beerme1 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 As others noted what we do know is that the way the lease was structured it favored keeping the franchise local. As K-9 indicated the way the trustee vote was configured it also did tilt the process toward keeping the franchise local. What I have brought up on this topic is that there is still some vulnerability to the area's team if a situation arises similar to the Clipper situation where a bidder dramatically overbids from a rational economic standpoint just for the sake of joining the exclusive ownership club. There are people who possess an unimaginable amount of money who simply don't care about western NY. What happens if a bidder with intentions to move the franchise bids in the $2.5 B range and the next highest local bidder is $1.25 B range? Are you sure who the trustees are going to select? Ok if we have a local bid at $1.25 B and someone bids $2.5 B the trustees must say screw it and sorry Buffalo. If it's a half B more than they screw you to the out of towner. That's my biggest (maybe my only) fear right now. Spiders? Clowns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopefulFuture Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Listen, I was born raised and educated here and my profession and interests focus on urbanization and public policy. I want nothing more than this city and region to rebound but I am so annoyed with the incessant false public discourses suggesting resurgence and that we’ve finally turned the corner. The single variable, likely because it’s the most prominent and visible, that this entire conversation has focused on and this idea being constructed around (pun intended) is construction. Everyone is suggesting that bricks and mortar is proof positive we’ve finally broke away from the shackle of deindustrialization and economic contraction. It’s a very convenient conversation since politicians dated back to the 1950s have suggested growing and building your way out of decline. So politicians have long used their voice to suggest to the populace that growth is good and further that new growth taking the shape of new buildings and investment is our indicator. And that may be true if that growth was not induced by massive influxes of public subsidy to create a market where none actually exists. Canalside…. Massive govt subsidies. Everything Rocco Termini and most other developers touch… massive subsidies. New federal building… all govt money. Any waterfront projects… massive subsidies. Uniland’s new Delaware and Chippewa Building… subsidies they cried about needing to make the project work. The 500 IBM jobs taking over Delaware North’s office when they move three blocks away.. millions in subsidies. Making brownfields shovel ready on Riverbend….. hundreds of millions in govt subsidies. These are the big ones, there are hundreds of small ones that all of the projects, like the magic silver bullet projects from the prior decades (Metro Rail, Main Place Mall, Bison’s stadium….) are nothing without fundamental systemic shifts in public policy at the local and state level. The reason these types of projects never deliver anything but millions to the owners (socialized debt for privatized profit) is because the cost of the subsidies far outweighs the return in the form of jobs. Jobs matter but when many jobs created at places like Canalside and new hotels and other commercial uses are minimum-wage paying services jobs, that have minimal positive impacts. The systemic problems keep these from actually helping because for every new job they create, others are leaving or the hyper-acquisition mentality of large global corporations result in more lost jobs, think HSBC. And guess who will get saddled with millions in subsidies to fix the foreclosed and vacant former HSBC tower because the Urban Land Institute , a pay for membership group of real estate pros, has told the city it needs to help their brethren make this building suitable by throwing millions at it usable. So the govt subsidized Uniland’s project to move Delaware North three blocks and backfilled the vacant spaced with millions more in subsidies and now the govt will eventually subsidize the former HSBC building so that someone can move into it and vacant more space…. And the chain of government subsidized vacancy continues absent any actual economic growth. If anything, the only positive we’ve truly seen is a geographic one. We’ve seen major investment in the city and less in the suburbs, so all we’ve really done is changed the location, which to be sure is good for the city proper. But… we are a region and that as a cohesive agglomeration of cities, towns, and villages has to be measured as one entity in this global economy and it certainly has to be measured as one when considering how this supposed change will be viewed by potential new owners. What these subsidies have done is commodified the city, and Americans love a hot commodity and to talk about it and brag about it and Facebook about it. The city has become that, which wealthy empty nesters who pushed urban sprawl in the 80s, 90,s and 00s, forever impacting this region, now buying city properties with cash. But let’s be clear, again with another misconception, that more of the city remains a weak housing market than not. The entirety of the east side is among America’s most impoverished, segregated, and abandoned neighborhoods in the entire country. Riverside and Black Rock remain areas of minimal interest and investment and continual decline and disinvestment, aside from a few potential corridors. South Buffalo is a neighborhood in transition, with areas of insipient decline and some areas of maintenance but little improvement. Regionally, the older inner ring suburbs and many rural towns and villages continue to experience population loss and aging. Additionally there are major increases in vacant and abandoned properties, cost local govts and the county millions per in lost assessed value and taxes. So all the positives locally (just for Bflo) across a few square miles of the 40+ square miles may come at the cost of the suburbs, just as suburban growth came at the cost of the city. And by the way, the data matters to, which no one every discusses because that takes work, knowledge and may actually debunk the public misconception of what’s actually happening. Just so we’re clear, from 2010 (last complete census) to 2012, the city lost another 0.7% of its population (-1,926) The county has seen a minor jump in population….from 919,040 to 919,086 (+46) (these are estimates so they could be over it under-estimated). Which means even with population decline Buffalo it’s still increasing slightly in the suburbs… but everyone is moving into the city I thought? If it weren’t from the massive influx of refugees into Bflo for its cheaper, low quality housing in many areas, the loss would be worse. All we’re doing right now is throwing massive money at systemic problems… bad business climate, poor investment in human capital, bad infrastructure, high energy costs, etc… rather than just fixing the problems so that moving forward the incentives to move here are because we have a good business climate, an educated work force, great infrastructure to create a business and lower energy costs that Vegas and Phoenix (yes, with NF right here, we pay more for electricity than desert cities). Why? Politicians love to cut ribbons and tout “accomplishments” on the campaign trail and people vote for it, devoid of any understanding of the reality. My money is on continual economic stagnation coupled with massive public investment and more gentrification in the city and decline in the suburbs, recreating the urban decline in the suburbs and switching the massive costs of that decline geographically. Then, because the voting power remains in the suburbs (about 70/30), politicians will reverse course to get votes from the suburbs and throw massive money their way again. I’m not a pessimist, I know the challenged and the reality and don’t have the luxury of blind loyally and the religious fervency displayed by those who just want to believe so bad and don’t want to have an honest conversation based in reality. While I agree with much of this, I to work in the private/public arena with large projects. The one thing that you point out that is not entirely true is on subsidies. While it's convenient to point to those subsidies as one of the only ways to get things done in NY, it's not entirely true as to the why. 83% roughly of those subsidies are tax related, and being so, they help to bring the state in line with competitiveness with other areas of the nation that have actual business friendly tax rates. The only difference being the length of those tax subsidies. NY finds itself on the short end of the stick because it refuses to give long term structured deals on those rates. They are changing that policy, and rightfully so. Also, I cannot stress enough the 08 to present situation with regards to real estate pricing fluctuations combined with federal money being dumped into the cash stream. It's very important to realize that WNY did not see a major down turn in real estate, nor did it see a huge increase in pricing. It's been stable. I deal with equity investors from Dubai to NYC to LA to Tokyo and those type investors right now love stability, especially given the unknowns in QE based areas where those investors just don't know exactly what the influence those type of gov't programs have long term since they can't see where a particular market is going to level off due to the huge influx of gov't cash. I must also point out that WNY in particular isn't even close to the top of the list of this situation, look to newly built up populace centers such as Las Vegas or the larger LA basin for prime examples. Phoenix and some areas of Florida and Texas have the same issues on a somewhat smaller scale, but this areas stagnation, as you call it, combined with the infrastructure in place, which, isn't at all what you describe since it's a gateway to a large market such as Toronto, merely needs to have champions at the private and political levels to achieve it's potential, and that starts with private equity investors in the region. That investment will manifest itself from industries that already exist here as well as industry that find those long term tax subsidy deals to come here. The WNY region has had an immigration influx to replace those that have left for 40 years or so, but this is very common in situations similar to this, it's not as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Populations are nomadic in nature over a long term period. Nothing stays the same for a substantial amount of time. The key is to harness the generational skills brought by these groups and combine it with the existing populace, which, is more common place throughout history than not. I do however agree with you that as time passes the urban area will begin to see an increase in gentrification and as such, will see an increased market value. But this is long term as well. I do agree with you also that it is shifting from one area to another, but that does not change the fact that if NYS and the local gov't's put the tax rates at the medium level nationally growth would ensue in the existing structure already in place. In the end, manufacturing will return to some extent, it's an eventuality that cannot be denied as regional economics on a broader historical pattern are cyclical in nature. In place of that manufacturing that does not manifest itself in the short to mid term future, there will be other industries, such as the service sector, to replace the remaining portion. The time frames on something like this can take 2, 3 or even 4 generations depending on the equity investment size. The larger the equity investment, the faster it moves. And what were looking at in WNY is a larger equity position for larger investors due to it's proven ability to remain stable in turbulent situations, such as the 08 scenario. I must also note, you must rule out financial institutions as entities that will absorb some of the region with equity positions. Hedge Funds, Investment Banks, Commercial Banks (because they are considered dual roles since the repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act) and some other independent funding sources. WHile these type of financial industries may desire some long term, stable positions, it's in opposition to their overall goals of consistent returns that draw in more investors at a rapid rate. Instead, look to individuals with wealth (i.e. the Pegula's, Jacob's, Galisano's) and their abilities to foster both independent as well as co-dependent investment strategies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 you mean like spiders on the field??? Spiders anywhere. Expand your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET1062 