But the people of Wisconsin need to pony up another $450 million to update their 22 year old stadium or the Brewers are totally leaving town!
But the people of Wisconsin need to pony up another $450 million to update their 22 year old stadium or the Brewers are totally leaving town!
So they do not meet for the next 18 months (or more)? At all?View: https://twitter.com/jaclynfox5vegas/status/1666018279880822784?s=46
Local LV reporter says that it appears that the stadium bill might be dead until the next LV legislative session, which isn’t until 2025.
I wish Fisher would just sell the team, take his $2 billion plus payday and fuck off somewhere. There are supposedly two local groups who want to keep the Athletics in Oakland.Great news... for now, anyway. I'm sure there will be much backroom dealing to try and extort the taxpayers of Nevada and line the pockets of state politicians. But glad to see it's dead for now.
The most immediate impact on the team’s income statement will be from MLB’s revenue-sharing distribution. MLB’s last collective bargaining agreement made the A’s eligible for that windfall, but there was a hitch. The A’s would receive only a 25% share in 2022, a 50% share in 2023, a 75% share in 2024 and a full share in 2025. The shares in the last two years were contingent upon the A’s having an agreement in place for a new ballpark by 2024. No agreement, no revenue sharing.
The team’s 25% take in 2022 amounted to $9 million, meaning a full share would have been $36 million. Assuming the agreement for a new ballpark in Las Vegas is in place by January 15, the team is going to get upwards of $50 million from revenue sharing in 2024 and 2025 combined.
“You’ve all called us in here for a special session, and are asking, minimally, for the state to give you all $36 million per year for the next five years for a taxpayer-funded stadium, at the same time that the governor has vetoed funding for summer school, a bill to support children’s mental health, a bill requiring paid family leave — all because the governor said we couldn’t afford them,” State Senator Rochelle Nguyen said early in a three-hour back and forth with two advocates of the bill.
“Can you explain to me why we need to provide hundreds of millions of dollars for a billionaire team to come to the Las Vegas Strip, on some of the most valuable property in the world, if we can’t provide funding for critical resources?” Nguyen continued. “Can you explain to me why this is such a good deal that we should agree that no taxes generated on the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Tropicana should go to these critical state and local services for the next 30 years?”
https://theathletic.com/4592120/2023/06/08/as-las-vegas-plan-takes-heat-in-nevada-special-legislative-session/But the exchange that might have struck most at the heart of the matter came in the second round of questions from the legislature, after a 20-minute recess turned into an hour-and-a-half break. State Senator Dallas Harris asked Aguero about the worst-case scenarios if things don’t go well, and whether public subsidies for stadiums are really ever worth it.
....
“I don’t think most of the people in your profession agree with the statement you just made, that it does in fact create more local revenue,” Harris said.
“I’ve read all the articles that have come out recently about stadiums and subsidies,” Aguero said.
Aguero suggested other economists are wrong on one point: he drew a distinction between Las Vegas and other towns, arguing that because of the visitors to the city, the calculus should be different. Those who could criticize subsidies elsewhere, he said, would be “100 percent correct.”
“If you go and you build a stadium in Des Moines or Tallahassee … you are building it only for the residents that are there,” he said.
“Your testimony is that a public stadium is a bad idea everywhere else except for Las Vegas?” Harris tried to confirm.
Aguero seemed to step back from his argument at that point, however.
And this gem from a caller in opposition to the A’s stadiumPer The Athletic, many in the legislature were less-than-enamored with the A's proposal:
https://theathletic.com/4592120/2023/06/08/as-las-vegas-plan-takes-heat-in-nevada-special-legislative-session/
A place where an actor can beat a Vietnamese man until his retinas detach and it will never be mentioned.The "movie studio bill," by the way, is about Marky Mark's effort to build a "new" Hollywood in Nevada that won't be "woke" ... end sidetrack
That's the thing about this whole journey. There were times that I thought that the A's were no doubt going to stay in Oakland. Then I thought that the Vegas deal was completely done. But it's becoming an embarrassment for MLB and I think that Manfred has to step in and settle this. I don't think that he will because Rob Manfred completely sucks and is a spineless weasel, who lives to make sure that billionaires get every last drop of corporate welfare from the public that they can possibly siphon from the public teet, and he has no qualms about allowing MLB to look dumb, so I expect this charade to last another day to 10 years.Does this at least crack open the door that the team may figure out an Oakland strategy? Or is that ship now long since sailed?
Or Salt Lake City…or any viable market with a quality, already funded ownership group that’s ready to act.Seems like a good opportunity for Nashville to come in and throw a ton of cash and get this done quick.
Yeah! That'll show them!There seems to be a very large Oakland group of supporters on Twitter and they’re staging a reverse walk out on June 13 where they’re looking to bang the place out. It’s going to be filled with a lot of anti-Fisher signs, etc.
If it works I expect that it will get a lot of media attention which might turn the tide a bit. My hope is that this combined with the Nevada legislature not taking too kindly to the A’s proposal forces MLB to take notice and nudge Fisher out. MLB usually only does the right thing when faced with no other alternatives.
Tennessee just approved a shit ton of public money to build their new domed football stadium (replacing the ancient and obsolete 25 year old one that definitely can’t be used another day). Of course since it’s Tennessee, being the political bastion of those who think adding to the public debt is a crime worthy of death, there’s no way they’d throw another billion at a stadium right? /sarcasmSeems like a good opportunity for Nashville to come in and throw a ton of cash and get this done quick.
I don’t agree with statement at all because it’s completely untrue and misses the entire point of the reverse protest.Yeah! That'll show them!
It's like if a political party voted against a bill they supported just to show leadership that he's not the boss of them. Never happen
I agree about neglect and pricing, but the A’s had 97 win teams in ‘18 and ‘19 and still couldn’t break 21,000 average attendance. Similar performance in 2012.I don’t agree with statement at all because it’s completely untrue and misses the entire point of the reverse protest.
One of the reasons why Fisher is leaving is because he claims (and MLB is corroborating with them) that there is no support in Oakland for the team. The A’s have to move because the city and the fans simply don’t care.
Thats unequivocal bullshit. When the owners don’t gut the roster, don’t neglect the park, don’t jack up ticket and concession prices, Oakland is a great sports, and baseball, town. The stadium is packed when there are pretty good to great teams there. All it takes is for the owner to be partly plugged in and to give even half a shit about the franchise.
This community has supported the A’s through a lot of bullshit through the decades and have only had one really good ownership group (the Haas family) so for their collective name to be dragged through the mud as the main “reason” for their team leaving? Fuck that, I’d be pissed too.
How do you think that they should register their distaste? What do you think that they should do? Many times, fans are powerless to seize control of any sort of narrative when it comes to their team leaving, A’s fans are at least trying to do that.
This is something to be supported, so I’m not sure why you’re saying that it’s dumb.
The A’s did have shit numbers those two years, I admit, but I think it probably had to do with fans realizing that the whole boom-bust cycle was going to go bust again after that year (2019).I agree about neglect and pricing, but the A’s had 97 win teams in ‘18 and ‘19 and still couldn’t break 21,000 average attendance. Similar performance in 2012.
Last time Oakland was a decent baseball town was 2005
in 2019, they had 3 guys hit 33+ Hr and 7 guys hit 20+
Fisher doesn't care what people think of him.There seems to be a very large Oakland group of supporters on Twitter and they’re staging a reverse walk out on June 13 where they’re looking to bang the place out. It’s going to be filled with a lot of anti-Fisher signs, etc.
If it works I expect that it will get a lot of media attention which might turn the tide a bit. My hope is that this combined with the Nevada legislature not taking too kindly to the A’s proposal forces MLB to take notice and nudge Fisher out. MLB usually only does the right thing when faced with no other alternatives.
What makes Oakland unique in the “is [insert city here] a viable MLB market” debate is that there’s two questions; Is OAKLAND itself a MLB market, but also, is the Bay Area really a two team market?What should be accounted for is that from 2009ish until about 2015, the team across the Bay was in the midst of a dynasty winning three World Series in five years. That has an effect on attendance as well.
The point is, when given the team, the support is there. Are there going to be as many fans in the seats as LA or NY or Boston or Chicago (NL) or St. Louis? No. But those franchises are the Cadillacs of MLB.
Oakland is a dependable car that if you give it just a little bit of love, will take you where you want it to go. If you neglect it, it’s going to die on you. Most markets are like that.
If a second team stays in the BA it really needs to be in San Jose.What makes Oakland unique in the “is [insert city here] a viable MLB market” debate is that there’s two questions; Is OAKLAND itself a MLB market, but also, is the Bay Area really a two team market?
I think the answer to the first question is “maybe”, but the problem for Oakland is that the answer to the second question is “probably not”. I feel like Bay Area is a market more like Boston, and not as much LA/New York/Chicago…
If NV is like NC, the legislature passes a two-year budget in the first year of it's cycle (cycle being election in Nov of even-numbered year, new legislature begins Jan of odd-numbered year, ends with next election). They call the odd-numbered year the "long session" -- consider lots of bills, pass a two-year budget, etc. Even the "long session" might only last 4-6 months. Then the second year is the "short session" -- 1 or 2 months -- limited to making tweaks to the passed budget. They can also call special sessions.So they do not meet for the next 18 months (or more)? At all?
And let’s not forget, the current ownership group has been threatening to leave *incessantly*. Every fan base has their breaking point. So when the A’s are perpetually in a cycle where the fans know they won’t keep any good talent long term, *and* the team is constantly on the verge of moving, it’s no wonder the fans aren’t going to respond like they did years ago.The A’s did have shit numbers those two years, I admit, but I think it probably had to do with fans realizing that the whole boom-bust cycle was going to go bust again after that year (2019).
But they had good attendance records prior to that:
2015-17 they ended up in last place every year and had a high of 1.7m per year one season and a low of 1.4m. The other year they finished in the middle.
