simpleman Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 The only reason I can logically think the owners are afraid of public ownership is that they feel that ultimately so many teams would become public that the balance would be tipped so that the majority of votes in the NFL would be public owned teams, and they would be more interested in the good of the game over the money in the game. They fear that focus would hurt the regular owners profit potential. Logically public teams would never sell out to be moved, so the value of existing teams that could be sold and moved would be increased. The law of supply and demand (decrease in supply).
Mr. WEO Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 It's worth something. Most recently valued about about $250 per share, according to the last share offering in around 2011 as far as I can tell. In total, this article shows about 5m shares outstanding. At 250 per share that's about a 1.25bn franchise. http://johntorinus.c...h-1-25-billion/ Would be cool if buffalo could do the same. Unfortunately we know they cannot. The stocks are worthless. In buying one, fans are donating $250 to the Packers.
stevewin Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 A few(?) years ago there was a poster that was seriously investigating the possibility of a grassroots campaign for public ownership of the Bills - not sure how far he eventually got
filthymcnasty08 Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 A few(?) years ago there was a poster that was seriously investigating the possibility of a grassroots campaign for public ownership of the Bills - not sure how far he eventually got Yes there was...."Bills Bonds" if I remember correctly.
PromoTheRobot Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 The only reason I can logically think the owners are afraid of public ownership is that they feel that ultimately so many teams would become public that the balance would be tipped so that the majority of votes in the NFL would be public owned teams, and they would be more interested in the good of the game over the money in the game. They fear that focus would hurt the regular owners profit potential. Logically public teams would never sell out to be moved, so the value of existing teams that could be sold and moved would be increased. The law of supply and demand (decrease in supply). Or they are worried about mass hysteria caused by rioting share holders fighting over Flutie vs RJ. Why is it assumed fan ownership will be all unicorns farting rainbows? Just look at this board. PTR
Rubes Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Yes there was...."Bills Bonds" if I remember correctly. Here is the TBD thread. The web site appears to be down for good.
nucci Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Really? If that's true that sounds ridiculous on the part of the NFL. At least they could have said "no NEW community owned teams" to prevent any random city from trying to bankroll a team. But to ban it from a team that has an aging owner with no potential buyers.... Are you sure?
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 My beef with the chain gang is this, they stop the game and bring out othe chains to measure within inches as to whether thye got a first down or not. They have that little slide thing along the chain that they line up with a five yard marker so they know when moving the chain from sideline to the middel of the field, nothing has shifted. Great idea!! But here's the problem, on first down all they do is eye ball the starting point with the ball. They don't bring the chain out, and again align the sliding five yard marker with the nearest five yard line. So if the starting point was off by a foot or so either way, that means on the tail end in most instances the team either had to go somewhere between 9.5 to maybe 10.5 yards for a first down. Now I have no problem with that, at the end of the year it all will balance out (excluding for the Patriots of course) but why bother wasting time measuring to within an inch when you have no idea of the accuracy of your starting point! IMO, they will never get rid of the rod/stick & chain... They already got it down to the minimum number of guys on the chain crew and the accuracy MAY not be that much better. I worked as a hydrographic surveyor on a survey crew. I used to sound (take depth readings) all the harbors (and rivers associated w/them) from Toledo, OH in the west to Ogdensburg, NY in east. We'd take the soundings to determine how much material would or would not have to be dredged (Harbors & Rivers Act). I did this during the era that led into GPS technology. Pre-GPS, we would have to establish elevation guages in the water and then build baseline all along a shore and then we would sound the water @ stations off that baseline... All by hand, in a rowboat w/a small outboard motor... We would get to 100th of an inch onshore for the baseline with rods and chains and then come off those stations with a boat and