Did Ralph Already Grant Toronto An Option To Buy?

[trolls_r_us]

The Bills are not moving, PERIOD.

 

And that includes Toronto.

 

Like I said though, to any non-Bills fan around the country, they "make sense" to move to Toronto. So we will keep hearing about it.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

I think it's time for you to change the title of your thread to "Let me convince you that Ralph already granted Toronto an option to buy", since this appears to be an ongoing effort to prove that this is the case.

 

As many have stated: no, he hasn't. You continue to provide abstract references to the Toronto sports market and miscellaneous financial "indicators" without any supporting evidence that there is anything to your theory other than conjecture.

 

We get it: you think Ralph already sold Buffalo out.

 

Now it's time for you to get it: nobody agrees with you.

 

Move on.

It's a long thread, so I can understand how you could easily have missed it, but here's what I actually said (partial quote from my post #85 above):

 

"I was pretty up front in the OP that the question of whether Ralph already granted Toronto an option to buy or a right of first refusal to buy is speculative.

 

* * * * *

 

I happen to be interested in what will happen to the Bills after Ralph's death, and I think the Toronto situation bears watching. I doubt that I'm the only one. Even if it turns out that Ralph has NOT granted any sort of option or right of first refusal to anyone, Toronto people are potential bidders in any future post-Ralph sale of the Bills.

 

So as I find information relevant to Toronto's interest or ability to eventually buy the Bills and move them to Toronto (with or without the benefit of any existing option or right of first refusal), I will probably post it here. Anyone who's not interested in the topic can pretty easily ignore this thread if they wish - - I am sure many will."

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

As for getting me to "move on" at any time before it becomes clear who will own the team after Ralph passes, well, good luck with that. This is a Bills-related topic that interests me, and I'm not flaming anybody.

[Delete This Account]

It's a long thread, so I can understand how you could easily have missed it, but here's what I actually said (partial quote from my post #85 above):

 

"I was pretty up front in the OP that the question of whether Ralph already granted Toronto an option to buy or a right of first refusal to buy is speculative.

 

it's not only speculative, it's inaccurate.

 

jw

[eball]

It's a long thread, so I can understand how you could easily have missed it, but here's what I actually said (partial quote from my post #85 above):

 

"I was pretty up front in the OP that the question of whether Ralph already granted Toronto an option to buy or a right of first refusal to buy is speculative.

 

* * * * *

 

I happen to be interested in what will happen to the Bills after Ralph's death, and I think the Toronto situation bears watching. I doubt that I'm the only one. Even if it turns out that Ralph has NOT granted any sort of option or right of first refusal to anyone, Toronto people are potential bidders in any future post-Ralph sale of the Bills.

 

So as I find information relevant to Toronto's interest or ability to eventually buy the Bills and move them to Toronto (with or without the benefit of any existing option or right of first refusal), I will probably post it here. Anyone who's not interested in the topic can pretty easily ignore this thread if they wish - - I am sure many will."

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

As for getting me to "move on" at any time before it becomes clear who will own the team after Ralph passes, well, good luck with that. This is a Bills-related topic that interests me, and I'm not flaming anybody.

I admittedly haven't bothered to read most of the stuff you've posted, but I wanted to take a moment to express my appreciation for your good-natured and patient responses to folks who seem to be irritated by the thread. A lot of posters (myself included) could learn a thing or two on the topic of "how to respond to people who disagree with you."

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I admittedly haven't bothered to read most of the stuff you've posted, but I wanted to take a moment to express my appreciation for your good-natured and patient responses to folks who seem to be irritated by the thread. A lot of posters (myself included) could learn a thing or two on the topic of "how to respond to people who disagree with you."

Regarding "ICanSleepWhenI'mDead,"

 

I'd add that he puts a hell of a lot of effort, time, and research into all his posts and that he seems like a pretty smart person (on top of what eball already said)… so in spite of the polarizing effects of this particular topic, I'm glad he's aboard here.

 

His posts are better than 95% of the posts that populate this site.

Edited July 7, 2011 by San Jose Bills Fan

[sllib olaffub]

I don't have anything but reasoning to go on here - but, as others have mentioned, Ralph Wilson keeping the Bills in Buffalo has been profitable for him, and he might also have a certain personal motive for keeping the team here despite being able to profit largely by the team's sale (unless it is borrowed heavily against, as another has tossed out there), but, to this point, he appears to be going to the grave as the sole owner of a team in an ever dwindling market. He knows how much the fans here love the Bills, but he's been on record saying the market here, as it is, cannot sustain a profitable competitive fanbase without regionalization. That sounds like he is doing all he can while he can to keep the team here - but he only has to do that for a few years until his death.

