Buffalo Blitz
Brown passes to Collins, Collins to Higgins. Higgins throws long to community ownership. And it's a first down for Buffalo, somewhere in the middle of a lot of speculation about Ralph Wilson's intentions for the Buffalo Bills.
All of the above mentioned weighed in this week, Brown and Higgins via letter and Collins in a press conference held in his offices in the Rath Building Friday at noon. At issue for Mayor Byron Brown were the comments Wilson made about the city of Buffalo and the economy of the region. Brown made it a point to agree that Buffalo has seen decades of tough times, but pointed out that the fiscal well-being of the city was improving.
Brown's letter stated: I understand your decision to schedule pre-season and regular season Bills’ games over the next five years in Toronto and I appreciate all that the Bills have done to remain a viable National Football League franchise in Buffalo and Western New York.
The City of Buffalo, especially over the past two years, is clearly moving in the right direction and has experienced a level of investment and development not seen in generations. Add to that positive growth, the city’s continuing fiscal improvement, and it becomes indisputable that the City of Buffalo is making significant progress…I think you should see the evidence of this progress for yourself and then realize that the City of Buffalo is not stagnant or at death’s door.
Newly elected Erie County Executive Chris Collins started his press conference off by saying that it was not an announcement about a new stadium in downtown Buffalo, as some had speculated. "When entertaining negotiations, all items are on the table. The possibility of a new stadium is nothing more than a topic, and Ralph Wilson has not asked for a stadium," Collins said.
Collins went on to say that he wasn't insulted by the tone of Wilson's response. "All Ralph Wilson did was to state the obvious," Collins said. "Youth are leaving the area, and we've been in decline for 40 years. It's my job to help lead us out of this quagmire. We will grow or die." Collins added that Wilson has been committed to this area for over 50 years, and that he was truly surprised that people were upset about his statements.
"I'm going to be an optimist. Wilson is a realist," Collins said. "Wilson has every right to say what he wants."
Adding that Buffalo Bills prices were clearly below most of the other NFL teams, Collins said that opening the franchise to Ontario would benefit 14 million or more potential clients. According to Collins, "That bodes well for the continuation of a franchise right here."
Collins said, "The Bills are such an important part of the fabric of our community." He went on to say that with less than five years left on the lease of the stadium, it was essential to keep the dialogue moving forward. "We have to stop shrinking, start growing—get in a growth mode—and run like a business." Collins reiterated that if Buffalo hopes to retain the Bills, the message he wants to send out is that, "Erie County is open for business."
In Collins' plan for the area, he named the key points that he felt would make Buffalo successful and therefore more attractive to investors. He said we need to settle the Peace Bridge issue, set ourselves up as a Six Sigma* community, move ahead with waterfront development, and continue with the casino. In terms of a stadium, Collins did concede that the waterfront would be an obvious place to put a new one. He also noted that the NFL's advertisers would not benefit in terms of ratings from a Canadian market, as they would not be included in a final count.
As to Congressman Brian Higgins' proposal (below) for a public/private ownership, Collins said that it would be three years before serious negotiations would begin. Saying that the community is not currently recognized as a business friendly community, Collins stated that it would be premature to name the role the community would play in terms of dollars.
In a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Higgins is looking for an amendment to the leagues constitution that would allow community ownership of NFL teams. From the release: The Congressman is also asking the NFL for consideration of an alternate “Hybrid Community Ownership” situation under which a majority of shares in the franchise would be sold to a “traditional owner” with the fans owning the remaining shares. Under this structure the majority of the day-to-day decisions would be made by the traditional owner, however the community shareholders would maintain a stake large enough to veto relocation to another community.
“We know all too well that Buffalo’s economy has seen better days, but I am just as confident we will see better days again, soon,” Higgins added. “For the first time in years there is new private investment, a massive state investment in UB, a thriving biomedical research community, and finally the development of our waterfront. A hometown NFL team is an important part of Western New York’s future.”
The following is a document from Congressman Higgins' office that better explains the concept of community ownership:
How Community Ownership of the Buffalo Bills Could Work
Here is an example of how community ownership of the Bills might work under the “Hybrid Community Ownership” scenario:
According to Forbes, the value of the Bills is approx. $821 million.
1) Current Owner Ralph Wilson sells the Bills to a newly incorporated, not-for-profit entity, the “Buffalo Bills Football Club, Inc.”
2) 10 million shares of the corporation are created.
3) 5.1 million shares (51%) are sold to a single person or partnership. At its current value, the new owner would pay $419 million.
4) There is an initial public offering (IPO) for the remaining 4.9 million shares. To raise the $402 million balance, shares are offered at $82.10 a share.
5) To limit the concentration of too much influence, the rules of the corporation a) prohibit the majority owner from purchasing additional shares (i.e. caps him at 51%), and b) prohibit any one shareholder to own more than 200,000 shares. Shares can be sold but they can not appreciate in value.
6) The rules of the corporation specify that it takes a vote of 75% of the shareholders to relocate the team.
Notes:
• This is just a general outline of how it COULD work. Actual numbers and values, and ways of going about it, would be up to the Bills and the NFL.
• Also, the above approach would work for the full public-ownership scenario, except that – there being no majority owner - the shareholders would elect an executive committee to appoint a board to run the team.
Keep that full house I formation, boys.
*See this Buffalo News story for an explanation of Six Sigma.
Comment Options
Spaulding97
Gotta give Higgins and Collins some credit. Even though the Evil Empire known as the NFL will most likey deny this, it's a great idea and would be amazing if came true.
Report this
CKBuffalo
Good idea, but why would it have to be a non-profit venture? It would seem that a for-profit arm for the people of WNY would provide higher incentive to raise the needed money. The desire to keep the Bills here would go a long way, but being able to see a return on my investment would make me want to invest more.