2014 they drew over 2 million
2013 they drew over 1.8m
2012 they drew over 1.6m
Not coincidentally those high years in the teens, they were really good finishing first or second.
They drew middling crowds (averaging about 1.4m) for mediocre teams from 2011-2008. But did great business from 2007-2004 twice topping over 2m and getting close to that number with back-to-back years of 1.9m.
What should be accounted for is that from 2009ish until about 2015, the team across the Bay was in the midst of a dynasty winning three World Series in five years. That has an effect on attendance as well.
The point is, when given the team, the support is there. Are there going to be as many fans in the seats as LA or NY or Boston or Chicago (NL) or St. Louis? No. But those franchises are the Cadillacs of MLB.
Oakland is a dependable car that if you give it just a little bit of love, will take you where you want it to go. If you neglect it, it’s going to die on you. Most markets are like that.
I'd try to figure out something involving as many people as will fill the Mausoleum that day but Fisher doesn't get a dime of it.I don’t agree with statement at all because it’s completely untrue and misses the entire point of the reverse protest.
One of the reasons why Fisher is leaving is because he claims (and MLB is corroborating with them) that there is no support in Oakland for the team. The A’s have to move because the city and the fans simply don’t care.
Thats unequivocal bullshit. When the owners don’t gut the roster, don’t neglect the park, don’t jack up ticket and concession prices, Oakland is a great sports, and baseball, town. The stadium is packed when there are pretty good to great teams there. All it takes is for the owner to be partly plugged in and to give even half a shit about the franchise.
This community has supported the A’s through a lot of bullshit through the decades and have only had one really good ownership group (the Haas family) so for their collective name to be dragged through the mud as the main “reason” for their team leaving? Fuck that, I’d be pissed too.
How do you think that they should register their distaste? What do you think that they should do? Many times, fans are powerless to seize control of any sort of narrative when it comes to their team leaving, A’s fans are at least trying to do that.
This is something to be supported, so I’m not sure why you’re saying that it’s dumb.
The Giants also have rights to the rest of Santa Clara Valley, or Santa Clara County (aka Silicon Valley). To put it into perspective, the population of San Jose is a little over a million; the whole county about 2 million. The Giants own all of that. Also worthy of note is that the county is home to companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Netflix, Intel, Nvidia, AMD and many more that pay their employees decent to outrageous salaries so they can easily afford to take the family of four the 45 miles or so up to games.If a second team stays in the BA it really needs to be in San Jose.
There's no way SF gives that up though.
It was fair in the early 90s when the A's gave the Giants those territorial rights for absolutely nothing. I think that the Giants were making noise out of moving out of Candlestick and wanted to move into Santa Clara/San Jose. When the A's asked for those rights back (because they wanted to move to SJ) the Giants told them to take a walk.The Giants also have rights to the rest of Santa Clara Valley, or Santa Clara County (aka Silicon Valley). To put it into perspective, the population of San Jose is a little over a million; the whole county about 2 million. The Giants own all of that. Also worthy of note is that the county is home to companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Netflix, Intel, Nvidia, AMD and many more that pay their employees decent to outrageous salaries so they can easily afford to take the family of four the 45 miles or so up to games.
In a fair, fair world, you'd plant the A's in the middle of the valley and have all those fans much closer to a stadium that could be built, but things aren't fair.
The Giants were close to moving to TB and in the 70s close to moving to Toronto. (In the 50s they almost relocated to Minneapolis but we’re talked into going to the west coast by O’Malley.)WRT the Giants looking to relocate to San Jose, funny but I recall more plans they were working on to move to Tampa Bay. Can you imagine that?
1978… I still have this baseball book that just listed the A’s without a city name, which indicates how close to reality it almost became: View: https://twitter.com/baseballruben/status/1643731439282982912?s=46&t=KYO-hlcIPjze7WFtbMSCvgThe Giants were close to moving to TB and in the 70s close to moving to Toronto. (In the 50s they almost relocated to Minneapolis but we’re talked into going to the west coast by O’Malley.)
Incidentally the A’s were extremely close to moving to Denver in the late 70s. Can you imagine Canseco, McGwire and the rest of those dudes hitting in Denver? Holy shit.
I used to buy that book every year! Man that was my guide to all things baseball when I was a teenager. I think I still have the 1983-1989 versions in my attic somewhere. I should dig them out.1978… I still have this baseball book that just listed the A’s without a city name, which indicates how close to reality it almost became: View: https://twitter.com/baseballruben/status/1643731439282982912?s=46&t=KYO-hlcIPjze7WFtbMSCvg
“Washington Nat’l Lea.”I still have baseball cards showing Padres playing for Washington
See this is what I talk about when I talk about Campaign Contributions. Whoever is going to build this thing for the A's (and maybe the Unions) must have promised some serious dough for the pols.
Very smart to have the senate vote on it on a day where another LV team wins a championship.
Wait....
What's dead in Vegas doesn't stay dead in VegasWait....
Previous reports said the bill was dead.
Yeah - I'm confused.Wait....
Previous reports said the bill was dead.