K-9 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 ??? It has been reported that the Toronto group has net worth above $10B ? -- that's triple what Pegs is worth. As far as liquidity, they would have several years to figure that (as well as any legal rangling) out before moving and building stadium --- I'm not running around and saying "the sky is falling" -- but a group of Toronto businessman buying the Bills is not good --- Kirby never mentioned any iron-clad contract requiring them to keep team in WNY or forfeit ownership --- even with one, would it be enforceable ? NFL rules prevent corporate ownership of a team so I don't see how MLSE plays a role. It's not like Tanenbaum can just write a check against MLSE assets to purchase the team. And neither he nor JBJ have the liquid net worth to write the check themselves. Edward Rogers III certainly does, but he needed permission from his mom and sister just to join the Tanenbaum/JBJ group. On paper, they don't seem like the kind of group the NFL has preferred in the past. Not that it means anything as the NFL seems to like JBJ and it wouldn't be a concern to some owners. But it may to some others. GO BILLS!!!
GA BILLS FAN Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Liquidity is a time issue --- everything is liquid longer term if you are willing to sell. As for corporate ownership, I believe NFL wants majority owner to be individual, so it's possible that JBJ/MLSE/Rogers can split ownership in such a way as to satisfy NFL mandate -- in the end, that group has more assets than Pegs, which is a concern.
Wayne Cubed Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 (edited) Liquidity is a time issue --- everything is liquid longer term if you are willing to sell. As for corporate ownership, I believe NFL wants majority owner to be individual, so it's possible that JBJ/MLSE/Rogers can split ownership in such a way as to satisfy NFL mandate -- in the end, that group has more assets than Pegs, which is a concern. Right but most of Tannebaums money is in MLSE, which is where his net worth comes from. He can't write a check against MLSE, so his liquidity is a problem. Same goes for JBJ. They don't have loads of cash, which the NFL likes. Which makes sense, you wouldn't want an owner/owners having big debt problems and then banks getting involved when they can't pay back their debt. Rogers is probably the most liquid out of the 3, but as K-9 pointed out he needs permission, hence why he isn't a loan bidder. He doesn't need JBJ or Tannenbaum. Edited July 20, 2014 by Wayne Cubed
K-9 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Liquidity is a time issue --- everything is liquid longer term if you are willing to sell. As for corporate ownership, I believe NFL wants majority owner to be individual, so it's possible that JBJ/MLSETanenbaum/Rogers can split ownership in such a way as to satisfy NFL mandate -- in the end, that group has more assets than Pegs, which is a concern. I make the distinction because MLSE's assets won't be used to purchase part of the team. I'm not downplaying the financial strength of the group, especially since Rogers got on board. But other than Bon Jovi's popularity with Goodell, Jones, and Kraft, I don't see a lot of attraction by NFL owners for the group. Especially if Rogers needs approval from his family to make large moves, like he did just to become part of this Toronto group. It's just not the clean kind of ownership group the NFL has favored in the past. But I'm getting ahead of myself because any prospective buyer has to be approved by that 3/4 vote of the four trustees of the estate. In some ways, that may be a more difficult hurdle. GO BILLS!!!
GA BILLS FAN Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 I make the distinction because MLSE's assets won't be used to purchase part of the team. I'm not downplaying the financial strength of the group, especially since Rogers got on board. But other than Bon Jovi's popularity with Goodell, Jones, and Kraft, I don't see a lot of attraction by NFL owners for the group. Especially if Rogers needs approval from his family to make large moves, like he did just to become part of this Toronto group. It's just not the clean kind of ownership group the NFL has favored in the past. But I'm getting ahead of myself because any prospective buyer has to be approved by that 3/4 vote of the four trustees of the estate. In some ways, that may be a more difficult hurdle. GO BILLS!!! I'm still counting on the trustees to vote in favor of a true committed WNY buyer --- that to me is the biggest thing in our favor, that and a few billionaires on our side of the border
SF Bills Fan Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 (edited) The new group that now involoves Rogers does seem like they would have the cash- but I agree that too many questions around relocation and a new stadium exist. If Goodell said we need a new stadium, then he has to be saying the same thing about Toronto. Would the NFL approve that group with a sub par NFL quality stadium and no plan for building one over Pegula with a perfectly fine and newly renovated one as well as the political power of NYS state willing to work to get a new one and Pegula possessing the ability to get it done himself if he wants. Not to mention a loyal stable fan base that will evaporate for the Toronto group. It's stability vs a bunch of maybes and what ifs. "maybe we can get a build stadium in the suburbs of Toronto somewhere?" "what if we lose the current fan base in Buffalo?" "what if this goes over like the Bills in Toronto series" the main question the NFL and Goodell need to ask is "what if the NFL fails in Toronto?" Edited July 20, 2014 by SF Bills Fan
CodeMonkey Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 The new group that now involoves Rogers does seem like they would have the cash- but I agree that too many questions around relocation and a new stadium exist. If Goodell said we need a new stadium, then he has to be saying the same thing about Toronto. Would the NFL approve that group with a sub par NFL quality stadium and no plan for building one over Pegula with a perfectly fine and newly renovated one as well as the political power of NYS state willing to work to get a new one and Pegula possessing the ability to get it done himself if he wants. Not to mention a loyal stable fan base that will evaporate for the Toronto group. It's stability vs a bunch of maybes and what ifs. "maybe we can get a build stadium in the suburbs of Toronto somewhere?" "what if we lose the current fan base in Buffalo?" "what if this goes over like the Bills in Toronto series" the main question the NFL and Goodell need to ask is "what if the NFL fails in Toronto?" The NFL has already declared their desire to go international. And it makes sense as expanding their market seems to be the only way for them to continue to grow revenue. A team in Canada, and particularly Toronto due to its close proximity to the US, would seem to have the best chance of success over a place like London for example. If a team cannot succeed there, they can pretty much forget Europe. If a team in Toronto did fail, the team could just be sold again and/or move to another location in the US and the NFL would have valuable information regarding its international expansion plans.