Does anyone know how Gren Bay's system works?
Report this
gaustad
Although I think major changes need to be made in Buffalo, Wilson is a greedy idiot.
Reagrdless of our population or our economic situation, he packs the stadium on Sunday win or lose, rain or shine.....and we have one of the bigger stadiums in the league.
The loyal fans are the ones that have made his investment grow in the last 30 yrs, now none of it is good enough.
The NFL can't keep a football team in LA because the fans suck.There are still plenty of of people here to keep the team in Buffalo.
Raise the ticket prices, no reason to have the 2nd cheapest seats in the league. I am sure the people in Buffalo would share the expense in order to keep the team.
Report this
Tiburon1724
The Packers are not-for-profit as well. All money goes right back into the franchise. It's the only way they can survive, and it's worked very well for them as they've clearly remained competitive despite being in such a tiny market.
Report this
mbhxam
No way is the NFL going to allow Buffalo to do what Green Bay did way back when...
Report this
gaustad
mbhxam - agreed! We will only make ourselves look worse to request it when it is not necessary.
Build a new stadium and raise ticket prices.
Report this
nonono
Congressman Higgins' is to be commended for doing what every politician should be doing, and every citizen should be demanding..... a plan of action on a timely issue that effects the public, a plan which is specific and outlined, to be examined and discussed, debunked, embraced, improved upon.......why is there so little discourse of this nature in politics and civic planning today?
Whatever we do next, can we keep to a minimum the sentiments and suggestions attributed to former ballers like Jim Kelly? The man has a self serving interest in the franchise remaining in his home town, and his interest is the spin off economic opportunity afforded an ex quarterback. His moral fiber should fairly be challenged in light of his failed restaurant and the small businesses he stiffed by choosing the legal but irresponsible rights afforded him through bankruptcy. A very jaundiced eye should be trained on any 'suggestions' for downtown water front development, or any other 'business' endeavor for which he has evidenced no real acumen or success.
Report this
Mariner
Forget Toronto the Bills will go to LA. The league wants a team there and it will get one there. Its not about ticket prices its about corporate dollars which we just dont seem to have. Higgins idea is a pipe dream the NFL will never go for it. Brown needs to take a closer look at this area, he has not done anything to make it better so far in his first term. Where is our Water Front Development?? Leadership in this city is a joke. I can only hope that Collins being an outsider will be different.
Report this
al-alo
The NFL will never set this precedent. There is waaaaaaaaay too much money at stake around the nation.
Interestingly enough, this idea came up not too long ago when Steinbrenner did one of his semi annual threat to move the Yanks.
A NYS assembly member intro-ed the New York State Sports Fan Protection Act to do something like this. See:http://www.newrules.org/sports/newyork.html
Wasnt Higgins in the Assembly then? I wonder how he voted on this one?
Report this
AtwaterLouse
Legalities and rules aside, those numbers suggested by Higgins aren't even close to realistic. $400 million???
Does anyone really think 50,000 people would each pay $8000 upfront, in return for no profit and no interest on that money ever? Or that 5000 people would each pay $80,000 upfront for no profit and no interest forever? Or that 500 people would each pay $800,000 upfront for no profit and no interest forever?
I can't imagine anywhere near $400M could be raised that way. I doubt even $100M. My guess is maybe 1,000 people would each pay $5000 on average (that's $5M), and another 200 deep pocket types would pay $100,000 on average (that's another $20M). So there'd be $25M, which is $375M short of the $400M proposed by Higgins. And even that is depending on a lot. Seriously, 200 people each kissing goodbye to $100K with nothing in return? It might happen, but even if it did or even if double that many people did, it still falls way short.
My numbers air out of thin air too, but they sound much more realistic. This is why more cities don't even push for non-profit public ownership - yeah it's fun to demonize the NFL but after doing that, the numbers just don't work. The one instance of Green Bay started back in the 1920s when franchises had very low value. The Packers sold additional stock in 1998 which raised only $24M, even in that seriously football-crazed area:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bay_Packers#Public_company
Why should Higgins and Collins get any credit for suggesting a plan they know won't work?
Report this
AtwaterLouse
Anyhow, focusing on who owns the team distracts from real issues of net revenue growth relative to the other franchises. The trend is bad for that, with larger markets on a fast growth trend and just not anywhere near the same possibilities here in this area for strong revenue growth from corporate luxury boxes and premium seat licenses. The Bills have found ways to at least stay somewhat competitive so far, to their credit, but future trends show a lot of continued growth across most of the league and the gap will further widen. That's what makes the future look uncertain, as Wilson said. He's speaking the truth.
Building a new stadium isn't impossible but it could worsen the problem.
Modern stadiums are very expensive and yearly debt payments for that would eat up a chunk of revenues that already are in the lower portion of the league. In other cities, sales of corporate luxury boxes and premium seat licenses can add revenue growth to help make up for stadium debt, but here the money from those would be much more limited. It might make more sense to keep using the current stadium long term.
For ownership, the only semi-realistic possibility of the team staying is if when the time comes, some combination of Golisano, Rich, or Jacobs decide to buy the team from Wilson's estate just for the fun of owning an NFL team here despite financial challenges.
Report this
Sean
So much pessimism...It's only been a few days and look at the motions put forth by our elected officials. I'm glad to see some effort being made "up top" towards initiating discussions about the future of the Bills here in WNY. Is it an easy sell? Of course not, but if we're not willing to stand up for ourselves, why should someone else (i.e. The NFL, potential buyers, etc). It's a start people...
Report this
BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME
higgins needs to get into reality. No way in he'll will theNFL change their rules especially for a city like buffalo. Green bay is football legend. Vince Lombardi Bart Starr Brett favre multiple NFL championships. We don't have near the legendary status. We have no championships no legends. Sorry but the team is on its way to LA soon
Report this
RonR
Mariner,
The Bills or any existing team is not going to LA. The profit to the owners in selling the rights to LA is too much for them to let an existing team move there. They would not get the same cut if a team moved there.
