Oh, fine, let’s all try to guess how the Oakland A’s situation will turn out! You first:
Create your own user feedback survey
(I swear I wrote this before I saw Tim Kawakami’s latest column, but that does make a good study guide.)
Vote early and vote often. Show your work in comments.
If they move to Vegas, they will become the Vegas Vigs.
I want to vote Lacob buys them and either Howard Terminal or the Coliseum site but think enough forces at play will help see the move to LV through, sadly. But think it’s reasonable to think that almost any of those voting options could happen.
Hope enough pressure from everyone else (fans/media) helps turn enough MLB owners to pressure him to sell.
There has to be a dollar amount that gets him to sell
Living in Charlotte, my heart says ‘Greensboro’ but by head, and my vote, say the abandoned silver mine under Area 51.
Why Greensboro and not Charlotte or Raleigh?
All the bots are talking about it! https://www.fieldofschemes.com/2021/06/10/17510/buffalo-bills-considering-move-to-greensboro-says-clever-robot/
Major League Baseball’s Athletics purchased by the Ferengi Grand Nagus, will play on Starbase Deep Space Nine. Holosuite tickets available now!
New article on espn.com with this sentence:
“Meanwhile, Forbes Magazine pegs the Raiders’ value at $6.2 billion, more than double the team’s $2.9 billion estimated value in 2019, its final year in Oakland.”
Just spelling it out that using taxpayer money for stadiums is done to increase the wealth of team owners. I am sure tv revenues had something to do with that as well, so the team would have also increased in value if they stayed in Oakland.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39465208/super-bowl-las-vegas-rise-sports-oakland-fall
Local TV revenues are irrelevant in the NFL — every team gets the same cut of national network money.
And while the Forbes revenue estimates are generally pretty good, the Forbes team value numbers are historically hot garbage. Which isn’t to say that owners aren’t seeking appreciation in their team values, but “went from $2.9B to $6.2B” just means the Forbes sports valuation team thinks Las Vegas is fun.
I didn’t say anything about “local” tv revenue.
Something has to give here relatively soon. Fisher isn’t coming back to Oakland because he’s all in his feelings and too emotionally hurt. Oakland isn’t going to let them play at the Coliseum after next year unless they agree to stay permanently. Meanwhile it seems clear things are going nowhere fast in Las Vegas. Perhaps even more alarming there is that there is no particular evidence they’ve made any progress on where they will play in the interim. The other owners are going to have to step in somehow because it’s clear Fisher has absolutely no idea how to fix the mess he’s made for himself. Exactly what form that takes isn’t clear to me but by far the easiest way out would be to force him to sell the team to somebody like Joe Lacob who could build something at the Coliseum site with a relative minimum of difficulty.
“The other owners are going to have to step in somehow”
Man, if I had a nickel for every time I heard that.
Well sure, but they have to play _somewhere_. What happens when there isn’t a _somewhere_?
“Perhaps even more alarming there is that there is no particular evidence they’ve made any progress on where they will play in the interim. The other owners are going to have to step in somehow because it’s clear Fisher has absolutely no idea how to fix the mess he’s made for himself.”
Sacramento officials seemed very welcoming to the A’s, and there are literal billboards up in Utah trying to lure the A’s to SLC. So they’ve got two options on the table. I’m not sure what would be accomplished by the other owners stepping in. Aren’t the most likely interim home options still going to be Sacramento and SLC?
Joe Lacob?!! Absolutely hilarious Neil! How many times must it be said?!: He talked up the A’s to grease the skids for moving the Warriors OUT OF OAKLAND TO Frisco! And where is he setting up his WNBA franchise in the Bay Area? NOT OAKLAND! But if everyone wants to continue with the “Lacob will save the A’s for Oakland!” falsehood, or fantasy, have at it!
So that would be a “no” vote on that one?
Earth to antonio: Frisco is an exurb in Texas where the Dallas Cowboys have their club offices and practice site.
And there’s a damn good reason for having the WNBA in the Chase Center. It’s also the reason why In-N-Out is fleeing Oaktown.
L.V. is one of the biggest tourist attractions in the world , you can see live entertainment, gamble, buy pro sports merchandise and go to fun parks but what about fans and their money? the A’s seem to be less interested in fans and baseball than doing strange and ridiculous things.
A’s once had a point against Oakland which ignored them and focused on the Raiders/ Warriors. But lately they’ve shown they’ll lie, mistreat fans and do ridiculous things like try moving into a small area for a stadium. Oakland gets some of the blame- I heard they rejected some of the A’s stadium offers. But now the A’s and Oakland need each other, they have 2 very good options but refuse to accept them.
What the A’s need isn’t getting rid of Mr. Fischer, its’ MLB putting greed aside and tell Oakland/ Mr. Fischer to work it out!
“…the A’s and Oakland need each other…”
“Need” is so often misused.
I’m sure Oakland truly needs lots of things, the A’s ain’t one.
I voted for SLC
I am disappointed that there is no “all of the above” button on the survey.