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Pretty sure Zonabb and HopefullFuture just collaborated and wrote War and Peace II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Pretty sure Zonabb and HopefullFuture just collaborated and wrote War and Peace II Those two put together still can't touch even a minimalist effort from Hplaarrm or ICanSleepWhenImDead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Those two put together still can't touch even a minimalist effort from Hplaarrm or ICanSleepWhenImDead. Only if they forego punctuation and sentence structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnyc Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 At this point, all I really want to know is whether Pegula will be making a bid, whether there are any other interested parties who would keep the team in Buffalo (other than Trump and Golisano), and whether the Bills will be staying in Buffalo. It would be great if a new stadium is part of what happens in the long term, but in the short term, I want to know that the Bills will be staying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 At this point, all I really want to know is whether Pegula will be making a bid, whether there are any other interested parties who would keep the team in Buffalo (other than Trump and Golisano), and whether the Bills will be staying in Buffalo. It would be great if a new stadium is part of what happens in the long term, but in the short term, I want to know that the Bills will be staying. Semi-educated guesses: Yes Yes Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 At this point, all I really want to know is whether Pegula will be making a bid, whether there are any other interested parties who would keep the team in Buffalo (other than Trump and Golisano), and whether the Bills will be staying in Buffalo. It would be great if a new stadium is part of what happens in the long term, but in the short term, I want to know that the Bills will be staying. You and thousands of others. But no matter how much people Billieve they know what will happen, us fans will not know until it plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy10 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 The valuation, etc, from the bank should be coming soon, right? Wasn't it predicted to be by the end of the month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 The valuation, etc, from the bank should be coming soon, right? Wasn't it predicted to be by the end of the month? Would love to know how Morgan Stanley is handling the valuation. I assume all numbers and projections are based on keeping Bills in Buffalo and playing in renovated Ralph. How would you make valuation projections based on moving the team to 'fill-in-the-blank' city with a stadium not yet built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Would love to know how Morgan Stanley is handling the valuation. I assume all numbers and projections are based on keeping Bills in Buffalo and playing in renovated Ralph. How would you make valuation projections based on moving the team to 'fill-in-the-blank' city with a stadium not yet built. Normally it would be a date of death valuation, not a projection of the future. I imagine potential buyers are left to predict the future on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Normally it would be a date of death valuation, not a projection of the future. I imagine potential buyers are left to predict the future on their own. Not sure how you do a valuation without some kind of numbers projection. Jags and Cleveland are the 2 most recent sales but those were 2 years ago. I suppose you could use Bills current revenue and compare it to Jax and Cleveland's revenue from 2 years ago and corresponding sale price to come up with a valuation, but that's basically meaningless to anyone who doesn't plan on keeping Bills in WNY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 19, 2014 Author Share Posted June 19, 2014 @john_wawrow UPDATE: AP sources: #Sabress owner Terry Pegula among prospective #Bills buyers contacted by Wilson's estate. http://pro32.ap.org/article/ap-source-bills-prospective-buyers-contacted … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 @john_wawrow UPDATE: AP sources: #Sabress owner Terry Pegula among prospective #Bills buyers contacted by Wilson's estate. http://pro32.ap.org/...tacted … Nice! I bet that's the thing that I have to go sign for at the post office.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET1062 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Statement made today by Mike Gilbert of the Sabres.... “Terry and Kim Pegula have a deep commitment to Buffalo and Western New York. Their ownership of the Buffalo Sabres and Rochester Americans and the construction of HARBORCENTER are evidence of that fact. Like everyone else in this community, they have a strong desire to have the Buffalo Bills remain a centerpiece of this region. Accordingly, they have been following the developments involving the sale of the Bills. However, out of respect for the process being conducted by representatives of the Wilson Estate and the Bills, they will not be making any additional comments about the sale process.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Statement made today by Mike Gilbert of the Sabres.... “Terry and Kim Pegula have a deep commitment to Buffalo and Western New York. Their ownership of the Buffalo Sabres and Rochester Americans and the construction of HARBORCENTER are evidence of that fact. Like everyone else in this community, they have a strong desire to have the Buffalo Bills remain a centerpiece of this region. Accordingly, they have been following the developments involving the sale of the Bills. However, out of respect for the process being conducted by representatives of the Wilson Estate and the Bills, they will not be making any additional comments about the sale process.” Classy statement. Sometimes the most serious bidders are the ones who remain quiet.... CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 20, 2014 Author Share Posted June 20, 2014 Classy statement. Sometimes the most serious bidders are the ones who remain quiet.... CBF Ding!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Ding!!! Quien es mas macho? El Pegual es mas macho! Viva El Pegual! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Basically, that says "Stop calling us, Wawrow" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts