Thoughts?

[aznhockeyguy]

I for one am glad the San Diego voters voted to not give Spanos any public money.  NO MORE PUBLIC MONEY TO BILLIONAIRE OWNERS FOR STADIUMS. 

[Angel Oracle]

Kroenke did it right.   All of the money for Rams Stadium is coming from his (and yes, also his wife's) pocketbook.  

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

Well, from what I read the Debt Waiver is for teams looking to build a new stadium.

So, the NFL is allowing the Chargers to move "relocate" and use the "Debt Waiver as a Status" not in the true word of what it was used through building a new stadium but through the process of relocation and paying towards the relocation fee that is $550M that grows to $650M (IF they decide to use a bank to finance it) that the NFL charges teams. So, in this instance if the chargers decide to finance the second half through regular financial institutions (Bank) the $550M becomes $650M which they can finance pay off $325M across 10 years and then carry a loan across a longer term through a bank on the second $325M.

I would believe in the long term viability of the Chargers organization they would be better off in the initial in doing a $550M/10 year term back to the NFL.  then across the next 2 years outside the new stadium. That would leave 8 years of lean and crunching the LA Fan Base and trying to take the LA Market (could produce some growing pains and loss of name players?) ...Against the 1/2 now and then spreading the 2nd half across a longer term not knowing the interest rate tied to the loan. Or, if there could be a balloon payment or margin type call in year 20+.

vs 

10/325M = 32.5M per 

20-30/325M depending on rate and schedule.

 

Maybe, I'm incorrect? I'm just using basic math and basic regular loan assumptions what would the tax ramifications and write off % be ----- Question to our AW.com Accountants?

http://www.forbes.com/teams/san-diego-chargers/

 

interesting article about the City of SD paying the Chargers to play in SD.... http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/12867671/san-diego-chargers-make-33m-profit-rather-paying-23m-rent

[aznhockeyguy]

Back to the original point of the thread, if Arte wants to move the team to Irvine or wherever, fine by me, as long as there is no public money going to him. I was going to write a very long ass rant regarding giving public money to team owners but meh.  I root for the Angels, but I'm not in the business of giving wealthy people my tax dollars, nor will I shed a tear if they move away.  My life doesn't revolve around the team.

[aznhockeyguy]

5 minutes ago, SlappyUtilityMIF said:

Well, from what I read the Debt Waiver is for teams looking to build a new stadium.

So, the NFL is allowing the Chargers to move "relocate" and use the "Debt Waiver as a Status" not in the true word of what it was used through building a new stadium but through the process of relocation and paying towards the relocation fee that is $550M that grows to $650M (IF they decide to use a bank to finance it) that the NFL charges teams. So, in this instance if the chargers decide to finance the second half through regular financial institutions (Bank) the $550M becomes $650M which they can finance pay off $325M across 10 years and then carry a loan across a longer term through a bank on the second $325M.

I would believe in the long term viability of the Chargers organization they would be better off in the initial in doing a $550M/10 year term to the NFL. or $55M per for 10 years directly to the NFL. the next 2 years outside the new stadium. That would leave 8 years of lean and crunching the LA Fan Base and trying to take the LA Market ...Against the 1/2 now and then spreading the 2nd half across a longer term not knowing the interest rate tied to the loan. Or, if there could be a balloon payment or margin type call in year 20+.

vs 

10/325M = 32.5M per 

20-30/325M depending on rate and schedule.

 

Maybe, I'm incorrect? I'm just using basic math and basic regular loan assumptions what would the tax ramifications and write off % be ----- Question to our AW.com Accountants?

 

I am an accountant, but I don't have much knowledge about the relocation nor the debt waiver.  My gut reaction was that Spanos is doing this to increase the team's value before he sells the team as he is getting up there in age and whatever the increase in team value is would be more than the relocation fee. This is all speculation on my part, but definitely know that Spanos is a very smart man and he made this decision to benefit him financially.  

I'm not much of a tax accountant so I can't discuss the ramifications of financing.

[yk9001]

2 hours ago, SlappyUtilityMIF said:

I'm a BUCS Fan my family in Florida can't watch a Bucs game when they don't "Sell out".... Maybe, that is local tv?

There is no blackout policy, and hasn't been for a couple of years.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/03/28/nfl-continues-suspension-tv-blackout-rule

[yk9001]

3 hours ago, Jobu said:

That this topic interests you and you have posted many times in this thread. 

 

 

Hilarious, right? 

I still have no frigging clue what the joke is.

[yk9001]

1 hour ago, aznhockeyguy said:

but definitely know that Spanos is a very smart man

I am just wondering, what has he done to show that he is a very smart man?

[gotbeer]

7 minutes ago, yk9001 said:

I am just wondering, what has he done to show that he is a very smart man?

He had a rich daddy.

[yk9001]

5 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

He had a rich daddy.

That was my first thought.

 

[aznhockeyguy]

25 minutes ago, yk9001 said:

I am just wondering, what has he done to show that he is a very smart man?

Sorry, I should rephrase what I said.  He himself may not be smart, but hopefully he has hired very smart advisers to make himself a lot of money with this decision to move.  

[yk9001]

His advisors have sucked so far.

Here is another thing that the advisors have sucked at:  What is the one asset that the Chargers have?  I would say their Baby Blues.  Arguably one of the best unis in all sports.

So what does the Chargers brain trust have them wear?  Dark Blue.

 

Idiots.

[Inside Pitch]

Those baby blues really are awesome....   

[Blarg]

So many Superbowl victories in them.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

1 hour ago, yk9001 said:

There is no blackout policy, and hasn't been for a couple of years.

This was a killer in Jacksonville for a long time. The team was bad (still is), and the stadium was built larger than it normally would have been for a market that size because of the annual Florida-Georgia game and the bowl game.

[Angel Oracle]

On 1/13/2017 at 5:25 PM, Blarg said:

So many Superbowl victories in them.

Point taken, but baby blue has been their team color for like pretty much forever.   Something to be said for tradition 

[Tank]

On 1/13/2017 at 10:19 AM, Angel Oracle said:

Toronto has a MLB/CFL stadium, although they are going to the grass surface, iirc. 

Count me amongst the "say no to a multi-purpose stadium" contingent.   I like the look of a true baseball park.

They're finally getting rid of that butt-ugly artificial turf? Thank goodness.

[Angel Oracle]

Which would then leave only Tropacrapa with that stupid surface.

[Tank]

Good. Tropacrapa sounds about right.

[Mark68]

On 1/12/2017 at 1:42 PM, Troll Daddy said:

Kershaw. Look at his postseason stats.

[Mark68]

On 1/12/2017 at 4:13 PM, yk9001 said:

They are going to be paying a dollar rent at the new Rams palace.  One dollar.

Do you know what kind of joy that brings to a billionaire, to pay a dollar rent?

The same as winning a dollar bet?

 

[ScottT]

My first thought is that the title of this thread could be improved.