Toronto is a mixed bag. The more I read up, the riskier it looks. First off, players would be bound to Canadian taxation. If you think NYS is bad, try being rich in Canada. Secondly, NFL teams count on rivalry's and traveling fans. Ticket sales will go down because of the new restrictions in crossing the boarder. If a team is going in Toronto, it is going to be a huge risk for the Toronto owner. I still think it can happen but it is not a perfect deal so to speak.
Atwater,
I think the plan would call for the price of the stock not the be raised but the profits to be shared. For example, the NFL TV deal brings in $2.275 billion a year. I am not sure how they break it down, but say it was equal for the 32 teams. That is $71 Million per team. 49% of that is $34Million. If, as you say, 50,000 people owned 49% of the team, that would be 780 a person. On a per share basis, 39Million would bring $7.90 a share purchased for $82.10. So after 11 years, you would be at a profit for every share you purchased.
This is of course for just the TV deal and assumes that the TV deal is pure profit.
Now in terms of ticket sales and other items, the NFL shares 70% of profits with all teams. Buffalo, in a sense, has been milking this section. Kicking in the least and taking an equal share. So even when teams like New England charge close to $100 on average for a ticket, Buffalo still makes out.
However, the one area where teams get 100% of revenue is luxury box sales. This is what makes or breaks a team IMO. Buffalo right now does not have a good setup for luxury boxes. Because the team is in OP, it is hard to attract corporate sponsors from the same geographic pool as ticket holders. In other words, the corporations in Rochester and Southern Ontario do not follow the single seat fans to the game. A new stadium downtown would be more conducive to these companies. It would be located next to hotels, places to eat and drink and not a complete bitch to get out after the game.
The reason why Ralph is so cheap is because is 70% equal stake only goes so far. The big teams are fielding teams on better revenues from 100% streams like luxury box sales. Because of this, it does not really make sense for Ralph to use the stadium in OP long term. Let alone a group that pays $800MILLION.
It is impossible for the Bills to stay long term, under any owner, in OP. There is simply no way around it.
Report this
sally
1) The NFL will not allow the Bills to move to Toronto. They would lose too many Nielson rating points across upstate NY that cannot be rplaced by Canadian viewers. If they move anywhere it will be to another US market.
2)The Bills are not really the third smallest market in the league. If you look at the population within a 90 minute drive of the stadium and EXCLUDE ALL CANADIANS the Bills are the 19th largerst mrket in the league 19th LARGEST not smallest. Toronto is the 14th largest metro in North America and not the 5th as they have been claiming and reporting in the Buffalo News. The Toronto market only becomes the fifth largest in North America when you extent it to Buffalo AND Rochester. They are only the 5th largest market in North America when you include the nearly 3,000,000 Americans living in WNY from Buffalo to Rochester down to the PA line.
3) Why don't the Bills raise their prices to at least the league average? Their per ticket prices are WAYYYYY below those of the Sabres and you only need to but 8 for a season ticket compared to over 40 for the Sabres.
4) All of this discussion is moot. Until Wilson dies and the team is sold nothing will be decided. Wilson can plan on moving after the current leasde is up ut it's unlikely he will still be alive then. The Bills future is totally in the hands of whomever buys them. Remember the combined wealth of Bob Rich jr, Tom Golisano and Jeremy Jacobs exceeds the combined wealth of Rogers and Tannenbaum by nearly one billion dollars - I looked it up.
5)Buffalo on the upswing simply on the upswin:)
Report this
BuffaloNY
Sally, I like the sarcasim...you really think the NFL will block the move because of "Nielson rating points" across upstate. There are more people in the GTA then all of upstate. Plus if the Bills moved to Toronto they would become "Canada's team". Anyways, in the end it boils down to money. The Jerry Jones and Robert Krafts' of the world would much rather have a team with average ticket prices at $250 then a team with average ticket prices at $45. I don't know where you are getting the GTA is the 14th largest metro area in N. America. I have heard from multiple sources that it's the 5th. (regardless there are 3 MILLION PEOPLE JUST IN THE CITY OF TORONTO)
The idea to raise ticket prices and it will be OK is also flawed. Note* They just raised my tickets by $10 yesterday. My tickets for the Bills were 42 two years ago...now they're 70. It's obsurd that a team that hasn;t made the playoffs in 8 years is raising their tickets by 30% in two years. The Bills are making money, they just want to make more money. Remember we haven't made the playoffs in 8 YEARS...THE TEAM CAN"T KEEP RAISING PRICES WHEN THEY CAN"T MAKE THE BLOODY PLAYOFFS!!!!
Anyways, the Bills are on the upswing...next year we'll break the playoff drought. GO BILLS..[deleted]
Report this
bizcomplete
Atwater -
It's theoretically possible for there to be a for-profit public ownership structure. As Higgins suggests, you'd have a large individual minority owner and raise the remaining capital for the purchase through a stock offering. The stock would presumably trade at a price that reflects the total value (ie purchase price) of the franchise and would trade up in value as the franchise value increased; or, would decrease as the franchise value decreased. NFL franchises are ludicrously safe investments given the monopoly status afforded the league and, if history is any guide, these franchises increase in value at a very nice rate. Theoretically, that would allow individual investors to buy shares of the Bills and hold onto those shares and hoep for some economic return - they can sell 10 years later when the franchise is worth more than when they bought.
Of course, that's all theoretical.
Another, perhaps better option is to let one rich guy buy the team and raise debt to do it if he's not rich enough. Daniel Snyder only offered up a small portion of the purchase price of the Redskins with cash and used bankers to raise debt for the remaining capital. This approach would still require an owner(s) with a net worth of $250M or so, but that's better than searching for someone with net worth exceeding the cost of the franchise (call it $600M).