 

If he were planning on making sure the team stays here, I think he would have put everyone's fears and worry at ease. So, there are only two options I can think of - either he is going to let the market dictate where the Bills will go after his death, and that will more or less exclude Buffalo, unless there is a very, very wealthy buying group wanting to buy it and keep it here. Or, whatever Ralph has done to ensure the team remains here after his death is better served by remaining unknown until the time comes to make the move. I'm no lawyer, and I don't follow that end of the business, so I can't imagine what rules there might be, both outside the NFL, and inside it, that govern this type of business transaction, but there might be reason for silence.

 

Either way, Jim Kelly, who knows Ralph better than 99% of people, I'd say, believes it is possible to keep the team here. So do other people, like Russ Brandon. He's mentioned that the Bill's fanbase, considering Southern Ontario, Rochester, and WNY, is one of the league's biggest. I happen to think that the fanbase isn't the problem. This is a Historic team, with a name that is well known, and if the Bills had been winning over the last two decades, or had superstars on the team - if we would've been fun to watch, we might have a fan base that covers the world. People don't need to live here to buy the Bills merchandise. If we win, and are fun to watch, or memorable in some way, we will sell.

So, lets take care of that, first. Who cares about the Bills being here for another twenty or thirty years if we only have a few years of good football between 15 years of garbage? I want a winner. The rest will take care of itself a lot better if we do.

[thebandit27]

It's a long thread, so I can understand how you could easily have missed it, but here's what I actually said (partial quote from my post #85 above):

 

"I was pretty up front in the OP that the question of whether Ralph already granted Toronto an option to buy or a right of first refusal to buy is speculative.

 

* * * * *

 

I happen to be interested in what will happen to the Bills after Ralph's death, and I think the Toronto situation bears watching. I doubt that I'm the only one. Even if it turns out that Ralph has NOT granted any sort of option or right of first refusal to anyone, Toronto people are potential bidders in any future post-Ralph sale of the Bills.

 

So as I find information relevant to Toronto's interest or ability to eventually buy the Bills and move them to Toronto (with or without the benefit of any existing option or right of first refusal), I will probably post it here. Anyone who's not interested in the topic can pretty easily ignore this thread if they wish - - I am sure many will."

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

As for getting me to "move on" at any time before it becomes clear who will own the team after Ralph passes, well, good luck with that. This is a Bills-related topic that interests me, and I'm not flaming anybody.

 

I'm not suggesting that you're flaming anyone, and yes, I understand why the potential Toronto move is of interest to many.

 

All I am saying is that you started the thread by asking others the question of whether or not Ralph Wilson granted Toronto an option to buy, and asked that we convince you that he did not. I realize that others may have taken the hard line, but many of us have given good, solid reasoning as to why that's not the case (including information provided by JW, who has better access to the people in charge of such issues than most of us on here).

 

Now, although you have done it with candor and level-headedness, which I appreciate, your response to the collective "no" answer has been to provide as much evidence as possible to support the idea that the Toronto right of first refusal is a possibility. To me, it seems like you believe it's true, and don't want to be convinced otherwise. Thus, I'm suggesting that you change the title of your thread to accurately reflect your position, as opposed to asking others a question in order to refute the collective opinion of the masses.

 

Admittedly, I worded my last response to you poorly...what I meant by my statement was that you should change the thread title to accurately reflect your position, thereby letting people know ahead of time that you're not interested in being convinced otherwise, or just move on. Obviously, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and you've sparked 6 pages of discussion, so I have no desire to see the thread closed.

 

I hope that explains my position better.

Edited July 8, 2011 by thebandit27

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

I hope that explains my position better.

I think it does. I realize that this is a topic that sparks emotional responses, because nobody, including me, wants to see the Bills leave Buffalo.

 

It's also true that, while I realize that I'm distinctly in the minority on this, it is still my opinion that there is a possibility that RW granted a right of first refusal to buy the team to "the Toronto side of the deal." I think that possibility still exists because (1) I've never seen any media reports that actually quote RW as saying anything inconsistent with my speculation that it could have happened, and (2) I still believe that there are many reasons why the Toronto side of the deal would have wanted such contractual rights.

 

My impression has always been that, whatever anyone thinks about him in other areas, RW is basically an honest guy. So when I first started the thread, I was hoping that someone could provide a link showing that Ralph actually said something in an interview or press release that was inconsistent with my speculation, but that I had somehow missed it, despite having already spent a fair amount of time on google searching for contemporaneous RW quotes myself.

 

That hasn't happened. It's true that a lot of generally well-informed people are clearly of the opinion that Ralph did not grant "Toronto" a right of first refusal to buy the team. Some have given very rational explanations in this thread for why they hold that opinion. But sort of like conventional wisdom that everyone just "knows," an opinion, no matter how firmly believed, can be wrong. That's true of my opinions, yours, and everybody else's.