JimBob2232 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 The new group that now involoves Rogers does seem like they would have the cash- but I agree that too many questions around relocation and a new stadium exist. If Goodell said we need a new stadium, then he has to be saying the same thing about Toronto. Would the NFL approve that group with a sub par NFL quality stadium and no plan for building one over Pegula with a perfectly fine and newly renovated one as well as the political power of NYS state willing to work to get a new one and Pegula possessing the ability to get it done himself if he wants. Not to mention a loyal stable fan base that will evaporate for the Toronto group. It's stability vs a bunch of maybes and what ifs. "maybe we can get a build stadium in the suburbs of Toronto somewhere?" "what if we lose the current fan base in Buffalo?" "what if this goes over like the Bills in Toronto series" the main question the NFL and Goodell need to ask is "what if the NFL fails in Toronto?" Maybe those silly games in Buffalo will actually help us! It does prove that the market in Toronto is not well defined...even if the "home" team is only right across the border. Now imagine if those "home" fans are not pleased!
TheFunPolice Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Littman is 100% going to want the team to stay here.... I would not worry about his vote
HopefulFuture Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Littman is 100% going to want the team to stay here.... I would not worry about his vote You worry about all the votes. To state the trustee voters want the team to stay in Buffalo is purely speculative. There is no information, 0, that any of them have stated such. What you say to yourself to help you sleep better at nights is fine and dandy, but it's not fact to be sure.
TheFunPolice Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 You worry about all the votes. To state the trustee voters want the team to stay in Buffalo is purely speculative. There is no information, 0, that any of them have stated such. What you say to yourself to help you sleep better at nights is fine and dandy, but it's not fact to be sure. Litman and his family are deeply supportive of the Bills in WNY... and for the record, I don't tell myself anything to help me sleep better at nights. Have you read my posts in this thread? I am deeply concerned that the MLSE/Bon Jovi bid has been the plan all along here. All the "don;t worry I have sources" people are even trying to calm us down and warm us up to their bid now. First The Lunch. Then Jaws. Now the "wink, nod we'll be fine" people are on board. We are in BIG BIG trouble is what I think. Still, something does not add up here.
CodeMonkey Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Litman and his family are deeply supportive of the Bills in WNY... and for the record, I don't tell myself anything to help me sleep better at nights. Have you read my posts in this thread? I am deeply concerned that the MLSE/Bon Jovi bid has been the plan all along here. All the "don;t worry I have sources" people are even trying to calm us down and warm us up to their bid now. First The Lunch. Then Jaws. Now the "wink, nod we'll be fine" people are on board. We are in BIG BIG trouble is what I think. Still, something does not add up here. Nothing ever adds up when 100% of the process is behind closed doors. We don't have a clue as to what really is going on. All we can do is wait and see.
3rdand12 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Nothing ever adds up when 100% of the process is behind closed doors. We don't have a clue as to what really is going on. All we can do is wait and see. we can still speculate and gnash teeth i hope . Can't we please ? This period of bills fandom has been more trying than any playoff run or Superbowl game . I dont like the unknown very much .
nucci Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 we can still speculate and gnash teeth i hope . Can't we please ? This period of bills fandom has been more trying than any playoff run or Superbowl game . I dont like the unknown very much . Who does?
3rdand12 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Who does? Those with more faith than us I suppose : )
Augie Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 This period of bills fandom has been more trying than any playoff run or Superbowl game . Geez, it's kinda hard to remember that far back, but I'll take your word for it...
thebandit27 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Litman and his family are deeply supportive of the Bills in WNY... and for the record, I don't tell myself anything to help me sleep better at nights. Have you read my posts in this thread? I am deeply concerned that the MLSE/Bon Jovi bid has been the plan all along here. All the "don;t worry I have sources" people are even trying to calm us down and warm us up to their bid now. First The Lunch. Then Jaws. Now the "wink, nod we'll be fine" people are on board. We are in BIG BIG trouble is what I think. Still, something does not add up here. That's now the 3rd or 4th time your taken a shot at a poster that many of us have told you has been very reliable and informative in the past. Knock it off. Learn to make your point another way or go somewhere else to make it. Thanks.
CodeMonkey Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 we can still speculate and gnash teeth i hope . Can't we please ? Obviously it doesn't matter how I answer as it has been going on since Mr. Wilsons passing
Mark Vader Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Those with more faith than us I suppose : ) I've been saying that the Bills are staying in Buffalo, for years. Even when they announced that they would be having the Toronto series, I said the Bills are not moving. I still stand by that. Even though I have no insight into the current matter. The Bills are not moving.
3rdand12 Posted July 20, 2014 Posted July 20, 2014 Geez, it's kinda hard to remember that far back, but I'll take your word for it... Trust me on this. Its better that i carry the burden than you. Obviously it doesn't matter how I answer as it has been going on since Mr. Wilsons passing O my much longer than that i think . We have been talking about this subject before dear Mr Wilsons passing on. Certainly wondering . I've been saying that the Bills are staying in Buffalo, for years. Even when they announced that they would be having the Toronto series, I said the Bills are not moving. I still stand by that. Even though I have no insight into the current matter. The Bills are not moving. Mark you are a Beacon of stead fastness of sorts . there are quite a few here who keep the faith . The faith in the Buffalo Bills , of course. And i think thats needed sometimes here on TBD and as a fan in general. I dont want to offend anyone please
Recommended Posts