It was a bit of a slow news week for once — a rarity in this year of a constant firehose of sports subsidy battles — but we still got Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shad Khan demanding $775 million in public money for stadium upgrades. And a bunch of other stuff happened! Let’s scroll through the news detritus:
- The Oakland A’s have presented a nonrelocation agreement to the Las Vegas Stadium Authority, and plan on submitting an actual financial plan for building a stadium sometime this summer, according to Mick Akers of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Las Vegas Stadium Authority Board chair Steve Hill insists that A’s owner John Fisher “has the ability” to fund the rest of his stadium out of his own pocket if he wants, but keep in mind Hill works on behalf of the A’s stadium project in his spare time, so big grains of salt apply. Meanwhile, Bally’s says it’s still thinking about where on its land the A’s stadium would go — given that’s it’s too big to fit anywhere, maybe they could put it in that thing their aunt gave them that they don’t know what it is?
- That $150 million apiece from the Jaguars and the city of Jacksonville for community benefits like public housing turns out not to be an actual 50/50 split, as the city would spend it over the next five years while Khan would have 30 years to spend the money. That’d be more of a 37/63 split in terms of present value, or even worse depending on how backloaded Khan’s spending is.
- Someone at one of the community “huddles” on the proposed Jaguars stadium asked Jacksonville Mayor Donna Deegan if the plan shouldn’t be put up for vote in a public referendum, and Deegan responded, “I believe the referendum was my election back in May.” Did voters know that’s what they were casting ballots on? That must have been one long candidate statement.
- The proposed owners of a proposed NWSL women’s soccer team and MLS Next Pro minor-league men’s soccer team in Cleveland have revealed renderings for a new downtown stadium, while also noting in passing that they want $90 million of the $160 million cost to be paid for with city, county, and state money, plus team “investors.” Did we mention there’s an animated video walkthrough? “We’re not just investing in a game. We’re investing in a future,” said Greater Cleveland Sports Commission CEO David Gilbert, and when that future has kick-ass action-movie music, who could say no?
- In case you’re wondering what the eight members of the St. Petersburg city council think of the Tampa Bay Rays‘ $1.5 billion stadium subsidy plan, the answer is: could be better (Brandi Gabbard), opposed (John Muhammad), in favor (Ed Montanari), could be better (Deborah Figgs-Sanders), in favor (Copley Gerdes), opposed (Richie Floyd), opposed (Lisset Hanewicz), generally in favor (Gina Driscoll). That would seem likely to lead to lots of horse-trading to win over Gabbard, Figgs-Sanders, and Driscoll, somebody go find them some development money for projects in their districts, stat!
- Plans to turn over the RFK Stadium site to the District of Columbia, possibly for use as the site of a new Washington Commanders stadium, hit a snag this week as Montana Sen. Steve Daines objected that the team hasn’t done enough to honor the designer of its old logo, Blackfeet Tribe member Walter “Blackie” Wetzel, saying “they could do something very significant in terms of ensuring the legacy of that logo.” Nobody seems to know what exactly Daines has in mind, possibly including Daines, but as bills like this are generally passed by unanimous consent, he must be appeased before the land transfer can take place, so this could get truly batshit.
- Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim said that hosting seven 2026 World Cup matches is “the equivalent of 30 to 40 Super Bowls,” and that sound you just heard is thousands of economists’ souls crying out in agony.
Great hitchhikers reference! Star for you!
30 or 40 superbowls? That’s comedy gold.
They have expanded the number of teams, and now 104 games will be played. So it’s less than half….which … uhhh.
…then again, only 7 actual games will be played in his city. So each one is like 5 superbowls!
Don’t they know the reference is “bigger than 10 Super Bowls”?
Speaking only for myself, I find it funny that someone who draws attention is claiming each World Cup game has as much economic impact as 5 Super Bowls. That probably really pisses off Roger Goodell.
Hey, anything times zero is still zero, so saying that seven 2026 World Cup matches is the equivalent of 30 to 40 Super Bowls is actually 100% correct.
Or the impact is 5x more negative than a super bowl
Exactly Andrew.
And if the Superbowl does actually “make” a host city $5 net, then the world cup games (which are still a terrifically stupid economic idea) would only have to generate $150 or so to make Sim’s statement accurate.
It’s unlikely. But not impossible.
John Fisher and Dave Kaval have been giving out “trust me bro” vibes throughout this entire Vegas episode, and pretty much all of the other important people involved in it have been taking them at their word every step of the way. Just wild to see.
Does the Nevada legislation require that the stadium be built on the Tropicana site? Is it too late to go to Rio, or somewhere else? Then the teachers lawsuit still hangs over the whole Vegas project. The West Sacramento A’s may last for a while, unless Manfred has less tolerance for a MLB team playing in a minor league stadium for a decade than Bettman had for the Coyotes playing forever at Mullett.
The law as written is site specific to the Tropicana.
The law as *currently* written is site specific to the Tropicana. We all know that the Nevada legislature will obediently revise the law if the team wants to move the project to a different site.
I wouldn’t say that we know that at all. The plan barely squeaked through the legislature last time, so even a couple of legislators jumping ship would be enough to cause problems for a new site.
While they could change it, it would require a special legislative session to get done before spring of 2025
In this economy NO TEAM is getting public money for a new stadium
If anything, it’s the inverse. In this economy (and in the current state of both conservative and mainstream liberal discourse), the only way public funds will be outlaid is if it’s to benefit the rich and their private business interests.
Seems pretty obvious what Steve Daines has in mind — indefinitely blocking DC’s plans for the RFK Stadium site, and trolling the team while doing so.
From the WaPo article: “Instead, he suggested ideas for how to satisfy the Wetzels, including restoring the logo with a new team name that’s supported by tribal leaders, “telling the history of the logo’s connection to the Wetzel family and honoring the native communities it represents” or “resuming merchandise sales featuring the logo and using a portion of the proceeds to bring awareness to missing and murdered Indigenous women and other tribal causes.””
Daines is saying that he will block DC from using the stadium site unless the team either restores its objectionable old logo or sells officially licensed “merchandise… featuring the logo”. Those are two things he knows the team won’t do.
Forget this “awareness.”
Just give the proceeds to the tribal leaders…..
Pretty clearly, John Fisher does NOT have the ability to fund the ballpark out of his own pocket – whether he wants to or not.
He is presently listed as being “worth” $2.9Bn by Forbes (who really don’t know what he’s worth, but make educated guesses based on what they know he owns. What they don’t know is what his debt load is on any of the assets he owns or beneficially controls).
The A’s themselves are now listed as being “worth” $1.1Bn by the same Forbes people.
Literally everything else he owns would have to be owned freehold and as sole owner for him to be able to afford to build the stadium himself. My understanding is that neither of those two things are true, but even if they were no-one in their right mind is going to go all in on building his own ballpark and leave himself effectively zeroed out on cash.
Not even John Fisher.
One of the other regular posters speculated earlier in the week that maybe MLB would be happy with a Coyotes scenario – another ownership group (Guru Vivek? St. Lacob???) keeps the A’s in NorCal and leaves Fisher to spin his wheels in the desert with the rights to an expansion team.
I think it’s actually the other way around. The savvier owners insisted on the “poision pill” clause where Fisher has to pay a penalty if he sells out completely in the first 10 years (I believe that’s right?) as a possible backdoor relocation/expansion fee. I guess that doesn’t kick in for selling a minority share in the team, since FIsher is shopping equity. But if the family fortune has another couple bad years, Fisher gets pushed further into asset-rich/cash-poor territory, on top of financing his share of the stadium at unfavorable interest rates. And if we punters on the Internet can foresee such a scenario, surely the other very stable business geniuses* at the top echelon of MLB can see it even more clearly. Above all, if they have a chance to get a rebate on all those years of revenue sharing payments, plus many more to come, they’re going to take it.
*sarcasm
I guess that would be the “dream” scenario for A’s fans… get rid of the failson and have an owner who actually wants to own the Oakland A’s own them in situ for a while and see if it can work (fwiw: I think it can,though you aren’t going to be one of the top 6-8 earners in baseball… then again, neither are 21 other owners…)
I don’t know if that is even remotely possible anymore (perhaps the last hope was that the non-dynamic duo would agree a 3yr extension at the coliseum and then find themselves unable to make Vegas work and sell. That is no longer on the table. They will be in Sacramento. Whether they ever leave there is a separate question).
That said, it is looking less and less likely that the Failson can afford his dream in the desert. Even taking into account that the final stadium design will be much cheaper than the fake opera house look that the renderings show, it’s still going to cost north of $1.5Bn to do… and maybe closer to $2Bn by the time all is said and done.
He has about $400m in tax breaks plus whatever cash he’s got on hand.
His other assets – mainly being family money – will be encumbered in one way or another (he may be required to sell to family members first – and at a submarket price, for example).
He could dump the moribund Earthquakes and raise maybe $100m or so. He could sell equity in the A’s (if he can find a buyer willing to be his jr partner) and raise maybe another $4-500m.
After that it’s some version of selling the family silverware.
I don’t think that’s going to go over well with his siblings.
I think there’s a thin glimmer of possibility to return them to Oakland under new ownership during the 3-year stay in Sacramento, since there’s an obvious ready-made stadium site with fantastic access routes sitting right there. But each year that goes past means that the legal and planning entanglements get more and more complicated. I would not at all be surprised to see the team, the city, and whatever ENA partner the city has end up in court over the team’s 50% interest in the site, sometime during the Sacramento years.
If Fisher had been willing to stick to the Coliseum after failing to steamroll Laney College, I think Oakland under Thao’s administration would have held their nose and gone through with it. But because he felt the need to attempt a bigger land-grab, he permanently lost their trust, and rightfully so.
Sacramento itself is up in the air. The MLBTR commenters pointed out that Ranadive could in no way go it alone. You could possibly pick up some of the old A’s fans who moved out to the Central Valley, like my family did, as the drive is somewhat less of a hassle than the Bay Area, at least until you hit Sacramento’s urban core. And maybe gin up some sort of Amtrak Capital Corridor package to scrape together what few East Bay fans aren’t permanently embittered. As for potential partners in the region, it’s hard to say. The Tsakopoulos family is one of the marquee names, with as much money and influence as the Spanos name carries further south in Stockton and environs; but daughter Eleni is running for CA governor, so I have to doubt they would want their good name tied to the somewhat shady stadium-funding game.
If Vegas does happen despite all the financing constraints, I would almost expect to see legal drama surrounding whatever Fisher family trusts exist, a la the drama surrounding the Spanos family trust after the Chargers move, which seems to have successfully been kept out of the media to a large degree.
The problems for Fisher and his Las Vegas stadium proposal are numerous. The T-Mobile Arena and MSG Sphere are 1400 and 2500 feet off the strip. The deepest point on thr Tropicana site is 1500 feet off the strip. The next property is the glamorous* OYO Hotel and even more glamorous* Motel 6. There probably isn’t enough room, and the right shape to build a hotel- casino that would justify the value of the site that would be left. Nothing seems to be working, or we’d see more details. Obviously putting a baseball stadium on or even close to the strip isn’t an optimal use of valuable land. Most of Fishers money is Gap stock, which has a beta of 2.33, that’s extremely volatile and risky. The odds on a baseball stadium at Tropicana and Las Vegas Boulevard keep getting longer.