 

I've given some thought to your suggestion that I change the thread title. I've always thought that, as between the two, the granting of a right of first refusal was much more likely than the grant of an outright option to purchase. I used the term "Option To Buy" in the main thread title simply because "Right-Of-First-Refusal-To-Buy" was too long.

 

With respect to the sub-title - - - "Please convince me that it didn't happen" - - I think you have a point. While I would still welcome any future posts providing contemporaneous RW quotes from the time the Toronto deal was made, my own reason for continuing to post Toronto-related information here has changed a bit. As I pointed out above, even if it turns out that RW never granted any sort of option or right of first refusal to Toronto, it remains true that wealthy Toronto businessmen and politicians are actively seeking an NFL franchise. It seems pretty likely that if the Bills are sold at auction after Ralph passes, people in Toronto will bid.

 

I still have a few thoughts I haven't posted yet about the possibility that a right of first refusal to buy the team was already granted, because I want to check a few facts first. But I am now also posting Toronto-related information here in part to monitor the likely strength of any future Toronto bid to buy the Bills, even if Toronto has no existing contractual right to do that. I suppose I could have started yet another Toronto thread for that purpose, but it made more sense to me to continue to post Toronto-related info in one place.

 

I'm willing to change the sub-title to "Keeping An Eye On Toronto's Ambitions." I'll consider other sub-title suggestions if you can convince me that they would more accurately describe the direction this thread has taken.

 

Fair?

[thebandit27]

I think it does. I realize that this is a topic that sparks emotional responses, because nobody, including me, wants to see the Bills leave Buffalo.

 

It's also true that, while I realize that I'm distinctly in the minority on this, it is still my opinion that there is a possibility that RW granted a right of first refusal to buy the team to "the Toronto side of the deal." I think that possibility still exists because (1) I've never seen any media reports that actually quote RW as saying anything inconsistent with my speculation that it could have happened, and (2) I still believe that there are many reasons why the Toronto side of the deal would have wanted such contractual rights.

 

My impression has always been that, whatever anyone thinks about him in other areas, RW is basically an honest guy. So when I first started the thread, I was hoping that someone could provide a link showing that Ralph actually said something in an interview or press release that was inconsistent with my speculation, but that I had somehow missed it, despite having already spent a fair amount of time on google searching for contemporaneous RW quotes myself.

 

That hasn't happened. It's true that a lot of generally well-informed people are clearly of the opinion that Ralph did not grant "Toronto" a right of first refusal to buy the team. Some have given very rational explanations in this thread for why they hold that opinion. But sort of like conventional wisdom that everyone just "knows," an opinion, no matter how firmly believed, can be wrong. That's true of my opinions, yours, and everybody else's.

 

I've given some thought to your suggestion that I change the thread title. I've always thought that, as between the two, the granting of a right of first refusal was much more likely than the grant of an outright option to purchase. I used the term "Option To Buy" in the main thread title simply because "Right-Of-First-Refusal-To-Buy" was too long.

 

With respect to the sub-title - - - "Please convince me that it didn't happen" - - I think you have a point. While I would still welcome any future posts providing contemporaneous RW quotes from the time the Toronto deal was made, my own reason for continuing to post Toronto-related information here has changed a bit. As I pointed out above, even if it turns out that RW never granted any sort of option or right of first refusal to Toronto, it remains true that wealthy Toronto businessmen and politicians are actively seeking an NFL franchise. It seems pretty likely that if the Bills are sold at auction after Ralph passes, people in Toronto will bid.

 

I still have a few thoughts I haven't posted yet about the possibility that a right of first refusal to buy the team was already granted, because I want to check a few facts first. But I am now also posting Toronto-related information here in part to monitor the likely strength of any future Toronto bid to buy the Bills, even if Toronto has no existing contractual right to do that. I suppose I could have started yet another Toronto thread for that purpose, but it made more sense to me to continue to post Toronto-related info in one place.

 

I'm willing to change the sub-title to "Keeping An Eye On Toronto's Ambitions." I'll consider other sub-title suggestions if you can convince me that they would more accurately describe the direction this thread has taken.

 

Fair?

 

As far as I'm concerned, it's your thread, so that's your call, although I do feel that would be much more appropriate in relation to the purpose of the continual posting (I bet it would quell some of the emotional backlash as well).

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Hasn't been much in the media lately about the proposed sale of MLSE (that Larry Tanenbaum owns a chunk of) - - here's an update:

 

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/sports/article/141231--grange-on-mlse-one-final-task-for-peddie

 

"Teachers is said to be seeking $1.5 billion or more for their 79.5 per cent stake in the business they own with financier and MLSE chairman Larry Tanenbaum, but after a flurry of news -- including reports Rogers Communications Inc. was the leading candidate to buy the entity -- the deal isn't yet done.

 

What has taken so long?"

[AthensThunder]

Why yes he did and you found out.Now what are you going to do????

[The Senator]

Why yes he did and you found out.Now what are you going to do????

