Zona Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Actually the $750M is his contribution to Uncle Sam. +1 uncle sam ALWAYS gets his cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Smallest market thing really means nothing...no team loses money in the NFL. I'll agree with the latter half of this statement. Being profitable and generating sufficient return on investment are two different things entirely. I would argue that ROI is definitely driven by the team's market size and socioeconomic makeup. Some prospective owners may be fine with investing $1 billion and making $30 million a year, others not so much. Some potential investors (those who aren't hardcore sportsmen) will decide they can make more money on their money with other investments. Edited July 11, 2014 by BillnutinHouston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 I'll agree with the latter half of this statement. Being profitable and generating sufficient return on investment are two different things entirely. I would argue that ROI is definitely driven by the team's market size and socioeconomic makeup. Some prospective owners may be fine with investing $1 billion and making $30 million a year, others not so much. Some potential investors (those who aren't hardcore sportsmen) will decide they can make more money on their money with other investments. The asset is going to appreciate at more than an average of $30m per year as well. Add that to the annual profit, and in 10 years that $1b is gonna be $1.6b, at a minimum, just based on projected TV revenues. That's one helluva good investment deal, regardless. Maybe not for everybody as you say, but there's a lot to like about that type of return. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 I'll agree with the latter half of this statement. Being profitable and generating sufficient return on investment are two different things entirely. I would argue that ROI is definitely driven by the team's market size and socioeconomic makeup. Some prospective owners may be fine with investing $1 billion and making $30 million a year, others not so much. Some potential investors (those who aren't hardcore sportsmen) will decide they can make more money on their money with other investments. Its not like he couldnt use the team as collateral if he wants to invest in something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 I simply cannot imagine someone putting out 1.75B to run an NFL team in the leagues smallest market. not going to happen. The numbers cannot possibly work in any reasonable scenario. People buy property all the time and the decision isn't based on immediate return. Often times it beats paying taxes on the liquid and the little you make has a higher return than the interest. Sometimes the tax benefits for being able to write off the acquisition is the motivation. Another reason is the property could be purchased forecasting the neighborhood is headed towards an increase in value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zona Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 I also say that once a person becomes incredibly wealthy, that at some point they spend frivolously on things for sentimental reasons. Like maybe keeping the Bills in Buffalo because you were born and raised there and couldn't stand to see them leave. If you have 10 billion, it might be worth 1.75 to be a hero to millions... I think I would. what else would you buy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrod's Tailor Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Hi everyone. I've lurked on this board for a long time but this my first post. I'm a financial professional whose group has worked with Mr. Gundlach's on occasion. I have met the man a couple of times. To put it simply, he's a genius. I realize that doesn't automatically translate to successful ownership, but I still think he'd be a terrific owner and we'd be lucky to have someone so skilled at the helm. (Plus, check out his comments on the "L.A. Multitude" from the BN story at the start of this thread. He's the man!) However, a couple of posters have correctly pointed out that Mr. Gundlach will have a hard time matching both the size and liquidity of Mr. Pegula's fortune. I would also point out that Mr. Gundlach has a few issues in his background that came out during his old employer's lawsuit against him. They're NSFW (and hilarious), so I won't post a link here, but a simple Google search will point you to what I'm talking about. Go Bills! Edited July 16, 2014 by billsfaninmanhattan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 give me a guy who is going to live for 25 more years Actually, that's a BIG negative, IMO. He's still trying to make more money (i.e., view the franchise as a buy low / sell high opportunity), while T-Pegs and Tom G. have already made their dough and want to enjoy their toys and lifestyle. Gundlach's just an other version of Trump... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I have actually heard from a source that he might be the preferred bidder at this point, and is committed to keeping the team in Buffalo. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrod's Tailor Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I have actually heard from a source that he might be the preferred bidder at this point, and is committed to keeping the team in Buffalo. Interesting. If he's actually the guy this team will stay put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts