Thirdborn Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Grew up in Buffalo ... left in 89 ... LOVE that the Bills are staying in Buffalo, and I really like Cuomo's son's involvement in the process
Buftex Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Not my first choice (that would be Jacobs or Pegula), but much closer to the top of my list than Trump or Bon Jovi.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Yes - my favorite Italian restaurant in WNY. Outstanding. Thanks will keep that in mind. Do you have a favorite Steak house? I'm a big fan of EB Greens. It's a nickname for Golisano--- because he's so cheap he probably steals sugar packets from restaurants.
KollegeStudnet Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 I still think it will be a collection of billionaires that will be apart of a group. Golisano will own a share. As will the Jacobs family, Peluga, etc
Omar Little Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Not my first choice (that would be Jacobs or Pegula), but much closer to the top of my list than Trump or Bon Jovi. That sums it up nicely.
papazoid Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Quinn was just raising donation money for his run on the buffalo school board ?
judman Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 I don't like that cuomo has given me a reason to like something he is doing.
Fingon Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Does anyone really think they are going to move now? It seems like half the billionaires around here are bidding to keep the team in Buffalo.
Big Gun Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Not sure I would want Golisano. I think he just sees $$$ in selling the team in 5 years. Not sure he would be all that interested if they were to win or not, as long as they turned a profit. He didn't care if the Sabres won, he cared that they were out of the red and sold for more than he bought them for. $$$ was all he cared about. In the end I don't think Sabre management were given the tools to succeed. I don't think he would be any different with the Bills.
K D Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 If you thought Ralph was cheap... And not to be a Debbie Downer but if Golisano bought the team wouldn't we be in the same position as before with a super old owner and counting the days until he passes and the team goes up for auction? This would buy us more time but he wouldn't be my first choice
The Wiz Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Please, no Quinn!! Anytime I hear his name I remember his conversation with Rene Robert. Robert: "What's your background, Larry?" Quinn: "I'm a land developer." Robert: "Do you think I could do your job?" Quinn: "No, I don't think you could." Robert: "Then what makes you believe you're a hockey man?"
ChevyVanMiller Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Golisano and Quinn would be last on my list of local buyers. Golisano was an absentee owner of the Sabres that kept team payroll in the bottom third of the league.One of the great lines about Quinn was written by a Buffalo News scribe who said, "He always looks like he just rolled down a hill." With that said, when Ralph was still with us it seemed bleak that the team would stay in Buffalo after his departure, while now it seems nearly certain. So, whoever it ultimately goes to, I'll be elated.
aristocrat Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 It's a nickname for Golisano--- because he's so cheap he probably steals sugar packets from restaurants. The Sabres were Stanley Cup contenders IN SPITE of Golisano/Quinn. The Drury/Briere fiasco was a direct result of their micromanaging. Not sure I would want Golisano. I think he just sees $$$ in selling the team in 5 years. Not sure he would be all that interested if they were to win or not, as long as they turned a profit. He didn't care if the Sabres won, he cared that they were out of the red and sold for more than he bought them for. $$$ was all he cared about. In the end I don't think Sabre management were given the tools to succeed. I don't think he would be any different with the Bills. What profits more...winning playoff team or losing team that cant sellout reg season games?
K D Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 What profits more...winning playoff team or losing team that cant sellout reg season games? I don't know if there is a huge difference with revenue sharing. A losing team might not be as profitable but it will still be profitable
Lurker Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Golisano was an absentee owner of the Sabres that kept team payroll in the bottom third of the league. These kind of responses (not yours personally, but the collective 'BTG is cheap' posts) make me scratch my head. When Blase bought the Sabres they were a financial mess with the stench of insolvency still hanging heavy in the air. To just spend for the sake of spending was silly, and any good business person would do what he did--operate on a budget until the cash flow improves. The Briere fiasco was a miscalculation, but IMO, the other big hoo ha--Drury singing with the Rangers--was something of a FU to the team that wasn't on ownership. The Bills would be an entirely different kettle of fish as many posters have pointed out--it's the golden goose that only 31 other guys have laying eggs for them. With a mandated salary floor and the ability to print money based on the underlying asset value of the franchise, I doubt very seriously as to Golisano being a spendthrift NFL owner.
zazie Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 These kind of responses (not yours personally, but the collective 'BTG is cheap' posts) make me scratch my head. When Blase bought the Sabres they were a financial mess with the stench of insolvency still hanging heavy in the air. To just spend for the sake of spending was silly, and any good business person would do what he did--operate on a budget until the cash flow improves. The Briere fiasco was a miscalculation, but IMO, the other big hoo ha--Drury singing with the Rangers--was something of a FU to the team that wasn't on ownership. The Bills would be an entirely different kettle of fish as many posters have pointed out--it's the golden goose that only 31 other guys have laying eggs for them. With a mandated salary floor and the ability to print money based on the underlying asset value of the franchise, I doubt very seriously as to Golisano being a spendthrift NFL owner. Excellent summary. Of course Golisano should be among everyone's top choices, he will very likely keep the team in WNY. And PS, even with revenue sharing, Buffalo should not have the same payroll as NY or Dallas, it is just unrealistic, there is much less money overall in the community as a whole, and that much less for the team to capture through whatever revenue stream (parking to hotdogs to advertising banners to stadium naming etc. etc.). it is only logical that the Bills spending should be in the bottom half, reality bites.
Mr. WEO Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 These kind of responses (not yours personally, but the collective 'BTG is cheap' posts) make me scratch my head. When Blase bought the Sabres they were a financial mess with the stench of insolvency still hanging heavy in the air. To just spend for the sake of spending was silly, and any good business person would do what he did--operate on a budget until the cash flow improves. The Briere fiasco was a miscalculation, but IMO, the other big hoo ha--Drury singing with the Rangers--was something of a FU to the team that wasn't on ownership. The Bills would be an entirely different kettle of fish as many posters have pointed out--it's the golden goose that only 31 other guys have laying eggs for them. With a mandated salary floor and the ability to print money based on the underlying asset value of the franchise, I doubt very seriously as to Golisano being a spendthrift NFL owner. Good post. These anti Golisano posts are far out of touch with reality. Here was a guy who's purchase saved the Sabres. Now the Bills are looking for a savior and Golisano isn't the guy?
Recommended Posts