 

I can see only 2 course of action, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive:

 

Either...

 

1) File an injunction to block said agreement;

 

And/Or...

 

2) Start researching Ralph Wilson Enterprises potential deals with the various customs brokers and van lines for a possible moving contract.

 

(Either - or both - would, of course, necessitate the start [and then continual 'bumping'] of a new thread to convince TSW members that the sky is indeed falling!)

 

 

As stated many times, the Bills will be located in and playing the bulk of their home games in Buffalo long after Rogers Centre lies in crumbled ruins...

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

19 and 0 baby!!!!!

 

 

.

Edited July 10, 2011 by The Senator

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

 

I can see only 2 course of action, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive:

 

Either...

 

1) File an injunction to block said agreement;

 

And/Or...

 

2) Start researching Ralph Wilson Enterprises potential deals with the various customs brokers and van lines for a possible moving contract.

 

(Either - or both - would, of course, necessitate the start [and then continual 'bumping'] of a new thread to convince TSW members that the sky is indeed falling!)

 

 

As stated many times, the Bills will be located in and playing the bulk of their home games in Buffalo long after Rogers Centre lies in crumbled ruins...

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

19 and 0 baby!!!!!

 

 

.

Hey there, The Senator!

 

You caught me on a bad day, but you're a fellow Bills fan and I'm a big believer in the First Amendment, so I'm gonna do you a favor. It's totally up to you, obviously, but I strongly suggest you delete your post #51 in this TSW thread:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/131353-what-a-stadium-in-niagara-falls-would-look-like/page__st__40

 

If you actually do that, I'll explain why it's a good idea. OTOH, if you don't think "The Senator" can learn anything from an anonymous insomniac, I suppose there's no reason for you to change anything.

[The Senator]

Hey there, The Senator!

 

You caught me on a bad day, but you're a fellow Bills fan and I'm a big believer in the First Amendment, so I'm gonna do you a favor. It's totally up to you, obviously, but I strongly suggest you delete your post #51 in this TSW thread:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/131353-what-a-stadium-in-niagara-falls-would-look-like/page__st__40

 

If you actually do that, I'll explain why it's a good idea. OTOH, if you don't think "The Senator" can learn anything from an anonymous insomniac, I suppose there's no reason for you to change anything.

Yes, you're absolutely right - there are folks out there with both malicious intent AND too much idle time on their hands.

 

I've edited the post. Thanks.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

I've edited the post. Thanks.

No worries. I didn't want to explain before you had an opportunity to make the edit, and now an explanation is obviously unnecessary, so I'll skip it.

Edited July 11, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

i would not discount the dig-down plan.

 

jw

You may already know this, but I just discovered something showing that the "dig down" plan for the Rogers Center was not a recent invention of the looney Toronto councilman. The "dig down" expansion plan was mentioned in a 2007 Toronto Star article. I don't have a direct link, but the article was quoted verbatim at length at post #71 at this message board site:

 

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=358177&pid=7586173&st=50entry7586173

 

Here's the pertinent text:

 

"By Rick Westhead - Toronto Star

Updated: 10/20/07 8:31 AM

 

* * * * * *

 

To be sure, the concept of NFL football in Toronto isn’t far-fetched. The Globe & Mail reported last week that the owners of the CFL’s Argonauts have explored whether they could raise the money to build a stadium for an NFL franchise in Toronto.

 

And a source familiar with the matter told the Star that a plan has percolated for years to jackhammer the field level at the Rogers Centre. Sinking the field could make room for as many as 10,000 new seats for a 100-yard NFL field.

 

Nevertheless, the NFL and Wilson are sure to come to the same conclusion in future months when they contemplate the Bills’ future: Skyline aside, Toronto doesn’t come close to L.A. when the debate moves to how best to buttress NFL coffers.

[BuffaloBaumer]

It's NOT going to Toronto, the team is STAYING in Buffalo. The wheels are in motion and if I could provide more detail, I would. All I can do is tell you that for the first time EVER, there is progress....

[K-9]

It's NOT going to Toronto, the team is STAYING in Buffalo. The wheels are in motion and if I could provide more detail, I would. All I can do is tell you that for the first time EVER, there is progress....

 

Now you've done it.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Pondslider]

It's NOT going to Toronto, the team is STAYING in Buffalo. The wheels are in motion and if I could provide more detail, I would. All I can do is tell you that for the first time EVER, there is progress....

 

Like throwing a lit match into a dry forest and expecting nothing to happen.

[McBeane]

It's NOT going to Toronto, the team is STAYING in Buffalo. The wheels are in motion and if I could provide more detail, I would. All I can do is tell you that for the first time EVER, there is progress....

 

Oh God, this thread is going to get interesting...

 

I'm gonna sit back and watch the show

Edited August 26, 2011 by Marcellosaurus