boyst Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 definitely not an oversell - i know dallas has the party deck thats standing room only... things like that are likely part of it. maybe some of the suite space, or super premium on field type of seats at stadiums too? Yeah, it just seems like fancy number crunching. If you want to impress me with numbers - get the number of approved people at the structure from the Fire Marshall or something and then figure it out. Standing room is standing room and should count as normal attendance when it is figured.
GA BILLS FAN Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 It's been touched on before, but Toronto's TV market is not a US market. So the eyeballs watching there would mean very little to any sort of current TV deals the NFL has. Toronto fans living in Canada, wouldn't be watching on CBS, Fox or NBC... they also wouldn't be able to purchase the Sunday Ticket from DirectTV. So that means the only people watching games in Toronto, that would possibly count towards TV revenue, are probably already watching the Bills from the US. Unless you think more fans would tune in to watch a team because it's in Toronto. Surely, the NFL would have to work out some sort of deal with a Canadian television station. But, the logistics of that might be tricky. EDIT: So while you may think Toronto is a slam dunk, LA makes much more sense because it's not a move into a different country or non US TV market. It's simple and puts them in the 2nd largest US TV market. It's been touched on before, but Toronto's TV market is not a US market. So the eyeballs watching there would mean very little to any sort of current TV deals the NFL has. Toronto fans living in Canada, wouldn't be watching on CBS, Fox or NBC... they also wouldn't be able to purchase the Sunday Ticket from DirectTV. So that means the only people watching games in Toronto, that would possibly count towards TV revenue, are probably already watching the Bills from the US. Unless you think more fans would tune in to watch a team because it's in Toronto. Surely, the NFL would have to work out some sort of deal with a Canadian television station. But, the logistics of that might be tricky. EDIT: So while you may think Toronto is a slam dunk, LA makes much more sense because it's not a move into a different country or non US TV market. It's simple and puts them in the 2nd largest US TV market. No market, including Toronto is a slam dunk --- as for eyeballs, eyeballs in Canada are worth as much as they are in the U.S. --- think about it, the NFL could sign a contract with CBC or other Canadian broadcasting company --- Toronto has issues (fan support and CFL the two biggest) --- if LA doesn't get a team in the next 3 years, I'd put them ahead of Toronto in terms of risk --- I just don't like the rationalization that could be used by owners if team moved to TOR
PromoTheRobot Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 http://espn.go.com/n...nce/_/year/2013 If you sort the attendance by pct% the Bills rank 24th at 90.7% of capacity. Notice three other teams linked to Los Angeles (St.L, SD, Oak) are all below us.
Mr. WEO Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 If you sort the attendance by pct% the Bills rank 24th at 90.7% of capacity. Notice three other teams linked to Los Angeles (St.L, SD, Oak) are all below us. None of the teams you listed are interested in moving because of poor ticket sales. They want new stadiums. Move on.
May Day 10 Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 Yeah, it just seems like fancy number crunching. If you want to impress me with numbers - get the number of approved people at the structure from the Fire Marshall or something and then figure it out. Standing room is standing room and should count as normal attendance when it is figured. the best is the NHL numbers that include the Winter Classic http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance chicago is at 118%
PromoTheRobot Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 None of the teams you listed are interested in moving because of poor ticket sales. They want new stadiums. Move on. Yes, all they want is new stadiums...half filled new stadiums.
Mr. WEO Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 Yes, all they want is new stadiums...half filled new stadiums. I don't get it...
PromoTheRobot Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 I don't get it... It means that the still want people to fill their new stadiums, assuming that is what they really want, and not using their stadium demands as an excuse to skip town.
Mr. WEO Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 It means that the still want people to fill their new stadiums, assuming that is what they really want, and not using their stadium demands as an excuse to skip town. No, actually they are using their desire for new stadiums as the reason for considering moving. It's not because their current stadiums are half full.
Doc Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffalo.com/media/sports/breaking-according-sources-buffalo-bills-will-stay-past-2020/
KOKBILLS Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffa...stay-past-2020/ Interesting...
bbb Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffa...stay-past-2020/ What is it worth? Who is this guy? Is he legit?
