Source: Bills could have new owner as soon as October

[GunnerBill]

A couple things to consider that are very different in the NFL. The NFL and the other owners MUST approve the sale. So, technically even if Mary Wilson wanted to sell the team to an LA businessman, she would need their approval. Now Mary and the potential buyer could sue the NFL if they denied the sale. Second, any relocation of a franchise must be separately approved. Why would the NFL void it's own contract ? I think there is ZERO possibility the team moves before the 7 year out clause. I think we are all wasting space considering a move before year 7 as a viable option. That doesn't mean this team won't be sold to a person, and that person will eventually move the team in year 7, it is just so unlikely that it would happen before that time, it's not worth talking about. Let's focus on who and when it will be sold and what that person's longer term intentions are for the team.

 

I agree - but I was talking about law. What you are talking about internal regulation of the league.

[mrags]

 

 

I was operating under the assumption the majority owner of the Bills wouldn't be on public assistance (corporate welfare aside).

 

It seems like you're looking at this from a landlord's perspective, not a tenent's. While's it's only happened a couple of times, when a tenent has tried get out of his lease (I'll let them go if they have a valid reason for wanting to break the lease), I have had no troubles being awarded a judgment for the entire lease amount. I stopped the enforcement after I had enough to make up the difference between when they stiffed me and when I had another tenant, but I could have collected on the entire balance of the lease, ie, monthly rent x 12 months.

 

If a tenant of RWS tried to break the lease, I don't buy for a moment he would get off scot-free.

Ive never had a tenant try and leave before their lease is up. But a very close friend of mine has. He's owned his apartment for 5+ years and in that time he's has over 6 renters and 2 of which I know for a fact left mod night and they never recovered their money. The only saving to their losses were the tenants left a few things behind which were sold to pay for needed renovations. Even the TV and DVD player that were left behind couldn't be sold because the credit card company came looking for them.

 

With all that being said, I don't think anyone can move the team. I believe the lease is locked in. I believe the $400M is just a precaution if someone pulled the up the Mayflower trucks in the middle of the night.

 

I was simply stating it was a bad analogy. A billion dollar investment is completely different from a rental lease agreement on cheap staples paper that is easily maneuverable.

[Canadian Bills Fan]

Ive never had a tenant try and leave before their lease is up. But a very close friend of mine has. He's owned his apartment for 5+ years and in that time he's has over 6 renters and 2 of which I know for a fact left mod night and they never recovered their money. The only saving to their losses were the tenants left a few things behind which were sold to pay for needed renovations. Even the TV and DVD player that were left behind couldn't be sold because the credit card company came looking for them.

 

With all that being said, I don't think anyone can move the team. I believe the lease is locked in. I believe the $400M is just a precaution if someone pulled the up the Mayflower trucks in the middle of the night.

 

I was simply stating it was a bad analogy. A billion dollar investment is completely different from a rental lease agreement on cheap staples paper that is easily maneuverable.

 

Optimism in this thread is like a breath of fresh air.

 

Thank you

 

 

CBF

[stony]

Yep...and I'll add this: if (and I have no knowledge that this is the case) it were Pegula, he'd get approved by the NFL in a unanimous vote.

 

The other owners would be ecstatic.

 

I think they would too.

 

I would expect he'd receive great recommendations from his NHL brethren. From day 1, he was one of the wealthiest owners who could have ruffled feathers and grabbed headlines. He's done the opposite and laid low. I think the NFL would welcome this. He sure isn't another Haslem.

[GA BILLS FAN]

I agree - but I was talking about law. What you are talking about internal regulation of the league.

Understand, but, the process for a new ownership group to take over this franchise goes through the NFL. The NFL is fully supportive of the lease agreement that was signed. I'm sure their due diligence on the new owner will include ensuring that owner will honor the contract the league supports. In other words, the likelihood of the scenario you discuss is very low to start. In addition, I believe all other franchise moves over the past 30 years involved established NFL owners (Balt->Indy; Clev->Balt, LA->Stl; Stl->Ariz, Oak->LA, LA->Oak etc). I don't recall a new owner buying and then moving a team within the first few years of ownership. I think this speaks more to the "NFL club" than anything, in that it takes 24/32 owners to approve a relocation and it will take time for that owner to build consensus.

[machine gun kelly]

 

 

I think they would too.

 

I would expect he'd receive great recommendations from his NHL brethren. From day 1, he was one of the wealthiest owners who could have ruffled feathers and grabbed headlines. He's done the opposite and laid low. I think the NFL would welcome this. He sure isn't another Haslem.

 

One can only dream. I sure hope so.

[BillnutinHouston]

What I'm saying is, new owners don't buy NFL teams for the money. They do it because they are fans of the game. They are sports team gurus. And they love the city they own the team in.

 

Interesting analysis, but diametrically opposed to the analysis that Peter King gave on air (to Murph I think). King called Ralph a fan and stated that in that way he was UNLIKE most of the newer owners.

 

 

[Campy]

 

<snip>

I was simply stating it was a bad analogy. A billion dollar investment is completely different from a rental lease agreement on cheap staples paper that is easily maneuverable.

 

It doesn't matter if it's drawn up on gold leafed paper or toilet paper. Nor does it matter if it's for $1.00 or $1MM. Assuming the basic standards are met (parties are clearly identified, goods or services exchanged for satisfactory consideration, effective/start and end dates, etc), a contract is a contract is a contract.

 

We agree that the team likely/hopefully won't move, we evidently only disagree on the enforcement of the lease agreement. I think there is value in the lease and its penalty and disagree with 83's (or whatever is username is) assertion the lease can be easily broken.

 

(PS: Tell your friend to make sure his leases specify the total value of the lease payable in 12 payments of X dollars. Then if it's broken, he can go to court to get a judgment for some or all of the unpaid balance and then initiate a garnishment.)

[mrags]

 

 

Interesting analysis, but diametrically opposed to the analysis that Peter King gave on air (to Murph I think). King called Ralph a fan and stated that in that way he was UNLIKE most of the newer owners.

most of the new owners are moguls and won't ever make what they have paid. You think Jerry Jones is worried about the 1.5B it cost for JerryLand??? He's for a rock hard (===3 because he's for the most absurd talked about monstrosity in the league. He'll never recoup what he's paid for that stadium. He's have to live another 80 years.

 

Think about it. Like I said, Ralph has owned the team since it's inception, for a cost of only $35k. And he's still not worth $2B without the team. Even with the teams assets he's still probably not worth $2B. That says something about how much money these guys make. Or more so, how much they care about making money vs just being an owner of an NFL team.

 

And fwiw, there aren't many new owners in the league at this point. You can't even call the Dan Snyders and Jerry Jones of the world new owners. They purchased their teams way before they got into the $Billions.

[bisonbrigade]

The Oakland Raiders moved to LA once already, have a fan base there, play in a worse stadium. I can see them moving 1st. The Chargers originated in LA and are trying to get a new stadium so they are second. The Jaguars play in a dumpy old stadium and cannot draw flies to there games and play one game a year in London England. They would be 3rd. Buffalo plays to a packed stadium with die hard fans and is tied into a lease to the stadium which has been renovated. Which one of these teams make more sense?

[YoloinOhio]

And don't forget the Raiders, the team that still claims L.A. as it's territory. They have made it known they want to return but the NFL doesn't want them to.

Yep, I only left them off because I feel like it won't happen per the NFL. But they have a gross stadium and a fan base there so you never know.

[A Dog Named Kelso]

One minor caveat to the above: the 7-year benchmark is not an out clause...it just lowers the penalty to $28M for breaching the contract--it doesn't change the contract terms. This was done to allow for a lower-cost out for the team in case a new stadium is completed by that time. Such a new stadium would (presumably) appease a court of law that no irreparable harm is being done to the County (assuming they stipulate) and allow for the lease to be broken with only a minor compensation to the County. It's as though the County is saying: sure, if you get a stadium built that tells us you're staying by year 7, we'll stipulate that you're staying here and take a relative pittance ($28M) to let you out of that lease.

 

Also, I believe this is a one year arangement in year 7 and goes back up for the remaining years

[ndirish1978]

Been telling you guys this. Mary Wilson does not want the team this was made clear years ago. Ralphs will said to sell it ASAP based on league rules, that has been known (and apparently ignored) as well. Now for the final part fans ignore, an owner CAN Move the bills and pretty much ignore the 400 mill fine. No Court will ever force a person or business to be a tenant. AND WNY must prove to a court they suffered 400 million in damages and they will never be able to. Now a new owner may keep the team here, but fans need to quit wishing and start dealing in facts.

 

Nice try. No one is forcing anyone to be a tenant. The contract doesn't force anyone to do anything it simply requires payment for voiding the contract. That clause in an of itself makes it possible for the lease to be broken, but a new owner doesn't have a right to do it for free.

[plenzmd1]

 

 

Nice try. No one is forcing anyone to be a tenant. The contract doesn't force anyone to do anything it simply requires payment for voiding the contract. That clause in an of itself makes it possible for the lease to be broken, but a new owner doesn't have a right to do it for free.

That's not how the lease has been explained this week, unless it am missing something.

 

The Bills cannot break the lease for any amount of money in the first 7 years of the contract , period. That is what is the the contract. However, should a court not enforce that"specific performance" clause for some as of now unknown reason and the Bills relocate, then the $400M payment comes into affect.

 

At least that is how I understood it based on the reports all this week, but I am certainly no lawyer.

[thebandit27]

That's not how the lease has been explained this week, unless it am missing something.

 

The Bills cannot break the lease for any amount of money in the first 7 years of the contract , period. That is what is the the contract. However, should a court not enforce that"specific performance" clause for some as of now unknown reason and the Bills relocate, then the $400M payment comes into affect.

 

At least that is how I understood it based on the reports all this week, but I am certainly no lawyer.

 

This is closer to correct.

 

Basically, the team would have to convince a court of law that they aren't doing irreparable harm by breaking the lease--a task that is made monumentally difficult given that the language of the lease states that both parties agree that breaking the lease would be defined as irreparable harm.

 

If, by some minor judiciary miracle, they win that battle, they get to pay a $400M penalty for breaking the lease.

 

The only exception is that the penalty drops to $28M after year 7--this is included in case the team gets a new stadium by that time, which I'm willing to bet that the County would consider not to be irreparable harm since they're staying, and would get the $28M to cover the last 3 years of the lease.

[bbb]

Two Miracles are required for sainthood. The first was keeping the team here for 54 years, the second would be arranging for the team to stay here long after his death.

 

If this turns out be the way it goes, Saint Ralph it is for sure. I'd be for renaming Buffalo Wilsonville. Putting a statue of Ralph on every corner.

 

I think Pegula was always part of that group, although nothing was announced. FWIW I used to date a girl, whose family was very close, and business partners with Pegula. Did not realize how much money they where worth then, but am kicking myself now. It's OK, the middle class is treating me well. Jim Kelly is also a close family friend of theirs. The connection is pretty direct, even though it sounds weak.

 

I never heard about Jim Kelly being a close family friend of the Pegulas. How did this come about?

[jimmy10]

Wasn't Jimbo a regular presence at Sabres games? That would seem to be evidence in favor of that connection.

[bbb]

I do remember him at games back in the 80s and 90s at the Aud. I haven't seen him there at the new arena, but that doesn't mean he's not there.

[SRQ_BillsFan]

It is largely incorrect, but without actually seeing the contract, it is impossible to say for sure what would happen. Some liquidated damage provisions are enforceable and some aren't. It depends on lots of different factors. And it is also possible that there is language in the contract that would provide for injunctive relief to prevent a new owner from breaking the lease.

 

 

People keep forgetting that the NFL signed the lease as well. Give. That if someone just up and moved the team they could not have the blessing of the NFL. Simple as not changing the schedule.

 

.

[BUFFALOKIE]

 

 

If this turns out be the way it goes, Saint Ralph it is for sure. I'd be for renaming Buffalo Wilsonville. Putting a statue of Ralph on every corner

 

LOL! The Wilsonville Bills!!!