That's the least likely outcome. Not only did the NFL burn basically every bridge with the fans, local government, and local business community during the relocation process, but there's zero chance they'd let a team be community owned. Just think of the risk exposure they'd face by potentially being forced to expose their actual finances or have to comply with open records requirements.
I had a dream that some investigative sports journalist uncovered that the NFL bribed and extorted their way into a three-way deal to get Vinny McMahon to shut down the XFL and get St. Louis to drop the lawsuit. It was short on details, but it involved Vinny buying the Buccaneers for a song, and moving them to the Dome...or was that a nightmare?framer wrote: ↑Apr 23, 2020Give us an expansion team. Owned by the community.
Yeah, definitely a nightmare...
- 1,864
And they're the only professional sports team in the US that is - not to mention the community ownership was done back in like 1923 and had to be grandfathered into the leagues new ownership policy in the 80's. There's zero chance any major sports league would be willing to this today.
Indeed. Worth noting that not only would the NFL never allow another team to be community-owned like the Green Bay Packers, the NFL would also never allow another team to exist in a market as tiny as Green Bay (#158 MSA in the country; for perspective, STL is #20, and we were on the smaller end of all NFL markets). Of course, the current wait time to become a Green Bay Packers season ticket holder is 30 years, if you got on the list today (there are 130,000 people on the wait list, and only a few thousand season tickets become available every year).chaifetz10 wrote: ↑Apr 23, 2020And they're the only professional sports team in the US that is - not to mention the community ownership was done back in like 1923 and had to be grandfathered into the leagues new ownership policy in the 80's. There's zero chance any major sports league would be willing to this today.
Have to agree with dblnsouthcity on this one the roughly $200 or so million.. Take what is remaining on the debt (goes to CVC) and possible some extra change on loss tax revenues is what would be most likely outcome. Anyhting more will be an extended court battle and appeals and years on any payouts.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Apr 23, 2020I think the money would go to CVC for the most part.DogtownBnR wrote: ↑Apr 23, 2020^ I just wonder what percentage of that money will actually go to the
city of St. Louis into their coffers. Hopefully it is a billion plus, So maybe the city sees a few hundred million dollars.
Related but not related, with cost of money at all times low and shot at a legitimate NFL settlement I'm at a loss why CVC hit the pause button on expansion & upgrades. If anything, they should be full steam ahead so when the economy is back they have a more competitive convention space to fill hotel rooms and tax coffers. Use settlement to cover the first couple years of bonds.
Last I read they was going for a cut of the Rams relocation fees, a figure that could reach more than $35 million per team.
- 3,766
I'm torn on whether or not they should take a settlement. Really depends on what the offer is. I say if it's anything north of $400M, they take the deal. Reason being, even if they do take it to court and wind up getting a judgment of $1B or more, it's going to be tied up forever in the appeals process, and we won't see a dime of it for probably at least 5 years, if not longer. We may not see any money before 2030. $400M now, or $1B that could take a painfully long amount of time to actually procure, and may wind up getting greatly reduced by an appeals court.
I think a settlement will be more than they will get in court. The NFL won’t want to go thru all the discovery and will pay a premium for to not go through it. If you push past and everything is out in the open that leverage is gone (for a premium) and I think they won’t be willing to pay as much in a settlement and the amount won would be less. But we will have to see how it plays out.
It was a lot lower than that... the Rams and Chargers each had to pay $645M in relocation fees over a ten year period from 2019-2028. $645M divided by 31 teams equals roughly $20.8 million per team. For whatever reason, the Raiders relocation fee for their move to Las Vegas was far lower - only $378M, also to be paid out over a ten year span beginning this year. The 29 teams who aren't moving stand to gain about $54M in relocation fees each from the three relocated franchises. The relocated franchises will also collect relocation fees from each other (ie - the Rams will get a 1/31 share of the Chargers and Raiders relocation fees).Gary5071 wrote: ↑Apr 24, 2020Last I read they was going for a cut of the Rams relocation fees, a figure that could reach more than $35 million per team.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/272 ... est-of-nfl
- 2,929
There is another advantage to trial by jury: the opportunity to be awarded punitive damages. These are damages the court orders the loser defendant to pay given in order to punish the defendant for their unscrupulous behavior. As well, they exist to dissuade any other potential actor from behaving in the same manner as the defendant had acted, that the defendant had been made a lesson for all others that such behavior will not be tolerated in a just society. Here, we could see punitive damages being so significant that it's hard to write the numbers down because they're so damn big as to appear made up. Generally speaking, whatever actual damages are awarded can be doubled or tripled or more.
Trial by jury, no settlement. I want Stank Kroenke to take the stand in open court.
Trial by jury, no settlement. I want Stank Kroenke to take the stand in open court.
- 443
A lot of this depends on Fraudulent Misrepresentation count. If the StL lawyers are confident in their fraud case, the settlement needs to be huge because if you prove fraud the defendant will have to pay your attorney's fees and enormous punitive damages. Further, the supreme court of Missouri, unlike most other jurisdictions, is not hostile towards to punitive damage awards.
The Missouri Supreme Court has upheld punitive damage awards that were 100:1, punitive to nominal.
The Missouri Supreme Court has upheld punitive damage awards that were 100:1, punitive to nominal.
