MadBuffaloDisease Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 Like I said before my guess is someone from outside the area comes in and buys the team but keeps them in Buffalo. Yes Jacobs, Golisano and Rich could all pony up the 700 million together but I think that is very unlikely because they don't have that much in expendable" assets that can be liquidated. Some multi-billionaire from outside the area may buy the team, but keep it in B'lo. Dan Snyder had a group of 5 people made up of 2 ad execs, himself, and 2 family members plunk down $300M to purchase the Redskins, although the final cost was $800M. So Golisano et. al. will likely have to plunk down the same percentage for the Bills, which is around $239M. I'd say that's very doable.
Kelly the Dog Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 The Bills aren't going anywhere, even when Ralph dies. I have three words for you: Weekend. At. Bernie's.
Kelly the Dog Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 If we can keep Ralph alive until the year 2010, there is a little loophole in the new estate tax laws and there is 0% estate tax I do believe for just that year. I know a guy who knows a guy. Accidents happen. Brakes don't brake.
Mikie2times Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 Like I said before my guess is someone from outside the area comes in and buys the team but keeps them in Buffalo. Yes Jacobs, Golisano and Rich could all pony up the 700 million together but I think that is very unlikely because they don't have that much in expendable" assets that can be liquidated. Some multi-billionaire from outside the area may buy the team, but keep it in B'lo. Why move another team to LA? They NEVER support the damn team. How many failed franchises have they had? Two? Three? Also, in regards to estate tax laws. If Ralph gives everything to his wife my understanding is that the assets are not subject to the 55% estate tax. But if they go to his estate they are subject to that ridiculous tax minus the first 1.5 million that is exempt. So the family much like the Robbie family of Miami would have to sell the franchise to pay the IRS. However, no matter what your political views, with a Republican controlled Congress they may be repealing the estate tax altogher and it would be a moot point. Keep going Ralph. He looks in great shape for an octogenarian! 116047[/snapback] If Ralph gives the Bills to his wife then the estate tax would not be applied until she passes away.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 BTW. here is a little financial background on the Bills' future owner: http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/54/200...datatype=Person Notice that lasy year he was the 126th richest man in the US. This year he's the 356th richest person in the world. And you think HE can't afford to buy the Bills, put together an investment group or secure collateral, or doesn't have the political power to ensure the NFL approves the sale to him?
udonkey Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 You guys notice that Rudy always makes 1 post then disappears for the rest of the thread? The guy is a friggin idiot. Motion to blackball Rudy from Tau Beta Delta (TBD)
tombradyfan Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 DONT SHOOT THE MESSENGER...got this froma nother site"Add the Bills to the short list of teams being mentioned as relocation candidates for Los Angeles. They join the Vikings and the Saints. Scratch the Colts, who are close to a deal with the city of Indianapolis for a retractable-roof stadium." -- Philadelphia Daily News 114872[/snapback] Hopefully I will be able to say.... ...good riddens
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 List all the justifictions you want, but there are numerous communities better suited than Buffalo to support a NFL franchise (for weather, population and financial reasons). 115347[/snapback] I'd like to hear what the "Numerous communites" are? LA yes, but besides that don't see too many others. Times have also changed. These days there doesn't appear to be a bunch of cities lining up with sweetheart deals either. There are enough larger NFL cities struggling these days too that would likely make other cities take note about offering great deals to move a team. If Indy, or Minn, or New Orleans can't make a go of it, why should some other city spend millions to get a team to end up in ten years in the same boat as these other places. LA is the one exception as the population there is so much larger. But besides that, there aren't many other cities currently without teams and that have massive populations that can support a team.
bdelma Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 ADD SAN DIEGO CHARGERS TOO. THE CITY IS A PLAYING HARDBALL WITH THIS TEAM HERE
MadBuffaloDisease Posted November 14, 2004 Posted November 14, 2004 ADD SAN DIEGO CHARGERS TOO. THE CITY IS A PLAYING HARDBALL WITH THIS TEAM HERE 116214[/snapback] This is probably the reason why: http://www.keepmedia.com/acct/QuickRegSubm...id=aRql29S3fbX- "SAN DIEGO -- This laid-back city seems to have it all -- stunning beaches, best weather this side of Honolulu, a national image as a vacation playground and top convention destination. A new ballpark and condo towers in the trendy Gaslamp Quarter, a Skid-Row section turned upscale shopping and dining, gives "America's Finest City" a lively, urban feel. San Diego is also known as a tightwad. City Hall's Web site proclaims it "the most efficiently run big city in California." Howard Jarvis, architect of Proposition 13, California's landmark 1978 ballot measure capping property taxes, once said that if all cities were as financially prudent as San Diego, there'd be no need for a tax revolt. That was then. This is now: a financial mess dragging the nation's seventh-largest city toward insolvency, federal investigators looking for evidence of corruption, a $1.7 billion gap in city workers' pension fund and retiree medical benefits brought on by years of mismanagement and alleged sweetheart deals. "
Recommended Posts