Golisano interview on the Bills & ownership

[JohnC]

@JohnC

Not sure that one year extension is confirmed yet and, if it is, emphasis on the "extension" part -- it's going to give them more time to negotiate a long-term deal, not because Ralph is averse to a long-term commitment.

 

http://espn.go.com/n...lease-extension

 

The one year extension has been agreed upon instead of a longer term extension because the owner and his reps don't want to commit to a longer term lease that would justify the major extension for the prospective renovation.

 

It is obvious to me that the owner is not going to commit to keeping the team on a longer term basis because it would make his "asset" less appealing to outside bidders. Let's be blunt about this situation. The financial numbers for the costs are very easily attainable. That is not the problem. The stumbling block is that the current owner who is very aged is more concerned with ensuring that his franchise is not encumbered with financial committments so that it is more appealing to all bidders.

 

My view is that it would be irresponsible and not wise to commit money to an antiquated and relic of a stadium. It would be much smarter to use the substantial amount of money that was to be directed for a relatively short term upgrade and use it for a new facility. As it stands nothing can be done until the rapacious owner leaves the scene. Then we will have a sense of where this franchise will be located.

 

It must be understood that when you have an estate auction for an asset worth nearly a billion $$$ that it is not a simple matter. It can take two years before an owner or group wins the bid and gets the required league approval. To make matters more perilous if a losing group is not satisfied with the outcome it can take the matters to court and delay the issue from being resolved. That is what happened with Jack Kent Cook's Redskin estate sale.

 

The bottom line is that this 94 year old owner is holding the issue and region in hostage. That is his prerogative. Because of his avarice the Bills will continue to be an unstable (losing) franchise until the owner is completely detached from this franchise. This is a stupid situation to be in caused by a greedy owner who in life and death is mostly interested is squeezing the last nickel that he can.

Edited October 27, 2012 by JohnC

[OvrOfficiousJerk]

http://espn.go.com/n...lease-extension

 

The one year extension has been agreed upon instead of a longer term extension because the owner and his reps don't want to commit to a longer term lease that would justify the major extension for the prospective renovation.

 

 

Here is the article I was thinking of, which came out right after that glut of reports saying the one-year extension was "agreed upon:"

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120912/CITYANDREGION/120919682

 

Poloncarz said that the one-year deal had not been finalized, and reports saying that it has are false. And all sides characterize the one-year extension as a way to give them more time to put together a longer term deal. If Ralph really wanted to play an indefinite one-year waiting game, he would've asked for the Vikings stadium and the $500mil in gov't funding, not get the terms he wanted, and then done one-year extensions at a lame duck RW Stadium while negotiations are "on-going."

 

IMHO, the stumbling block was probably the fact that the government wanted the team to chip in $$$, while the Bills were balking at that prospect. I'm actually okay with that, since the anti-business atmosphere of NYS prevents the Bills from generating revenue by luxury boxes/club seats/etc. But that means the state/county should get a longer agreement to balance out a larger government contribution.

 

And as it relates to a next owner to keep the team in Buffalo, like Golisano, the Ralph provides a good option to minimize team overhead costs: it's easy to extract necessary repairs and operation costs from the authorities, as opposed to a new covered stadium downtown that will necessarily mean the team kicks in a lot of money.

 

Thanks for the info about Jack Kent Cooke. Always wondered what the timeline might be like if (when) the team is sold on the open market

Edited October 27, 2012 by OvrOfficiousJerk

[Just Jack]

All silly stuff, but I remember Thurman Thomas, two or three years ago, talking on the Bills future in Buffalo, and he sounded so much like he knew something that he was dying to say, but couldn't...

 

He is still being coy about what he knows. I was at a private function a few weeks ago and during a question/answer session the subject came up. He said he couldn't say anything unless you were ready to write a check right then (or something like that).

[JohnC]

Here is the article I was thinking of, which came out right after that glut of reports saying the one-year extension was "agreed upon:"

 

http://www.buffalone...EGION/120919682

 

Poloncarz said that the one-year deal had not been finalized, and reports saying that it has are false. And all sides characterize the one-year extension as a way to give them more time to put together a longer term deal. If Ralph really wanted to play an indefinite one-year waiting game, he would've asked for the Vikings stadium and the $500mil in gov't funding, not get the terms he wanted, and then done one-year extensions at a lame duck RW Stadium while negotiations are "on-going."

 

IMHO, the stumbling block was probably the fact that the government wanted the team to chip in $$$, while the Bills were balking at that prospect. I'm actually okay with that, since the anti-business atmosphere of NYS prevents the Bills from generating revenue by luxury boxes/club seats/etc. But that means the state/county should get a longer agreement to balance out a larger government contribution.

 

And as it relates to a next owner to keep the team in Buffalo, like Golisano, the Ralph provides a good option to minimize team overhead costs: it's easy to extract necessary repairs and operation costs from the authorities, as opposed to a new covered stadium downtown that will necessarily mean the team kicks in a lot of money.

 

Thanks for the info about Jack Kent Cooke. Always wondered what the timeline might be like if (when) the team is sold on the open market

 

Even at this stage of his fading life Ralph is money conscious. He is not going to kick in any money for a stadium upgrade because he simply doesn't want to, How much money has he provided for his current stadium when it was built and on multiple occasions upgraded? Not much if any at all.

 

Ralph Wilson has absolutely no desire to have his team play in a new stadium for the simple reason that he is not going to chip in for the cost of a new stadium. In addition, he is not going to want to pay a higher rent in a new facility. The current facility is a dump. But the rent is dirt cheap. Why would someone at his age want a better facility at a higher cost? He wasn't willing to contribute to a new stadium and its multiple upgrades when he was younger and he certainly isn't going to pay more for a better facility at this stage in his life.

 

I get amused when people talk about Ralph's secret plans about how the franchised is going to be benevolently handled. Ralph Wilson has been an owner for more than one half century. His style of ownership has been a constant during that stint. Expecting him to act out of character is wishful thinking. The region has been very supportive of his business. You rarely get appreciative comments from him. But you do get a lot of snide critical comments about the region that has enriched him beyond imagination.

 

I will repeat what I have said on numerous postings: It is an absurdity that a 94 yr old person owns an NFL franchise. Until there is a new owner the franchise will continue to be one of the most unstable franchises in the league. If anyone questions my opinion on this matter then my challenge to them is to simply look at the look at the record over the past generation.

[dwight in philly]

Even at this stage of his fading life Ralph is money conscious. He is not going to kick in any money for a stadium upgrade because he simply doesn't want to, How much money has he provided for his current stadium when it was built and on multiple occasions upgraded? Not much if any at all.

 

Ralph Wilson has absolutely no desire to have his team play in a new stadium for the simple reason that he is not going to chip in for the cost of a new stadium. In addition, he is not going to want to pay a higher rent in a new facility. The current facility is a dump. But the rent is dirt cheap. Why would someone at his age want a better facility at a higher cost? He wasn't willing to contribute to a new stadium and its multiple upgrades when he was younger and he certainly isn't going to pay more for a better facility at this stage in his life.

 

I get amused when people talk about Ralph's secret plans about how the franchised is going to be benevolently handled. Ralph Wilson has been an owner for more than one half century. His style of ownership has been a constant during that stint. Expecting him to act out of character is wishful thinking. The region has been very supportive of his business. You rarely get appreciative comments from him. But you do get a lot of snide critical comments about the region that has enriched him beyond imagination.

 

I will repeat what I have said on numerous postings: It is an absurdity that a 94 yr old person owns an NFL franchise. Until there is a new owner the franchise will continue to be one of the most unstable franchises in the league. If anyone questions my opinion on this matter then my challenge to them is to simply look at the look at the record over the past generation.

well said!

[gobillsinytown]

Nice discussion going on here. The only thing that I would like to chip into the discussion is that these types of transactions are very complex. There will be private as well as public entities involved in what the franchise transitions into once Ralph passes, all of whom will be trying to protect and enhance their own interests. Because of this reality, any plans that Ralph my have are going to be kept completely confidential. The other parties involved, like Jim Kelly, Thurman, Golisano, Pegula, etc. are all going to say the "right things", but ultimately any real information they have will be kept to themselves. They know that Buffalo has a very passionate fan base and so aren't going to say anything beyond the most vague statements. Remember also that this is an ongoing process, so I personally doubt that anything has been finalized.

I've also noticed that some people seem to think that Ralph is the "sole decider". I don't believe this to be entirely true. While he certainly will have the final call, there will be many factors involved. Any asset sale of this size will almost certainly involve debt financing. So whomever gets the winning bid will have to incur some rather large leverage to complete the sale.

I think this will determine whether the teams stays in Buffalo. IMO, the larger the debt, the more the new owner will be forced to look at larger markets to generate more revenue streams.