The danger of cartoonishly large settlements is that they very often don't get paid. The liable party just reorganizes under a bankruptcy filing and poof, the judgment is either wiped out or reduced to a fraction of what was originally awarded. Remember when Peter Thiel paid for Hulk Hogan to sue Gawker Media for an ungodly sum of money and Hogan actually won a judgement of $140 million? Thiel didn't do it because he genuinely cared about Hulk Hogan's claim, he did it because he wanted to destroy Gawker Media. And to the extent that it forced them into bankruptcy reorganization, he succeeded. Hogan did ultimately get paid - but he had to settle for a little more than 20% of what the original judgment was.gone corporate wrote: ↑Apr 26, 2020There is another advantage to trial by jury: the opportunity to be awarded punitive damages. These are damages the court orders the loser defendant to pay given in order to punish the defendant for their unscrupulous behavior. As well, they exist to dissuade any other potential actor from behaving in the same manner as the defendant had acted, that the defendant had been made a lesson for all others that such behavior will not be tolerated in a just society. Here, we could see punitive damages being so significant that it's hard to write the numbers down because they're so damn big as to appear made up. Generally speaking, whatever actual damages are awarded can be doubled or tripled or more.
Trial by jury, no settlement. I want Stank Kroenke to take the stand in open court.
Is the lawsuit against Kroenke about chest-thumping and showing a bunch of billionaires how righteous our anger is, but not actually getting meaningful financial compensation (while Kroenke continues to be a billionaire who is generally insulated from feeling any genuine suffering for his misconduct)... or is it about actually trying to recoup some or all of the financial losses we incurred due to the Rams relocation back to LA ten years earlier than their original lease was set to expire?
If $500 Million gets put on the table and the CVC can just walk away from this whole debacle forever, they would be completely insane not to take that deal. And I have to think their lawyers are smart enough to know that. We're not getting an NFL team back (at least not anytime in the next 20 years or so), and we're not putting the NFL or the Rams out of business. None of those things are going to happen. What we can do is probably extract a pretty hefty sum of money from the Rams for Kroenke's malfeasance. If the figure is big enough, take the money and run.
ESPN - Inside the Rams-Chargers marriage as the NFL fights for Los Angeles
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/281 ... os-angeles
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/281 ... os-angeles
- 221
$500 million is an excellent amount and in the ballpark of the relocation fee. I agree, if a settlement amount hits this figure take the money and run - fast.DTGstl314 wrote: ↑Apr 26, 2020The danger of cartoonishly large settlements is that they very often don't get paid. The liable party just reorganizes under a bankruptcy filing and poof, the judgment is either wiped out or reduced to a fraction of what was originally awarded. Remember when Peter Thiel paid for Hulk Hogan to sue Gawker Media for an ungodly sum of money and Hogan actually won a judgement of $140 million? Thiel didn't do it because he genuinely cared about Hulk Hogan's claim, he did it because he wanted to destroy Gawker Media. And to the extent that it forced them into bankruptcy reorganization, he succeeded. Hogan did ultimately get paid - but he had to settle for a little more than 20% of what the original judgment was.gone corporate wrote: ↑Apr 26, 2020There is another advantage to trial by jury: the opportunity to be awarded punitive damages. These are damages the court orders the loser defendant to pay given in order to punish the defendant for their unscrupulous behavior. As well, they exist to dissuade any other potential actor from behaving in the same manner as the defendant had acted, that the defendant had been made a lesson for all others that such behavior will not be tolerated in a just society. Here, we could see punitive damages being so significant that it's hard to write the numbers down because they're so damn big as to appear made up. Generally speaking, whatever actual damages are awarded can be doubled or tripled or more.
Trial by jury, no settlement. I want Stank Kroenke to take the stand in open court.
Is the lawsuit against Kroenke about chest-thumping and showing a bunch of billionaires how righteous our anger is, but not actually getting meaningful financial compensation (while Kroenke continues to be a billionaire who is generally insulated from feeling any genuine suffering for his misconduct)... or is it about actually trying to recoup some or all of the financial losses we incurred due to the Rams relocation back to LA ten years earlier than their original lease was set to expire?
If $500 Million gets put on the table and the CVC can just walk away from this whole debacle forever, they would be completely insane not to take that deal. And I have to think their lawyers are smart enough to know that. We're not getting an NFL team back (at least not anytime in the next 20 years or so), and we're not putting the NFL or the Rams out of business. None of those things are going to happen. What we can do is probably extract a pretty hefty sum of money from the Rams for Kroenke's malfeasance. If the figure is big enough, take the money and run.
- 2,632
- 1,864
If they vote yes, then it's just another piece of evidence against the Rams in court regarding the "economic feasibility" of each city, correct?
“The cost of the stadium, which sits on 298 acres in Inglewood, has roughly doubled since the early projections of roughly $2.5 billion, and both the Rams and Chargers have fallen short on anticipated seat-license sales that offset construction costs. What’s more, if the NFL further increases the debt limit, Kroenke can take advantage of lower interest rates.”
So delicious.
So delicious.
Imagine STL getting stuck with the bill for underestimated stadium costs right now.
- 9,564
I doubt the costs here would have doubled, Vegas started construction a year after LA and got done already on budget for 1.7Bquincunx wrote: ↑May 16, 2020Imagine STL getting stuck with the bill for underestimated stadium costs right now.
- 6,123
Some interesting developments: Lawyers for our fair city are apparently requesting to depose forty two people and they want to double the slot to depost S(a)tan, Demhoff, and Goodell. (And also the then league vice president.) Apparently they are presently permitted to depose ten people for seven hours each. (One seven hour day.) They want two days for the big players. (And I would sincerely love to take about two decades out of Stan's precious time.)
PD article on the suit: Kroenke, Demoff and Goodell among those requested for depositions in relocation lawsuit against Rams
PD article on the suit: Kroenke, Demoff and Goodell among those requested for depositions in relocation lawsuit against Rams
Is it time to change the name of this thread that is along the lines of City vs Rams Lawsuit.
- 6,123
^I'll second that. I actually did a bit of digging to make sure this was the right thread to post the above news, but I couldn't find any other.