Report this
RonR
Sally,
Do you just make stuff up? You must work on the city budget and call it a surplus....
Toronto is the 5th largest metro area in North America 1- Mexico City - Metro Population 21,027,200 2- New York - Metro Population 29,881,200 3- Los Angeles - Metro Population 16,584,700 4- Chicago - Metro Population 10,894,200 5- Toronto - Metro Population 5,462,100
Using your "numbers" of 3M in Buffalo and Rochester, that puts 2.5Million in Southern Ontario....Yea...that sounds right...
Report this
styler
I can't believe what I'm hearing on this thread! This pessimism speaks of compacency and cowardice. Why not fight for such a big part of our cultural heritage!? It seems that Buffalo desperately wants the rest of the country to notice us for our bountiful history and beauty. However, without a national stage on which to celebrate our heritage and regional identity, like the NFL (every Sunday, September to February), no one will be looking when we finally finish our waterfront, or rehab the whole of downtown. An NFL football game is like having a giant commercial for the communtiy spirit of the area. Without such an important privilage, we will become completely marginalized. Quick! Name something culturally important in Toledo, OH. . .
Report this
RonR
BuffaloNy-
Just where do people get the $250 number for AVERAGE ticket prices. This highest AVERAGE price is in the $90's and that is New England. Sure there are teams where tickets are sold for $250 but it is not the average.
I do think the NFL wants teams like Jacksonville, Buffalo and Cincy to bring up the rear of ticket prices but the NFL average is just under $69.
Also, the Bills are NOT making money. The NFL is making money but not the Bills. The only reason the team is around is because of the rev share. If the Bills and other teams did not have this, 1/3 of the teams would not be where they are today and some say that the NFL would not have 32 teams. This of course would lower TV contracts and reduce the 70% anyways.
At the end of the day, the Bills do need to make more on the 30% they take home AND 100% of the luxury boxes. If that can be done in Buffalo is the question.
No offense, but there is enough money in the current market to find people who do not freak out over $70 tickets to 10-12 games. Now, that money does not want to sit in the cold with a bunch of drunk fools in hunting gear but they do exist.
IF, and it is a BIG IF, the Bills are to stay, the fans at the game will change. They will need to build a dome. They would still be the working mans team but the working man would not be the season ticket holder so to speak. They might go to a couple of games but they would be priced out by more wealthy season ticket owners. So you have to ask yourself, as a fan, would you rather go to a couple of games and root for Buffalo team at a bar for the rest or find a new team to root for once they move.
Report this
TheUptowner
Looks like Sally needs to go back to geography class! Toronto is the 14th largest metropolitan area in the Americas which includes South and Central America, so let's go back to primary school and recall that countries like Brazil, Argentina and Colombia while in the Americas are not in North America! So on a list including only the US, Canada and Mexico Toronto is approximately the 11th largest metropolitan area by official statistics from the US Census Bureau, Statistics Canada and Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.
According to Statistics Canada the 2006 census population for the Toronto CMA was 5,113,149. However, if you look at North American media markets Toronto is about the fifth largest market (defined as the Golden Horsehoe region which had a census 2006 population of 8,102,163 (note that this excludes any population residing in the United States!).
Report this
bizcomplete
RonR-
The Bills are NOT making money? Really?
According to Forbes they are. . . http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/30/2004/LIR.jhtml?passListId=30&passYear=2004&passListType=Misc&uniqueId=301765&datatype=Misc
Report this
hashma
In my opinion, I really don't care anymore on keeping the Bill, we've spent WAY too much on them already for them to treat us like that. And no, Wilson DOES NOT have the right to humiliate the city up in Toronto like that. If he wants to say it and offer suggestions for improvement, fine, but not to say the city is doomed and get out fast. Classless. As for those "poor" players having to pay Canadian taxes; now its only worth 19 million of salary instead of 21 here- the shame....
We should focus on attracting tourism; REAL tourism to our cultural events. And, when I think of a city, I don't immediately think of their sports team. Chicago to me is a great city with culture, history, 21 Fortune 500 companies, and arch. NOT the Bears. Maybe I'm the only one, but a city MUST be more than just a football team or something is TERRIBLY wrong. And finally, why do we always have to pick on Toledo...Rush Belt cities should band together not attack each other; we get enough of that from the southern cities.
Report this
RonR
Yes Bis. The Bills, standing ALONE, are not making money. The Bills, as members of the NFL, are. Do you see the difference?
The 70% cut that the Bills get from the rev share is greater then what they kick into the pool.
Report this
tourneur
Warren Buffet, coincidentally, was in Toronto this week. His forecast likely trumps (no pun intended) any strategy that Buffalo can devise to prevent an eventual move by the Bills.
"I think it is more likely that we will continue our present polices in the U.S. and the Canadian dollar, over time, would strengthen even further."
"I think those Canadian dollars are very likely, even from this level, to be worth more than the U.S. dollar five or 10 years from now than they are today."
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=290491
Report this
AtwaterLouse
RonR and Bizcomplete - Read more carefully what I wrote please. Higgins specifically said his plan is to raise $400 million via public non-profit stock sale for 49% ownership, and for some other wealthy investor to fund the other $400M for 51%. That's quoted directly in the BR article and also in Saturday's Buffalo News. I'm not putting words in his mouth.
I'm not debating feasibility of profit vs. non-profit issue, only pointing out that to claim it's realistic to raise $400M from the public is foolish. As I noted Green Bay was able to raise only $24M in a well publicized public stock sale in 1998. I say 'only' $24M not to look down on that amount - 24 million is a lot of money and they were happy with that much. But of the 400,000 shares they offered up for sale at $200 each, only a little over 100,000 were sold. Again, 'only' is relative to claim from Higgins that $400M worth can be sold for the Bills. That figure is way way way more than can realistically be expected. Green Bay public ownership was established in 1923 when the franchise cost was in the thousands of dollars not the high-hundred-thousands of dollars.
