Discussion of The Bills Fan Alliance concept

[JM57]

This is what needs to be done before it is too late. Cheers to those guys and I will certainly contribute.

 

I didn't read the entire article... what happens if an owner takes the money and later bails?

 

They said that to receive the money, the owner would have to pledge to keep the team in Buffalo for a "set period of time" Whatever that may be

[dubs]

This is what needs to be done before it is too late. Cheers to those guys and I will certainly contribute.

 

I didn't read the entire article... what happens if an owner takes the money and later bails?

 

The owner can't simple bail and the fund would not be giving the money away. It's a loan, like from the bank but in this case from private 'investors'. The loan gets paid back to the fund, interest free. That's the attraction for a potential owner. The savings in the interest cost would presumably be enough to make the area more attractive. If the owner left, they'd have to pay back the loan and some penalty, I'd assume.

 

It's interesting, that's for sure. I think the two obstacles are:

1) getting enough 'investors' to make the fund attractive to a new buyer

2) structuring the fund appropriately and cost effectively.

 

In addition, I think this is potentially an extremely innovative private sector solution to the increasingly corrupt and wasteful public funding for stadiums that has gone on in the past. In this case, people have a choice and can choose this as a project to fund. Not simply because a government official decides it's a better use of taxpayer resources (I know the proposal is a mix of funding sources, but this could be a good first step)

Edited February 3, 2014 by dubs

[The Big Cat]

$170 million doesn't seem like it would be enough to move the needle on anything, but I'd be in.

 

I agree with you that the Bills for some reason do next to nothing to cultivate Buffalo expatriates, who are among the most rabid of Bills fans. Kind of a mystery there.

 

What do you mean by "major Bills hubs"? Do you just mean fans in other major cities?

 

Yes. I'm talking about the Bills bars in Chicago, NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, San Fran...all of which can draw hundreds of Bills fans.

[Mr. WEO]

They said that to receive the money, the owner would have to pledge to keep the team in Buffalo for a "set period of time" Whatever that may be

 

Didn't the public just agree to toss the Bills 90 million or so to "keep them in Buffalo" for a "set period of time"?

 

The opportunity for fraud in this scheme seems massive.

[dubs]

 

 

Didn't the public just agree to toss the Bills 90 million or so to "keep them in Buffalo" for a "set period of time"?

 

The opportunity for fraud in this scheme seems massive.

 

And that's the difference. Instead of tax dollars, it would be a fund set up specifically and solely for one purpose, to give interest free loans to the Bills. It's entirely voluntary participation from 'investors'. It would have to be extremely transparent. Tax filings, annual reports, prospectuses, investment guidelines. Much more transparent than what goes on in getting funding from public tax revenue.

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

And that's the difference. Instead of tax dollars, it would be a fund set up specifically and solely for one purpose, to give interest free loans to the Bills. It's entirely voluntary participation from 'investors'. It would have to be extremely transparent. Tax filings, annual reports, prospectuses, investment guidelines. Much more transparent than what goes on in getting funding from public tax revenue.

 

Nothing is more transparent than an announcement that your tax dollars are going to be spent on some private venture. Much less transparent is a small group of superfans soliciting 170 million by preying on the desperation of loyal football fans.

 

It's not a loan (which must be repaid) and it's not an investment (where profits must be shared or a portion of the entity must be owned by the investor). It's a gift--to a noncharity

 

This would only make sense if the "investors" actually owned, collectively, that percent of the team and was therefore entitled to that share of the profits (which isn't allowed in the NFL).

 

Otherwise, it sounds like ransom being offered before the loved one is kidnapped.

Edited February 3, 2014 by Mr. WEO

[Kelly the Dog]

Nothing is more transparent than an announcement that your tax dollars are going to be spent on some private venture. Much less transparent is a small group of superfans soliciting 170 million by preying on the desperation of loyal football fans.

 

It's not a loan (which must be repaid) and it's not an investment (where profits must be shared or a portion of the entity must be owned by the investor). It's a gift--to a noncharity

 

This would only make sense if the "investors" actually owned, collectively, that percent of the team and was therefore entitled to that share of the profits (which isn't allowed in the NFL).