tagline. A tagline was a big spool of cable on the boat that had cloth markers every 5 feet. As the boat came off the baseline @ the designated angle (usually 90 degrees set by guy w/sextant or two range poles when there was no shore guy), the tagline would pay out... Another guy would then take a hand sounding with a lead line (think window sash chain with various types of weights depending on botton type) @ various tagline cloth marks. The sounder would call the depth reading out while the crew chief recorded the sounding and @ what point... w/paper and pencil that data would be recorded into the survey book. Data would be then be corrected/adjusted to the elevation of the water. All sounding data would then be plotted onto a chart @ the office. Sometimes big harbors like BFLO, the survey boat would not have enough tagline... +1,000's of feet on the spool. More boats would be needed to cross and get the measurements way out. It would take 3 crews of 5 or 6 guys to work a place like BFLO Harbor, year in and year out, maintaining it... Now... One or two guys in a survey launch can sweep the harbor in half a day with GPS! Anyway... Back in the day we would build that baseline to 100th of an inch yet when we would get out onto the water we could be within 10 feet to take the sounding! :-O What is the accuracy of the GPS? Under 30 feet? :-O Close enough? Both? Building a missile base to launch bottle rockets? Anyway... Sorry for the long winded story, but IMO football is better served with the slightly more people needed to operate the chains and sticks/rods as a crew. The observer (fan) can actually see the integrity of the chain. Go to lasers and what not, who's not second guessing that the parameters set in the machine aren't being doctored or cheated with? Do you trust the tech and the NFL? I want to see a chain! Just as good and just as accurate. Mechanical chains are trustworthy... Save the GPS and lasers for BFLO Harbor where they can eliminate 100 year 'round good paying jobs (from rod & chainmen to plotters and drafters) for 2 guys doing it all!
A Dog Named Kelso Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 The way around it, is it creates stocks that are then sold but not publicly traded. There are rules regarding this. they could initially set it up ast has a total of 10,000,000 shares valued at $70 = $700M. probably 60-70% of it is owned by single large investors, and thus have voting power.....and the other 30-40% are for smaller scale stock holders with no voting power. It is a way to raise money to purchase a team and it legally follows the NFL rules. You may not be able to be an owner of the team .... but how about an owner of the team's home. You could buy share for a free new home for the team to play in an essential keep them in a location for a time after the the new owner takes over. That is basically what a publicly funded stadium does, but no one wants that so, create a company to build and maintain a stadium w/these funds.
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Everyone keeps talking about the team being sold at auction based o nthe comment RW made like maybe 15 years ago that his wife doesn't want to own the team. But in the past 5 to 10 years there's been no comment on that at all. Meanwhile Jim Kelly/Thurman Thomas keeps saying don't worry implying they know something that we don't. Maybe Mary Wilson doesn't want to own/run a team but if I were her, I could think of one thing much much worse than owning the team, and that's having to part with around $400 to $500 million in taxes where as if she inherits the team no taxes due now. She could be a silent partner/owner someone like a Kelly is the president, in exchange he and a group of people buy small shares each year 5 to 10% to keep the capital gain tax bill down, and this group has the right of first refusal to any eventual sale upon her death. I'll believe the team is put up for sale when I see it as there has been no comments from RW around this in years. Another option along the original lines of this thread, while the NFL prohits public ownership, what if RW left the team to a charitable foundation again run be some one like a Jim Kelly or someone else. While the NFL would hate the idea, trying to stop it would likely take years in court, and would be a very bad publicity direction to go in, stopping a gift to charity. No potential buyers? Are you insane? When this team is put up for auction, it will be the wildest "can you top this" event in the history of the NFL. When has an NFL team (there are only 32 of them in the universe) ever (ever) been put up for open auction? I believe the answer is "never" (someone needs to look this up). This will be wild, with many bidders coming out of the woodwork for whom money is no object. The whole GB thing is very quaint, but you guys need to wake up and smell the coffee… this auction will be wild and any cute little group from the ole B Lo who thinks they will get the home town discount is in for a rude awakening.
CodeMonkey Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 IMO, they will never get rid of the rod/stick & chain... They already got it down to the minimum number of guys on the chain crew and the accuracy MAY not be that much better. http://www.firstdownlaser.com/ The only possible reason they have not switched to such a system is it gives the officials one more way they can screw the Bills every week!
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 No potential buyers? Are you insane? When this team is put up for auction, it will be the wildest "can you top this" event in the history of the NFL. When has an NFL team (there are only 32 of them in the universe) ever (ever) been put up for open auction? I believe the answer is "never" (someone needs to look this up). This will be wild, with many bidders coming out of the woodwork for whom money is no object. The whole GB thing is very quaint, but you guys need to wake up and smell the coffee… this auction will be wild and any cute little group from the ole B Lo who thinks they will get the home town discount is in for a rude awakening. Why does it have to be a "quaint little group." Pegula is holding about 5 billion in cash? http://www.firstdownlaser.com/ The only possible reason they have not switched to such a system is it gives the officials one more way they can screw the Bills every week! That is cool! Thanks! I can see that working nicely and better! Especially when the side judge come trotting in to spot the ball and is running off line! That green line is cool!
Rivermont Mike Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Stocks? Shareholders? Cute and so 20th century. One word: Crowdfunding. Capital: 50,000 people x $10,000 each. $500,000,000. Owner: $500,000,000 investment, 100-year commitment to NFL football in Buffalo. You: Financially back an owner with the responsibility to hire a GM, staff, and represent at the NFL meetings. Your investment is in for 20 years but it is transferable to heirs, purchasers, etc. A resident of Buffalo not necessary, but contractually you agree to invest in NFL football in Buffalo over a 100-year span. Owner makes same commitment. The investment group can be from all over the U.S. Revenue: Stadium naming rights (not necessarily a Buffalo-based company--think "e- and national brands), ticket revenue, suite revenue, merchandise sales, TV money, a cut of event revenues at other events, and...wait for it...a 65,000-seat, publicly-funded retractable domed destination stadium on the Buffalo waterfront. Think Patriots Place, only in Buffalo. City becomes relevant because now it can host big events, Super Bowls, political conventions. Local economy gets shot in arm. Benefits to you: Lifetime PSL (transferable) and a steady returns on your investment. Benefits to Buffalo: Tax revenue, hotels, restaurants, tourism.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Stocks? Shareholders? Cute and so 20th century. One word: Crowdfunding. Capital: 50,000 people x $10,000 each. $500,000,000. Owner: $500,000,000 investment, 100-year commitment to NFL football in Buffalo. You: Financially back an owner with the responsibility to hire a GM, staff, and represent at the NFL meetings. Your investment is in for 20 years but it is transferable to heirs, purchasers, etc. A resident of Buffalo not necessary, but contractually you agree to invest in NFL football in Buffalo over a 100-year span. Owner makes same commitment. The investment group can be from all over the U.S. Revenue: Stadium naming rights (not necessarily a Buffalo-based company--think "e- and national brands), ticket revenue, suite revenue, merchandise sales, TV money, a cut of event revenues at other events, and...wait for it...a 65,000-seat, publicly-funded retractable domed destination stadium on the Buffalo waterfront. Think Patriots Place, only in Buffalo. City becomes relevant because now it can host big events, Super Bowls, political conventions. Local economy gets shot in arm. Benefits to you: Lifetime PSL (transferable) and a steady returns on your investment. Benefits to Buffalo: Tax revenue, hotels, restaurants, tourism. Hybrid-Commie! ;-P ;-P
A Dog Named Kelso Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Everyone keeps talking about the team being sold at auction based o nthe comment RW made like maybe 15 years ago that his wife doesn't want to own the team. But in the past 5 to 10 years there's been no comment on that at all. Meanwhile Jim Kelly/Thurman Thomas keeps saying don't worry implying they know something that we don't. Maybe Mary Wilson doesn't want to own/run a team but if I were her, I could think of one thing much much worse than owning the team, and that's having to part with around $400 to $500 million in taxes where as if she inherits the team no taxes due now. She could be a silent partner/owner someone like a Kelly is the president, in exchange he and a group of people buy small shares each year 5 to 10% to keep the capital gain tax bill down, and this group has the right of first refusal to any eventual sale upon her death. I'll believe the team is put up for sale when I see it as there has been no comments from RW around this in years. Another option along the original lines of this thread, while the NFL prohits public ownership, what if RW left the team to a charitable foundation again run be some one like a Jim Kelly or someone else. While the NFL would hate the idea, trying to stop it would likely take years in court, and would be a very bad publicity direction to go in, stopping a gift to charity. This may be why Brandon was put in charge(made president). Basically allowing Mary to own the team, keep it in Buffalo but really have no interaction with how the team is run.
NoSaint Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 This may be why Brandon was put in charge(made president). Basically allowing Mary to own the team, keep it in Buffalo but really have no interaction with how the team is run. atleast short term after any (and i hate to say this) incidents...... that is probably part of the current structure. i dont know that its a long term plan though.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 I know I am going to get crucified for this comment, but here goes. Wouldn't it be great to just see the family pay the taxes due. Honestly, Ralph and his family made how much on a 25k gamble 53 years ago? So much distain for our gov't and taxes. Try go doing what the Wilson family did in Afghanistan and live peacefully for 50+ years... I guess that is all easier said than done. Everybody is always trying to game the system and they make no bones about it.
dubs Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 The stocks are worthless. In buying one, fans are donating $250 to the Packers. It's worthless in the sense that they are not traded. However, I do believe that if the team was sold, the shareholders would get the proceeds. In all likelihood, this would never happen. If it did, people who bought 100 shares at $5 bucks back in the 1930 would have done pretty well. Their $500 would turn into $25,000. I know that this is banned by the NFL, but the other reason is that you'd need a serious lead to this. For example, you'd likely need a primary investor to lead the purchase. Someone with enough cake to slap down a few hundred million. Then they'd have to hire an investment bank to do the underwriting and sell the shares in some type of offering. That process would increase the price tag by at least a $100m. It would be awesome, I would certainly buy some shares. I also agree with the point that was made that anything CAN change. However, you'd need a seriously influential and wealthy person to lead this process. Way above the Jon Bovi pay grade.
Rubes Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 http://www.firstdownlaser.com/ The only possible reason they have not switched to such a system is it gives the officials one more way they can screw the Bills every week! That's very cool. But how does it work on crowned fields like the Ralph?
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 If Mary Wilson inherits the team she certainly will pay every penny of all the taxes due. Let me get the calculator out, lets see OK, total taxes due; ZERO $$. I'm certain she does plan to pay that. Not gaming the system in any way, laws allow assets to be transferred upon death to spouse and all taxes are deferred. Granted the average person doesn't have a billion dollar asset laying around but the law's the law. Eventually the government will get their share and if the value keeps going up as I'm sure it will, the bill due will be even bigger. But nothing wrong with her saying hey I'm going to avoid this big tax bill now and keep the team in my name, let someone else run it and I'll just take a small amount out each year for my expenses. She could sell a small share off each year and just pay the taxes on the parts that's sold. She could even donate a small share of the team to a charity, who then could sell it and keep all the proceeds from the sale and MW avoids the taxes due on the portion she sold. Again imagine the NFL trying to stop that one. I don't pay taxes on the amount of money taken from my check each week that goes to United Way either and at the end of the year I do deduct the legit charitable contributions I make. I know I am going to get crucified for this comment, but here goes. Wouldn't it be great to just see the family pay the taxes due. Honestly, Ralph and his family made how much on a 25k gamble 53 years ago? So much distain for our gov't and taxes. Try go doing what the Wilson family did in Afghanistan and live peacefully for 50+ years... I guess that is all easier said than done. Everybody is always trying to game the system and they make no bones about it.
Recommended Posts