RonR - About your idea for revenue sharing, I won't argue against that and neither would Mr. Wilson. Even though he's usually condemned here, he's been one of very few owners over the years pushing the other NFL owners for long term solutions to help the Bills stay competitive in Buffalo well after his passing. The people who will argue against it are the Jerry Jones (Dallas owner), Bob Kraft (NE Patriots owner), Dan Snyder (Redskins owner), etc. By the way, the BIlls are making a profit now. Google around for the Forbes magazine 2007 report. They do one every year about the NFL with info about each team. As Wilson and Russ Brandon said there's no immediate emergency. The big problem is long term revenue growth trends.
Report this
AtwaterLouse
Opps, sorry this should say:
Green Bay public ownership was established in 1923 when the franchise cost was in the thousands of dollars not the high-hundred-
thousandsmillions of dollars.Report this
RonR
Atwater,
Do some reading. The Packers have been selling stock to the community since the mid- 50's and have been in the form of a public company since the 20's. The round in the 90's was not the first.
Also, you are not understanding the stock sale. It is NOT a non-profit stock as you think. The "plan" says that people can not sell shares of the team at a profit. It has nothing to do with the shareholders sharing in the PROFITS of the team. BIG DIFFERENCE.
If this were done, it would not be 50k people buying stock. I should have pointed out how silly that was the first time around. If 49% of the team went up for public sale, people would buy much more then a single share. More like positions in the range of $5k to $100k. Also, it would not limit the sale to Buffalo residents. You can not do an IPO and limit the geographic location of the buyer. People from around the world could and would line up to be an NFL owner. The team would be managed by the 51% owner. The 49% would simply go along for the ride, share in the revenue and not really have a say in the day to day.
People have positions much much larger in companies that are not nearly as profitable as the NFL. If the NFL was a stock on the NYSE, it would do better than Google!!!! I am not sure if the NFL would allow it, but I am positive that if they did, they could sell the 49% in a flash and ask for a hell of a lot more then $81. That is for damn sure.
FYI. The New York Rangers, Toronto Blue Jays and Seattle Mariners are all public companies in one form or another. This is not ground breaking stuff. Just stuff that a lot of people in Buffalo can not grasp.
Report this
BuffaloNY
RonR,
The 250 dollar AVERAGE came from the FAN590 in Toronto, the Buffalo News, TSN.ca, ect...it was also confirmed when Ted Rogers jokingly said there will be "Two seats" under 100 dollars at the game. Look at the price of Leafs games and you'll immediately see that the ticket prices in Toronto will be the highest in the league.
You're an idiot if you think there are plenty of people in the current market who will gladly pay 70 dollars and not complain. If that's the case why do we only have 45,000 season ticketholders? if that is the case, why do we struggle to sell out December games? Why do the Bills not have complete occupancy of the luxury boxes, or the indoor luxury seats? Maybe pussies like yourself are affraid to "sit out in the cold with a bunch of drunk fools with hunting gear", but building a dome wont make any difference. You're an idiot dude, go watch the figure skating championships and drink a few martini's.
Look at Forbes magazine, the Bills are making money ALONE http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/30/biz_07nfl_NFL-Team-Valuations_Revenue.html
Report this
AtwaterLouse
RonR - Those are FOR-PROFIT public companies. HUGE difference, and would get back to the same problem as is faced now.
Report this
AtwaterLouse
RonR - Higgins is indeed proposing a non-profit sale, and nowhere does he say what you said that the shares could be re-sold. So you're making that part up.
I'm understanding plenty. Look at item 1 in the BR article above:
And from Saturday's Buffalo News:
Since when can shares of a non-profit entity be publicly traded for profit as you claim? Those other example teams you cite are not non-profit orgs.
The GB Packers are not-for-profit, and conditions of owning their share explicitly forbid ever reselling any shares for profit (see bold text below): http://www.packers.com/history/fast_facts/stock_history/
Somebody explain to me how Green Bay publicly raising $5000 (1923), then $15,000 (1935), $50,000 (1950), and $24 million (1998) implies that it's realistic to think anywhere near $400 million can be raised in 2007 for 49% of the Buffalo Bills.
When GB raised money for ownership of the team, franchise values were orders of magnitude smaller than they are now. It was like buying Microsoft or Apple while they were being run in garages, or Google when it was in a dorm. Sure, at that point somebody could've held a few car wash fund raisers and bought them. Doesn't mean that's realistic now after they've exploded in value.
Report this
bizcomplete
Atwater -
Forget Higgins' letter. Yes, he and the subsequent reports have referenced a not-for-profit entity, but the concept would work if the stock offering was in a for-profit company - like every other publicy traded company in the US. And if this were structured with a for-profit entity, it would not necessarily get us back to the problems we face now. As Higgins suggests, the terms of the purchase could include a poison-pill like clause that keeps the franchise in Buffalo.
Again, simply strike the 'not-for-profit' clause and make that for profit and there could be some legs to this proposal. I concede it's still a long shot, but it's within the realm of doable.
And RonR I understand your point about the Bills not making money on a stand-alone basis (not counting revenue sharing from NFL) but I wonder why that point has any merit. It's like saying that McDonald's as a stand-alone burger stand would lose money; see, they get to sell Coke too and that's where they make up for the loss-leader burgers. Same goes with the NFL. The league needs to be comprised of dozens of teams to work, hence revenue sharing.
Report this
NewBuffalo
GREED....GREED....GREED....MONEY.....MONEY, Just like the cartoon with daffy duck and the pearl......MINE....MINE....MINE!