 

Otherwise, it sounds like ransom being offered before the loved one is kidnapped.

You don't see a distinct possibility of some outsider bidding $150 million more than a local group which would take the team out of Buffalo for good?

[dubs]

 

 

Nothing is more transparent than an announcement that your tax dollars are going to be spent on some private venture. Much less transparent is a small group of superfans soliciting 170 million by preying on the desperation of loyal football fans.

 

It's not a loan (which must be repaid) and it's not an investment (where profits must be shared or a portion of the entity must be owned by the investor). It's a gift--to a noncharity

 

This would only make sense if the "investors" actually owned, collectively, that percent of the team and was therefore entitled to that share of the profits (which isn't allowed in the NFL).

 

Otherwise, it sounds like ransom being offered before the loved one is kidnapped.

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

When taxpayer money is spent on large projects, almost invariably the choices are influenced by political alliances, campaign donations, or lobbying of some sort. That is one of the least transparent (or efficient) activities we have in this country. To make it worse, everyone pays taxes so in effect everyone is impacted by decisions that are influenced by these forces.

 

Conversely, in this proposal, those who want to support keeping the team in buffalo can. So the first benefit is that you are aligning the interests of the contributors and the benefactors. Second, the fund is set up by selling 'equity' to the 'shareholders'. The investors know that the only way they get their money back is if the team is sold AND moved. This would be stipulated in all the documentation. The fund itself would give loans to the team, which would be repaid under the terms.

 

I honestly can't see anyway that people could get 'fleeced'. It's as simple and straightforward as can be. It's really an ingenious idea and I think the biggest obstacle is fundraising enough to make it a real asset to a potential ownership group.

 

Think about it like this:

 

It's a similar structure to a mutual fund. Shares are purchased for $$ which a portfolio management team then invests on behalf of the shareholders. The difference here is the investment on behalf of the shareholders is a loan (bond) to the Bills, the PM team is not making money, and the shareholders are not expecting a return on investment.

Edited February 3, 2014 by dubs

[BillnutinHouston]

In order for this idea to go anywhere, it needs the endorsement of some key leaders in order to establish the plan's legitimacy.

 

The Bills can't/won't touch it as it acknowledge's Ralph's mortality. Jim Kelly can't either, since his supposed ties to a prospective ownership group would lend the appearance of a conflict of interest.

 

I wonder if there is anything prohibiting a political leader from endorsing it. Someone of Schumer's ilk.

 

If you intend to rally thousands of people to give money to any kind of effort, you must have strong leadership and absolute legitimacy. That may be the Achilles heel of this idea.

[May Day 10]

I agree on the legitimacy/figurehead. Once this gets moving, Im sure we could see various ex Bills at least chatter about it....

I also wont give a dime until I am sure there is no way fraud happens. If I am assured of that, I have a $K set aside.

 

This is huge and something I was hoping would happen. If for nothing else, if they do leave, we can feel like we did something. Also, I think if this was successful and the fans in this smallish city raised 9 figures, it may increase pressure on the league to do what they can to keep the team in Buffalo. Or at the very least (however unlikely), pull a Browns.

[Cereal]

Is it possible that this thing could be considered a charity/non-profit, such that contributors' companies could "match" our donations? I know that personally, I've budgeted MORE to give my charities of choice in recent years BECAUSE my company matches those gifts.

 

For example, where I might decide to give $200 to this Fan Alliance campaign, I might give $400 if I knew my company would match the gift for a total of $800.

Edited February 3, 2014 by Cereal

[RealityCheck]

This is a ridiculous idea on so many levels. A charity fund for an NFL team with the goal of raising at least 100 million dollars. The very idea of getting into the no-interest loan business with the NFL as the beneficiary is absurd. Then again, it's your money, not mine.

[JohnnyBuffalo]

I am in. I would drop a grand to try and keep the Bills where they are and I don't live in Buffalo. I hope this comes through.

[May Day 10]

This is a ridiculous idea on so many levels. A charity fund for an NFL team with the goal of raising at least 100 million dollars. The very idea of getting into the no-interest loan business with the NFL as the beneficiary is absurd. Then again, it's your money, not mine.

 

If you skim the top it looks ridiculous.