I would also have accepted a “Failson slowly – but faster than he expected – loses his family’s money, can no longer afford to pretend to be an MLB big wheel owner and is forced to ask the league to sell his team for him” button.
But no, neither option. Hmmph.
Seems like someone else may have wanted a “MLB gives Fisher San Jose territory after all” button.
What happened to Montreal? Nobody talks about them anymore. I would think that since TB’s stadium woes seem to have quieted down there would be more talk of this as a landing spot for the A’s.
I can see expansion by contraction being the most likely scenario at this point… payback for folding the Expos and moving them to Washington. The A’s just aren’t a viable team and likely never will be under the current ownership. Sadly, I don’t see any other way at this point.
The A’s and Rays consistently rank among the most profitable of MLB franchises (per you know who, who have significant issues with the way they do valuations… but their net operating revenue/income estimates have tended to be reasonably accurate when actual figures are available).
I completely agree that current ownership is horrific (arguably in both cases, as the Rays succeed on field despite their ownership not because of them), but even in an old and antiquated stadium, the Athletics franchise is a viable and profitable business.
It just looks like it’s not viable when it is run by a guy who has no clue how to operate a sports franchise. A’s fans have always turned up (the avg attendance is in the 20-22k range long term, regardless which decade we are talking about) until Fisher actively began turning them away in the 2020s. Historic attendance is verifiable at baseball reference (I’ve done it).
There are, frankly, no legitimate concerns about Oakland as a market for MLB (unless you consider “it’s not New York or LA” as a legitimate concern, which I do not. Only a handful of MLB markets routinely average north of 25k attendance annually. And avg attendance over 30k cuts the field to a very small number indeed).
There are significant concerns about the ability of current ownership to operate this franchise anywhere on earth, however. Finding a new location is not going to solve that for the Athletics any more than turning your credit card statement upside down improves your financial outlook.
Yes, but they are starting to embarrass MLB. That can’t last forever. They are only profitable because of revenue sharing and like you said it’s all likely fuzzy accounting to begin with. The other owners are NOT going to let that last in perpetuity… it will end sooner rather than later.
And when the mayor of Oakland has to beg the governor for CHP to help with their significant surge in violent crime, when it is down in most every other major city in California, when there are rumblings of recalling the mayor… any significant funding of anything owned by a billionaire will likely cause a major outcry. It is completely irresponsible… immoral maybe even… for a city with the problems Oakland has to fund this.
Oakland has always been, and will always be, a very large “mega suburb” living in the shadow of San Francisco. I just don’t see it as a major-league city.
Well, the other owners just voted to make him a permanent recipient of MLB welfare upon moving to Vegas, so that will last indefinitely. Fisher has been embarrassing them for nearly two decades now, and nobody has pulled the McCourt/Schott trigger to date. It may happen tomorrow for all I know, but it hasn’t happened yet.
Your comments on Oakland’s problems are well made. However: Baltimore. And the list of “other” cities host to major sports franchises that have similar (or sometimes worse) problems that have thrown money at billionaire owners (and continue to do so) is quite long.
I completely agree it is not a good look. It is also not an uncommon look in many places.
They haven’t pulled the McCourt lever because the A’s aren’t being put into bankruptcy. McCourt had over leveraged the team with his personal spending (his wife helped out there too, and IIRC there was a divorce about to happen). One thing Fisher has done is kept the A’s profitable.
One thing I’m wondering about is the A’s have said they will up spending on players prior to the move to into the new Las Vegas stadium ($130M is the number I saw in the article). Then get to MLB average of around $170M in 2028. The question I have is how will Fisher support these spending levels when he’s losing $60M in income because his TV deal will be cancelled and his $$$ from attendance will not be too high simply because any temporary stadium won’t be having 30K fans?
Really it’s the Bob Lurie lever, though: “You want to move your team, but it would make a mess for the league, so here just sell it to this other guy we found please.” Seldom-employed, but in the Giants’ case they weren’t anywhere close to bankruptcy or anything.
I really think Salt Lake City as a permanent option has to be a strong dark horse candidate. So much of this seems personal for Fisher; SLC put billboards up begging the A’s to come to town temporarily. He’s a pariah in Oakland, a laughingstock in the rest of the Bay Area, and mostly an irrelevant non-entity in Vegas. He’d be welcomed as a, well maybe not hero, but a positive figure if he moved to SLC. Add to that a willing partner/developer with real money and experience (Gail Miller) and state and local governments that seem like their itching to hand out cash.
Might as well move them to Fresno. Probably both as equally viable for long-term success. I don’t think they could survive anywhere else in California either… except for San Jose.
Plus I think the Rockies might have a thing or two to say about that move.
Tom Hanks (who is a lifelong A’s fan) has given interviews where he’s expressed interest in being part of an ownership group. I don’t see him being a majority owner, but if he were to partner with Lacob or someone else to keep the team in Oakland, should that give enough heft for MLB to choose an Oakland group over someone who wants to move them to Vegas or elsewhere?
I can already see next week’s headlines….
“Has Salt Lake City moved ahead of Greensboro to be the Next Vegas?”