Gotta love to hate GREED!
Report this
RonR
BuffaloNY
Try Google. http://www.khou.com/sports/texans/stories/khou080119_tnt_nfltickets.3ac0e203.html
BIG difference between $250 tickets and the average ticket costing $250.
AL.
Read what I wrote. People would not be able to sell their stock for more then they purchased it BUT they would share the profits as part owners of the team. If I purchased $8.2MIllion worth of stock, I would get 1% of the profits. If I sold that stock 10 years down the road, I would sell it for exactly what I paid for it. Thus not allowing me to sell the stock for profit. This encourages people to buy but not sell WHICH MAKES THE TEAM STABLE.
And are you serious about the Green Bay question. Ralph purchased the team for 25k and now could sell it for close to a BILLION. It is called inflation and increased value. The Green Bay 50k investing in the 50's is TWICE the amount Ralph paid for the Bills.
Yes it is realistic for 49% of a team to be sold in an IPO. Like I said before, anyone could buy into the team. Hell it could be 50 people buying the 49% at $8Million each. There are a lot of people with that kind of money who would buy into 1% of an NFL team. They, as 1% owners, share in 1% of the profits if any. Not to mention the perks.
IF this were to ever happen, it would not be a case of people owning 5-10 shares. Which is why there is a cap on people outside of the majority stake from owning more then 200k shares. That is capping ownership at 2%. This would mean at the lowest amount of owners, 25 with 24 capping out at 200k shares and 1 with 51% stake, 12 minority owners and 1 majority owner would need to vote to have the team leave. Essentially, if 13 owners were found and all winning to invest $17Million, the Bills could never leave. Finding that kind of money in Buffalo would not be a problem.
Report this
RonR
Biz-
Because the rev share is not set in stone and with guys like Ralph moving out, it will not stay at 70% forever. Added to that the costs of putting a good team are guaranteed to rise. In order for it to be a long term viable business, it should not be so reliant on rev share funds.
Report this
AtwaterLouse
Biz - If you want to suggest alternatve plans, great. But please don't order me to forget Higgins' letter. You're not the boss of BR. My comments call out what I consider serious b.s. in the plan proposed by my representative in Congress. This BR article discusses that plan proposed by him, and quotes what he said. It should be expected people will comment about that plan.
RonR - You're also propsoing something different from the non-profit plan Higgins proposed, and VERY different from rules the GB Packers have in place which do NOT ever share any profits with shareholders via dividends or anything else.
I hold Collins and Higgins to a much higher standard than I hold you two to, since I help pay their salaries.
The poison pill idea sounds too vauge to earn my feedback, pro or con. Even if a poison pill can be structured effectively to forbid the team moving (and I'm not saying it can or can't), then it would still have the effect of making it harder to raise $400 million or anything close to it for the publicly traded 49% - not easier.
It's my contention that predicting $400M or so being raised to purchase 49% of the Bills the way Higgins proposes things is ludicrous. Individual investors wanting a share of the Bills for hometown pride more so than a big long term profit could IMHO reasonably be predicted at something near what GB fans spent in 1998 - about $24M. GB offered 400,000 shares at $200 each, and people bought 100,000 of those shares. In other words, even for rabid fans like Packers fans, $24 million was all that was raised even though four times that amount was offered for public sale. For inflation, let's call it $40M (close to my previous guesses). That's an optimistic number, yet still only one tenth of the $400M my Congressman told us is a realistic amount to raise.
And RonR, I'm not interested in any arrogant insults from you. If you disagree with my view - fine, wonderful. Neither of us can predict the future, but I've given plenty of basis for my reasoning.
Report this
sally
Yes Buffalo,NY the league would block a move to Toronto because of a loss of Nielson ratings. The toronto ratings do not count toards the big us network contracts. It would be a net loss of US Network viewrs in the 1 milion household range across NY State. The Canadian TV money and what they can offer is peanuts to what the US Networks offer. A move only works for the league financially if it to another US City.
Report this
sally
Ron R I noticed quite a gap between your #4 Chicago and your #5 Toronto. Among those you left out for your convenience were: the real #5Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV CMSA 7,285,206 6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA 6,816,047 7 Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD CMSA 5,988,348 8 Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT CMSA 5,633,060 9 Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI CMSA 5,457,583 Not to mention Dallas and Houston and San Diego hen you factor in it's adjacent Tiajuana. Toronto is plenty big but it's not number 5, not even in the top ten Buffalo by the way is number 38 an Rochester #43 combined as they are for Bills marketing purposes they rank #21 with a populaion of 2.3 million. And that does not include the aditional 350,000 living in Catt,Chaut and Allegany counties.
If you are going to make claims bout our market size you should at least take he time to look up the actual data so that you know what the truth is. You cannot count on the Bufalo media because they are just parroting hat the Bills and Toronto media are telling them about size.
Source: http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa122099c.htm
Report this
RisingDamp666
Atwater, your research into the participation in the last Green Bay offering really proves that sports fans just don't put their money where their mouth is. I hear about or read about so many communities where pro sports teams are enticed by local hype only to see those efforts fail over the simple fact that boosters can never seem to come up with enough money to support their aspirations. Inevitably, it gets put before the voters and what do we learn? That things such as better schools, more effective police and other services are their main priority. It would be different if, after so many decades of publicly funded stadiums and arenas, there was a big economic 'bump' to justify that overextension of the public weal. It just hasn't happened. At the end of the day, pro sports teams are merely toys to be enjoyed by the wealthiest plutocrats. This hardly leaves Buffalo out . Many owners live in other cities and are satisfied to keep their "toy" where it is, provided they get something out of it: money, trophy, ring, whatever. And look at how the NFL has been battered every time a team moves: Cleveland got their "colors" and name back. Maryland got their team back.St Louis got their team back, L.A. is a festering sore because the NFL didn't like the stadium proposals put forth by plutocrats such as Eli Broad- even though they offered to pay the full cost! It's become a psychodrama that has just damaged the league every time it's happened. What happens when "they take The Bills away"? A lot of football fans elsewhere just might feel a little more estranged from the NFL and the "authenticity" of the game.That's why you'll never hear of plans to move the Packers away from Green Bay. You think someone like Paul Allen couldn't buy out the entire city of Green Bay, much less their interest in the Packers? There is a limit. I think there are potential owners out there that would love to have The Bills ...in Buffalo. Building a nice stadium would help, but I don't think, in these days of multi-billionaire owners, it would have to be the deal maker.