 

But if you look at it deeper, its not so bad. The Bills are a huge form of entertainment for me. I follow them, watch games, discuss on internet, follow college (with a small factor looking at Bills prospects), attend games, etc. Without them, thats a huge hole. $1000 as a quasi PSL as an insurance they stay (or I get the $ back) is appealing. Also it should be noted that any owner committed to Buffalo will be leaving considerable money on the table as opposed to a much wealthier, bigger market. It would be a Golisano-type in more of a philanthropic purchase. If this loan can help someone like that save our team, Im all for it.

[SRQ_BillsFan]

I like the idea. I question how it could ever be deemed a charity but if it was matching funds from Buffalo area companies would be huge.

 

As someone else said, not sure how far it gets without the Bills or city/state getting involved early, which I am not sure would happen. People would need some type of assurance. Didn't the article also say that it would have no value similar to the Green Bay certificates? If that is the case who gets the money that is paid back? Or is the loan forgiven somehow if certain criteria is met, such as the team staying put for x number of years?

 

I am just not sure how it gets started so that it would have the legitimacy needed.

 

Eventually we still have the issue of a stadium and how that would be funded. A move to another city would allow the owners to sell PSL's. This can make a team a large portion of this money much easier without having any strings tied to it. I question whether the Bills could generate much from PSL's. The area simply does not have the resources with that kind of disposable income.

 

Having said all of that, I would love to see something like this work. I am sure they could come up with some type of certificate that could be framed and proudly displayed in our man cave.

[dubs]

This is a ridiculous idea on so many levels. A charity fund for an NFL team with the goal of raising at least 100 million dollars. The very idea of getting into the no-interest loan business with the NFL as the beneficiary is absurd. Then again, it's your money, not mine.

 

You're really missing the point, unfortunately. But I would expect a few knee-jerk reactions similar to this.

 

The other options are as follows:

1) The state and county provides more incentives to keep a team in Buffalo or build a new stadium (current model).

2) Hope and pray a prospective new owner(s) decided to pony up all the money and also decide to keep the team in Buffalo, despite all the likely benefits to move the team.

 

With the current model, you are giving money without having any real say in the matter.

 

With the other option, you believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

[RyanC883]

In order for this idea to go anywhere, it needs the endorsement of some key leaders in order to establish the plan's legitimacy.

 

The Bills can't/won't touch it as it acknowledge's Ralph's mortality. Jim Kelly can't either, since his supposed ties to a prospective ownership group would lend the appearance of a conflict of interest.

 

I wonder if there is anything prohibiting a political leader from endorsing it. Someone of Schumer's ilk.

 

If you intend to rally thousands of people to give money to any kind of effort, you must have strong leadership and absolute legitimacy. That may be the Achilles heel of this idea.

 

I agree it needs some legitimacy. I think a politician could push the IRS to grant it a 501©(3) status, enabling tax-deductible donations to be made to the fund. In a way, the donations are a way to spare taxpayers money. If structured as a 501c3 I think it will bring in a ton.

[May Day 10]

Would something like this possibly sway a family member toward the idea of holding onto the team for a while after Mr Wilson is gone?

 

That is an interesting thought

[RyanC883]

Is it possible that this thing could be considered a charity/non-profit, such that contributors' companies could "match" our donations? I know that personally, I've budgeted MORE to give my charities of choice in recent years BECAUSE my company matches those gifts.

 

For example, where I might decide to give $200 to this Fan Alliance campaign, I might give $400 if I knew my company would match the gift for a total of $800.

 

Another reason for some congressional rep or senator to push the IRS to grant this 501c3 status!

[jimmy10]

I work in fundraising. So while I love this idea in theory, I'm concerned about the administrative costs involved. As much as we like to think there's a million or whatever Bills fans out there willing to support this (and I'd be one of them), you still need to get the word out. Direct mail, email, phone calls, whatever. That costs money. You need to provide paperwork and materials documenting individual gifts. More costs. You need someone to manage the fund itself and track the balance, likely provide quarterly/annual reports. If they get 501c3 status, then there's filing 1099s, all that stuff. More costs.

 

It's not just a matter of stuffing $170M in a giant piggy bank.

Edited February 3, 2014 by jimmyo