Some folks have also stated that an owner Ralph's age can't own a football team. On the contrary, many NFL owners have lived into their 80's and 90's in the past and still had successful teams. Unfortunately for us, Ralph hasn't been one of them, at least since 1999.

Is it time for a change? Probably. But I will say this about Ralph: He's been very loyal to the city. There have been many opportunites for him to relocate the team and he has declined to do so. This may be because he's old fashioned, or because he has his own private reasons.

For me, it's about the devil you know versus the one you don't. I think that once Ralph dies, there is going to be a lot of uncertainty over the future of this franchise. There are no guarantees that the team will stay.

Edited October 27, 2012 by gobillsinytown

[RealityCheck]

There seems to be a lot of sour grapes in this thread. RW has been a constant for over 50 years. His business approach has been consistent the whole time, yet somehow you people always expect a different outcome. The world is run by the supremely wealthy and RW is not anywhere near that league of influence. It's simple economics. If you don't like the product don't buy it. Otherwise you are a fool, and there is nothing more foolish then not taking a fool's money. The writing has been on the wall for a long time and giving up my tickets was a personal challenge this offseason, but my irrational funding of an industry that is a proverbial economic vacuum cleaner has finally ended. The MLB strike poisoned my love of baseball, and current trends have poisoned my desire to make the 12 hour round trip to Buffalo. The fear that an underachieving sports franchise is going to skip town is based on a classic ploy that is almost as old as prostitution. The notion that these huge nationally connected franchises care about the fans is for children. It's all about the money. The fact that a portion of the fan base cares so much about the finances of this team is truly irrational. Is Ralph gonna help you pay your bills? But hey, what do I know, it's your money. I mean Ralph's money. One last thing. It appears that the fair market value of many season tickets at the Ralph is far below the face value. People resell their tickets at massive discounts. Why be the moron that pays face value to be surrounded by fans that paid half price?

[K-9]

... Why be the moron that pays face value to be surrounded by fans that paid half price?

 

I take it you don't fly very much.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[RealityCheck]

I take it you don't fly very much.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Exactly! That's another industry I no longer support. I love my road trips.

[OvrOfficiousJerk]

...but my irrational funding of an industry that is a proverbial economic vacuum cleaner has finally ended. The MLB strike poisoned my love of baseball, and current trends have poisoned my desire to make the 12 hour round trip to Buffalo.

 

+1,000

 

Maybe you were thinking more along the lines of what's going on with the Bills, but the referee strike is what did it for me in terms of pro football as a whole. All the signs during the preseason were that the replacement refs were going to be a s**t-show, and I can't forgive the league for only acting after three weeks of a pathetic, sub-par product culminated in a variety of games being affected directly by replacement refs. Like others have said, the fact that the league was so stingy about saving a couple bucks tells me that it won't bend over backward to keep the Bills where they are.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm a dirty capitalist in many ways. Sure, make money, but have some class/pride/self-respect when you peddle your goods. it pains me to see businessmen disrespect their product/commodity so much like what the NFL does now, and the image that comes to mind is what Bryan Cox did to the Rich a couple years ago (decades, now?). No matter what, people will still overpay for their product; they can extort millions from communities with impunity, and there's little to stop them.

Edited October 27, 2012 by OvrOfficiousJerk

[gobillsinytown]

"The fact that a portion of the fan base cares so much about the finances of this team is truly irrational. Is Ralph gonna help you pay your bills? But hey, what do I know, it's your money. I mean Ralph's money. One last thing. It appears that the fair market value of many season tickets at the Ralph is far below the face value. People resell their tickets at massive discounts. Why be the moron that pays face value to be surrounded by fans that paid half price?"

 

.....yes, ultimately, it comes down to money. But at the same time, I don't think that NFL franchise owners are completely heartless, nor are their fans complete suckers. I think most fans know that in the end, football for them is entertainment. If the entertainment is no longer available in their area, then they will find other forms of entertainment to keep them happy.

I also think that as fans we forget that there are significant numbers of people in any NFL city that have no interest in football whatsoever.

My wife is a Cowboys fan. Why? Because her and her friend watched them a few times growing up and they really liked Roger Staubach. That's it. And she has only the most casual interest in them now.

So while some fans may be angry about the team, I think most fans can put it into the proper perspective.

[first_and_ten]

I remember him saying on his Sabre ownership exit interview that he was simply speculating in regards to Wilson's plans regarding the Bills. He also noted that Wilson and his tight knit group know how his estate is going to be handled and no else does.