FireChan Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffa...stay-past-2020/ An article from a sport blogger who takes "road soda" selfies and tweets Bills players to play video games with him? What it's worth is not much, What is it worth? Who is this guy? Is he legit? Not much. Some kid. Not really. Edited March 30, 2014 by FireChan
HalftimeAdjustment Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Halftime - do you have a link or more specifics to support your first statement above? See this link: http://www2.erie.gov/exec/sites/www2.erie.gov.exec/files/uploads/Buffalo%20Bills%20Non-Relocation%20Agreement.pdf Section 3 (b) subsection (iv) ©... upon re-reading this, it appears that they can discuss relocation under 2 conditions... either during arbitration hearings to terminate the lease, or if the relocation would take effect after the end of the term. So they can discuss relocation with someone who wants to relocate them after 7 or 10 years. Subject to the provisions of Section 2(b), during the Non-Relocation Term, without the prior written consent of the County and the ECSC, which consent shall be within the sole and absolute discretion of each of the County and the ECSC, the Bills shall not: (i) apply to the NFL for, or otherwise seek, approval to allow the Team to play any Games during the Non-Relocation Term anywhere other than the Stadium; (ii) relocate, transfer or otherwise move the Team (or attempt to relocate, transfer or otherwise move the Team except as permitted by clause (iv) of this paragraph) to a location other than the Stadium; (iii) sell, assign or otherwise transfer the Team to any Person who, to the Bills’ knowledge, has an intention to relocate, transfer or otherwise move the Team during the Non- Relocation Term to a location other than the Stadium; (iv) (A) entertain any offer or proposal to relocate the Team to a location other than the Stadium, (B) solicit an offer or proposal from any Person to enter into discussions regarding moving the Team to a location other than the Stadium, © enter into negotiations or agreements with third parties concerning the relocation of the Team to a location other than the Stadium, or (D) otherwise attempt to cause the playing of Games at a location other than the Stadium except in the case of clause (A), (B), © and/or (D) above, (x) during the pendency of an arbitration proceeding in which the Bills are seeking to terminate the Stadium Lease in accordance with its terms or (y) to the extent that the relocation or other action described in such clause would first take effect after the Non-Relocation Term;
hondo in seattle Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Forbes values the Bills at roughly $900 million. If media reports are true, the league will impose a maybe $200 million relocation fee. Then there's the $400 million fee to break the lease. So an out-of-towner will have to pay 1.6 billion to buy the Bills. Realistically, I don't see any market supporting that price other than L.A. But L.A. has it's own problems, particularly a stadium. Bringing the Bills to LA could cost $3 billion - including roughly $1.4 billion for a new state-of-the-art stadium. Not sure any of LA's billionaire's want to reach that deep. Another way to look at it, local bidders are getting a roughly $600 million dollar - or more - discount because they won't be assessed any fees and won't have to fund a stadium. Even without a 'no relocation' provision in the trust, the Bills have a good chance of staying here.
thebandit27 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Forbes values the Bills at roughly $900 million. If media reports are true, the league will impose a maybe $200 million relocation fee. Then there's the $400 million fee to break the lease. So an out-of-towner will have to pay 1.6 billion to buy the Bills. Realistically, I don't see any market supporting that price other than L.A. But L.A. has it's own problems, particularly a stadium. Bringing the Bills to LA could cost $3 billion - including roughly $1.4 billion for a new state-of-the-art stadium. Not sure any of LA's billionaire's want to reach that deep. Another way to look at it, local bidders are getting a roughly $600 million dollar - or more - discount because they won't be assessed any fees and won't have to fund a stadium. Even without a 'no relocation' provision in the trust, the Bills have a good chance of staying here. Don't forget that said owner would also have to win a court case preventing an injunction against the move--an injunction who's way is clearly paved by the lease language being crafted in concert with the law. A more interesting question that nobody has asked is if the $28M penalty after year 7 includes different language allowing for an easier breaking o the lease. I doubt it since it hasn't been mentioned, which to me says that the year 7 clause was included to encourage the search for a new stadium.
Mr. WEO Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffa...stay-past-2020/ "As many of my followers and readers know, I have a tie into a high up member of the front office." How would his readers know this? What other "nuggets" has his "high up member tie" told him in the past that were actually true insider info? I think pretty much anyone can claim they know for sure "the Bills aren't going anywhere". Most posters here have been doing so for longer than this boy has.
thebandit27 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 "As many of my followers and readers know, I have a tie into a high up member of the front office." How would his readers know this? What other "nuggets" has his "high up member tie" told him in the past that were actually true insider info? I think pretty much anyone can claim they know for sure "the Bills aren't going anywhere". Most posters here have been doing so for longer than this boy has. I saw some folks on here say that he broke a story or two, but I couldn't find a single reference to such a thing...
Kirby Jackson Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) I saw some folks on here say that he broke a story or two, but I couldn't find a single reference to such a thing... I think that it was Brandon Spikes. Massare originally reported that he was in town. He spent the rest of the day celebrating his victory. It was pretty pathetic. He has some sort of distant connection to Littman. I am positive that if a story breaking down the details of the lease or the trust comes out, it isn't coming from Massare. Edited March 30, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
jimmy10 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Take it FWIW: http://forgedinbuffalo.com/media/sports/breaking-according-sources-buffalo-bills-will-stay-past-2020/ I'm not gonna be comfortable with reports like this until names are attached to them.
Recommended Posts