper (like team value, which means nothing unless/until he's looking to sell, and he's not). He didn't lose his share of the TV money, which according to you and thanks to that great 2006 CBA, is making him rich. Benson's "investment" is wholly tied to being a part of the NFL. And the NFL is image-conscious enough that they wouldn't dare face the public backlash that would come if THEY approved a move of the Saints to San Antonio. IOW, it's the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few, if even since Benson hasn't lost money. So ultimately the decision to stay wasn't his. Unlike in Ralph's case. His players and team could have easily washed over to San Antonio, where he was looking to go some years before the hurricane. He was forced to take his chances in a devestated poor city---you aren't even disputing this so what exactly is your point? If for the next 2 or 3 seasons the fans didn't come back to the dome because of the profound economic impact of the disaster, would Benson still be forced to keep his team in a half filled stadium? And I don't recall the League's image taking much of a powder when the beloved Browns and Colts left town.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 people need to get over the correlation of ralph wilson to winning.....the only important factor to ralph wilson is profit. as it should be...winning is nice, but he is in business to make money....if he's not in it to make money then he truly is a fool... Well you speak as if winning and making money are mutually exclusive. They are not. A well run organization can win and make money at the same time. In fact while people in Western New York seem willing to support whatever product is put on the field, in the majority of metro areas, I would say that winning would make a team more profitable. So no, I don't forgive Ralph for his ineptitude and lack of commitment to providing a winning team for the fans. Of the 32 NFL teams, the Bills have the 4th lowest winning percentage in league history. To me, this is inexcusable. Ralph can make all the money he wants but his ****ty performance in wins/losses over 50 years of owning a pro sports team is reprehensible. Especially as performance in pro sports is measured, not only in dollars, but in wins. To subject the loyal, faithful fans of this team to a perennially lousy product is something that I will personally not forgive him for.
WellDressed Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 That clown is a nickel rocket, he uses the word rally, when he should be using the word rant. He probably has a side job working at the Lockport outdoor store.
JohnC Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 Well you speak as if winning and making money are mutually exclusive. They are not. A well run organization can win and make money at the same time. In fact while people in Western New York seem willing to support whatever product is put on the field, in the majority of metro areas, I would say that winning would make a team more profitable. So no, I don't forgive Ralph for his ineptitude and lack of commitment to providing a winning team for the fans. Of the 32 NFL teams, the Bills have the 4th lowest winning percentage in league history. To me, this is inexcusable. Ralph can make all the money he wants but his ****ty performance in wins/losses over 50 years of owning a pro sports team is reprehensible. Especially as performance in pro sports is measured, not only in dollars, but in wins. To subject the loyal, faithful fans of this team to a perennially lousy product is something that I will personally not forgive him for. I could never figure out how the Ralph apologists could be so hoodwinked by this shyster owner. The owner's perpetual whining of regional poverty and an inability to compete didn't stop him from making more than a quarter of a billion dollars in an 8 yr period. When I saw Ralph at the podium in Toronto incoherently ridiculing the Buffalo market compared to the riches of the Toronto market I thought how classless can a person get. There is not a scintilla of respect or a sense of gratitude towards the people of western NY who have enriched him beyond imagination over the half century. In Ralph's warped and greedy view of the world he believes that he has been shortchanged because of his desire for more money. Surprisingly, there are many who consider the baron owner to be a benevolent owner. What it comes down to is that many people are willing to accept a flawed and non-competitive franchise to no franchise at all. I can accept that rational. But at least admit the rational.
Doc Posted February 13, 2010 Posted February 13, 2010 Ah, yeah thosee are some of the reasons why Ralph would have to contribute a big chink to a new stadium. You're catching on. Unfortunately I can't say the same. Again, Ralph owes the fans nothing and the fans owe him nothing. Why you (continue to) insist that he "would have to contribute a big chunk to a new stadium" is anyone's guess! The fact is, he wouldn't have to, just like the majority of owners have barely contributed to their new stadiums, off of which they make tons of unshared/"local" revenue. And again, raising gameday prices would be prohibitive to the average fan who attends games. His players and team could have easily washed over to San Antonio, where he was looking to go some years before the hurricane. He was forced to take his chances in a devestated poor city---you aren't even disputing this so what exactly is your point? If for the next 2 or 3 seasons the fans didn't come back to the dome because of the profound economic impact of the disaster, would Benson still be forced to keep his team in a half filled stadium? Benson never left NO for SA, just like Ralph never left Buffalo for another city. Is that because Saints fans have low standards or because he never received an offer, like you've claimed with Ralph? But the reality is that, while Benson may have wanted to move the team to SA, the NFL doesn't consider it a viable city. So there's no way they're going to put a team there, much less relocate the Saints. Unlike the situation in Buffalo, where NFL owners would probably personally pitch-in with a move to another city. And I don't recall the League's image taking much of a powder when the beloved Browns and Colts left town. The NFL had to give both cities expansion teams because of the hue and cry. And neither had anything remotely close to Katrina happen to them.
Recommended Posts