RonR. I think you make a good case for the NFL to expand. There are obviously good markets out there, and looking at the depth of talent and the growth of the game, especially at the college level, there wouldn't be any "dilution" of players, that great old red herring of expansion debates past. San Diego should keep her team, L.A. should get at least one, Portland is ready, Canada is troublesome because of competition with the CFL and the anger that would raise among those non-Toronto metros.What the NFL needs is an 'everyone wins' strategy for future growth. Why does everyone in Buffalo automatically assume they're screwed?
Report this
AtwaterLouse
Damp - I see what you mean, but also we shouldn't minimize what GB fans are spending. $24M is a lot to invest with zero financial return. And in addition to buying all that non-transferable non-profit stock, GB taxpayers have approved a LOT of public funding for the team (much more than Erie Co has given the Bills).
In 2000, the GB Packers team president threatened the possibility of the team moving to L.A. unless additional public funds were given (dedicated 0.5% sales tax hike, which was subsequently approved by GB voters).
This might open some eyes (or not) if anyone thinks Packers management are angels and Bills management are devils. Note the taxes, other public aid, and the hefty season ticket surcharge listed following the threats:
http://www2.jsonline.com/packer/news/feb00/lambeau01022900.asp
Report this
BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME
higgins needs to remove his head from his rectum... Who does he think is? Like the NFL is going to listen to what he says? Pleas. The people of buffalo don't even listen to him... Maybe we should have Dam Hoyt write a letter too!!! Since that'd ok Dam does in office... They're all a joke
Report this
BetterThanDetroit
Google (the corporation) is in the market to expand the NFL by a few teams. They have approached people I know (ex-NFL'ers) about forming their own league should their add-on concept bottom out. Remember, if one team is added, another needs to be added to balance the schedule. Therfore, relocating a team may weigh in as a better option in certain business cases. I know that Portland want the Bills. You heard it right, folks!
Report this
TheUptowner
Sally, I'm so sorry that you failed to receive even the most basic education with regards to statistics but really there is no reason to inflict your ignorance time and time again on the rest of us. IMaybe you think that by throwing a hybrid of real and imaginary statistics people will just accept what you're saying. 'm going to break this all down for you nice and slow and maybe, just maybe something will finally sink in!!!!!!
Its difficult to compare the populations of metropolitan areas across countries because every country uses different definitions as to what areas are included in a metropolitan area. Generally speaking the US takes a very liberal approach to calculating metropolitan populations relative to most other industrialized countries. A great example of this is Statistics Canada and how it defines the GTA and Hamilton as distinct Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA), in the US they would be considered both separate Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) as well as a single Combined Statistical Area (CSA) much the same as Washington-Baltimore and San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland. So there is no direct way to compare metro areas in the US and Canada because the methodologies used are different. Similarly we can't say "San Diego is bigger due to Tijuana and Buffalo is bigger to due St. Catherines" crossing a national border is vastly different than simply crossing the county or state line.
That said if we take the most conservative 2006 US metro area numbers (MSAs) and the 2006 Canadian CMA numbers we get the following list of MSAs and CMAs you will note that Toronto is #10: 1. Greater New York (NY, NJ, CT) 18,818,536 2. Greater Los Angeles (CA) 12,950,129 3. Chicago (IL, IN, WI) 9,505,748 4. Dallas-Ft. Worth (TX) 6,003,967 5. Philadelphia (PA, NJ, DE, MD) 5,826,742 6. Houston (TX) 5,539,949 7. Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Palm Beach 5,463,857 8. Washington, DC 5,290,400 9. Atlanta 5,138,223 10. Toronto 5,113,149 11. Detroit 4,468,966 12. Boston (MA, NH) 4,455,217 13. San Francisco-Oakland 4,180,027 14. Phoenix 4,039,182 15. Riverside-San Bernadino (CA) 4,026,135
As noted earlier however the Canadian methodology is more conservative than in the US so the figure for Toronto is likely significantly higher if the US methodology was used!
Also on a combined list of US MSAs and Canadian CMAs Buffalo-Niagara Falls is the 50th largest metropolitan area, not the 34th largest (removing Canadian CMAs Buffalo is 47th), ranked below other US NFL-less MSAs like San Antonio, Austin, Sacramento, Hartford, Las Vegas, Providence, etc.
Report this
gaustad
It is very important to add to this blog that Chris Collins is an excellent leader. We should all be excited that we have someone like this in office. He has volunteered his time and salary to making things better in our city. And for what its worth, Brown is one of the better mayors that we've had in a long time.
Collins man is very passionate and sincere, but also strong mineded.... He is a realistic business person and is serious about turning things around.
Report this
sally
#10 is not numbr 5 is it? The border is meaningless in regards to coming to 8 games a year just as it is meaningless to the 30% of our airport users that come from Canada. My stats are real. Not counting Canadadian population only 20 of the 32 NFL stadiums have more people living within a 90 minute drive of their home stadiums. Counting only those canadians living in the Ft Erie/St Catherines region and only 15 NFL stadiums have more people within that same distance.