 

I don't know how anyone can come up with any other conclusion than Wilson is going to auction his franchise (asset) to the highest bidder in an estate sale. There are many people who want to believe ( misguided hope) that someone with local ties will swoop in and save the day with a purchase and a committment to keep the franchise in the region. It all comes down to who is going to offer the highest bid and what that person or group wants to do with it. If a LA group makes the highest offer and is approved by the league the team will be gone from us. If the Rogers group in Toronto offer the highest bid and wants to move it across the border then that is what is going to happen. So be it.

 

Anyone who believes that Wilson is going to benevolently handle his largest financial asset to benefit the region from which he is an absentee owner is very naive. Ralph is simply a hard nose businessman and a mediocre owner. At least that is what his team's long term wretched record indicates.

 

I'm sure it is obvious to most people that I have and have had for a long time a jaundiced view of him. For me his act has grown tiresome.

 

My questions are these: Does the league have the right to sell the team to an individual or a group that is not the highest bidder? I know the owners have to approve any potential sale, but is that merely a formality assuminmg there is no "problem" with the highest bidder that might cause a conflict with owning an NFL franchise? I also wonder if Mr Wilson and his heirs like the idea of a bidding war for the team and will try to create a bidding war to up the price. Also, does anyone know the last time an NFL owner died and left the team to heirs who wanted to sell?

[Just Jack]

My questions are these: Does the league have the right to sell the team to an individual or a group that is not the highest bidder? I know the owners have to approve any potential sale, but is that merely a formality assuminmg there is no "problem" with the highest bidder that might cause a conflict with owning an NFL franchise? I also wonder if Mr Wilson and his heirs like the idea of a bidding war for the team and will try to create a bidding war to up the price. Also, does anyone know the last time an NFL owner died and left the team to heirs who wanted to sell?

 

75% (24 teams) of the owners need to approve the new owner. Another interesting fact I found while looking this up, the new/lead owner only needs to own 10% of the controlling interest....

 

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2009/10/20091026/This-Weeks-News/NFL-Pares-Ownership-Rule.aspx

[JohnC]

My questions are these: Does the league have the right to sell the team to an individual or a group that is not the highest bidder? I know the owners have to approve any potential sale, but is that merely a formality assuminmg there is no "problem" with the highest bidder that might cause a conflict with owning an NFL franchise? I also wonder if Mr Wilson and his heirs like the idea of a bidding war for the team and will try to create a bidding war to up the price. Also, does anyone know the last time an NFL owner died and left the team to heirs who wanted to sell?

 

You ask some very interesting questions regarding what the league can do with respect to the estate sale. The league has a right in advance of the sale to approve or not approve a particular owner group based on their financing requirements and also based on the simple criterion as to whether they want to admit a prospective buyer in their exclusive club. The Milstein group was the highest bidder for the Redskins. The reviewing owners wouldn't approve him as a prospective owner because he had a history of suing anyone who would sneeze. Without a doubt they used good judgment in not permitting him to be an owner. He is the type of businessman who used lawsuits to financially beat his opposition into submission. The end result was that he ended up suing Jack Kent Cooke's son, another bidder, for defamation. The eventual winning bidder was Danny Snyder who was a minority partner in the Milstein group. When Milstein was not approved Snyder reformed the group with other partners and won the bid.

 

The point that must be understood is that the estate sale of the franchise is made more complex because the league has a say as to who is allowed to buy into ownership club. The executor of the estate has a legal obligation to maximize the sale of assets from the estate. Could there be a legal conflict between the estate executor and the league? Yes. Any dispute would be resolved by a judge overseeing the estate sale. In the Redskin scenario although a prospective owner was not approved the max price was received by the estate from the reformed ownership group.

 

I also wonder if Mr Wilson and his heirs like the idea of a bidding war for the team and will try to create a bidding war to up the price. Also, does anyone know the last time an NFL owner died and left the team to heirs who wanted to sell?

 

Absolutely! The ideal situation is to have more people bidding up the price in an auction. One of the obvious reasons why the current owner doesn't want to commit to a long term lease is that it would make his franchise (asset) less appealing to bidders who would like to relocate the franchise. The less the asset is encumbered with obligations the more appealing it would be for potential buyers.

 

With respect to your question regarding heirs who would want to sell the franchise I just don't know of a case. Usually if the heirs of an elderly owner had no interest in owning a team the arrangements to sell would be made in advance.

Edited October 28, 2012 by JohnC