Report this
sally
Oh btw Mr Uptown from Toronto if you want to count conservative methodology explain to me why Toronto should include Missasauga in it's MSA but the Bills should not count Chautauqua counties 150,000 people in a county only 15 minutes from Wilson Stadium in it's metro numbers, yet according to the US Govt. that county is not part of the Buffalo MSA. So when it comes to a market for an NFL team you cannot necessarily use only MSA's that is why it is more reasonable to simply count the number of people within a certain distance from each stadium. After all that is where the fans are going to come from irregardless of what your Statisitics Canada says.
Report this
RisingDamp666
Once again, Atwater, you raise another great point. If The Bills stayed in Buffalo under new ownership, would the people of this city be prepared for the bullying, blackmailing tactics that you described over at Green Bay? Maybe if the team were a perennial contender, but what if the quality of play remains what it is now? This stuff just wears people down. There are few white knights in the NFL, and Buffalo would be lucky to get one. So why lose sleep? Just play 'em as they lay.
Report this
RonR
Sally,
Are you serious?
First off, you need to know the difference between a Metro Conglomeration and a Metro Area. Things like San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose and Washington-Baltimore are Metro Conglomerations. Which are made up of Metro Areas and why these Metro Conglomeration have MULTIPLE TEAMS.
Secondly, the stat list you show does not even have Toronto. Kinda hard to show the comparison to Toronto when it is not EVEN on the list. Furthermore, any calculations found would not take INTERNATIONAL BOARDERS into consideration. Thus, any comparison for a Metro Conglomeration not effected by an international boarder TO a Metro Conglomeration near one is comparing two different values.
Thirdly, the grouping they have are VERY generous. If the same distances were applied, without regard to INTERNATIONAL BOARDERS to Metro Toronto, it would include all of Southern Ontario and Niagara and Erie County. That would add around 1.4MILLION to any available statistic for Toronto.
Lastly, the original point of mentioning Toronto is to show maker share opportunity for an NFL team and several of your areas HAVE MULTIPLE TEAMS.
Report this
RonR
RisingDamp-
Why would you call it blackmail and bullying. I read the article as a company explaining that having a NFL stadium that held on 60,890 at the time. was no longer competitive. EVERY PENNY of funding was placed out in the open to the public for them to decide. It was not a deal done by leaders but put to a vote for the tax and raised via the sales privately. If only government was that transparent in WNY.
Report this
RisingDamp666
Sally vs. RonR...what a smackdown! Really, RonR, if you look at the "market area" of Toronto, you have to think it's over ten million, including some of us. If a Toronto team became "Canada's Team", you wouldn't be blamed for stretching that number into the high 'twenties.( BTW, the Charlotte T.V. market is estimated at over ten million, which justified expansion there.) Buffalo's "market" is probably over three million. Not bad, but not impressive. San Diego's market would be the same size if you only counted the county/metro. But that would be foolish because there's burgeoning Tijuana, and Mexicali, and chunks of SoCal that just like San Diego, or the Chargers more than they do L.A. Thus that market is much bigger. Who can define these boundaries? The Census Bureau can't. And advertizers won't, and The League and the networks will, to ridiculous lengths. Just figure that Toronto is one big town that probably wants it all. Hockey, football, basketball and baseball..oh, and curling. We can't forget their passion for curling.
Report this
RisingDamp666
Oh, RonR, I never said it was evil, ugly, and nefarious blackmail, but threatening to move your team if a community of only 110,000 souls doesn't pony up $300 mil. is ....what? Good business? Green Bay knows that were it not for that legendary football franchise, their paper mill studded snow cave wouldn't merit mention in anything other than Snowplow Management Magazine. So they are vulnerable. I don't like those tactics even if the voters did. Just my dampness speaking...
Report this
RonR
Damp,
Did you read the article? The team itself can not move. It can either stay in business or close. The NFL. IF it were to fold, would need to do something with the player. The NFL, IF it were to fold, would have moved up its expansion time line and awarded a new franchise to a city. Say LA. Something would have to happen with the players. That is the ONLY reason LA was mentioned.
That is much different then saying pay up or we leave.
Report this
TheUptowner
Sally - No, I'm not from Toronto I'm just an ordinary citizen who hates misused statistics and made-up data! But I congratulate you on being a prime example of what is left behind in an area suffering from an exodus of well educated and talented people!
Its spelled Mississauga, and Mississauga is RIGHT NEXT to the City of Toronto, Mississauga with a population of 668,549 is a western suburb of the City of Toronto which has a population of 2,503,281 (maybe you have difficulty understanding this because you are used to Cheektowaga being considered a large suburb). Take a drive and you will see this very fact for yourself!
The Census Bureau doesn't consider how long of a drive people have from one county to a football stadium in another county in determining what is included in a metro area or not and for that matter what percentage of people from one area use an airport in a different area (or country for that matter) - thousands of people drive to JFK and Newark from Hartford to catch international flights but you don't see Hartford being included in the population of the NYC area simply because of that.
Secondly, several people have presented data related to US and Canadian metropolitan areas and US and Canadian media markets: using US MSAs and Canadian CMAs the GTA is the 10th largest (again the Canadian methodology is much more conservative than that of the US so the GTA number would likely be larger under US Census Bureau counts).
In terms of city proper populations Toronto is the fourth largest city in the US and Canada: 1) New York 8,250,567 2) Los Angeles 3,849,368 3) Chicago 2,873,326 4) Toronto 2,503,281 5) Houston 2,144,491 6) Montreal 1,620,693 7) Phoenix 1,512,986 8) Philadelphia 1,448,396 9) San Antonio 1,296,682 10) San Diego 1,256,951.
Regardless if we are looking at metropolitan area population (10th), city population (4th) Toronto is firmly ranked in the top 10 - since you apparently have problems with numbers this means that Toronto is much much closer to the top spot than Buffalo ever will be!
Report this
sally