Whoa... The game's afoot.
- 2,056
Do we think this ^ is based off of the new evidence that Mara said he would have never voted yes if not for the indemnification agreement?
...which is Mara "admitting" that it was against the relocation policy, and most likely opened them up for a righteous lawsuit.
...which is Mara "admitting" that it was against the relocation policy, and most likely opened them up for a righteous lawsuit.
- 3,429
- 474
Knowing that something you do will get you sued does not equate with knowing that something is wrong. A righteous defense still costs money.
- 3,429
OK, but let's tell the jury how the other owners were viewing this whole scheme, and how Kroenke only got their votes to move after he agreed to cover all adverse judgements against them.Black02AltimaSE wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021Knowing that something you do will get you sued does not equate with knowing that something is wrong. A righteous defense still costs money.
- 2,056
https://themissouritimes.com/should-st- ... weighs-in/
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
Kind of shocking to hear this from Parson. I figured if he had his way the Mississippi would be dammed just above Kimmswick and St. Louis flooded with all of us in it.pattimagee wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021https://themissouritimes.com/should-st- ... weighs-in/
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
The ironic thing that the last place to flood is the part he likes least . Maybe on the fringes but most of the big cities on the big muddy started out as settlements on the high ground nearest to the river to avoid flooding in the first place, from Minneapolis to St Paul to St Louis all the way down to the French Quarter of New Orleans.dweebe wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021Kind of shocking to hear this from Parson. I figured if he had his way the Mississippi would be dammed just above Kimmswick and St. Louis flooded with all of us in it.pattimagee wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021https://themissouritimes.com/should-st- ... weighs-in/
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
I also don't think he is necessarily thinking for the city itself. I could see Gov pitch an expansion team if new stadium is built in West County or St. Charles which might not be a bad thing if City could get something out of it.
So what would I do if I was Mayor Jones and gov started pitching a west county stadium for expansion? Go along w expansion team and go for the fences. As noted, State is not directly part of any settlement and our court award.
- First and Foremost, county approves Convention upgrades to get nonsense out of way and get things moving forward
- Northside infrastructure deal, specifically remove raised section of freeway, give extra DOT land back to city and replace w BLVD, upgraded street grid between Wash Ave & Cass Ave. Would time nicely with infrastructure bill.
- Funds for Affordable housing. The northside regeneration grocery store needs housing around it to be successful
- Final but not least, funds to demo dome & expand Convention beyond first phase.
- 2,929
So everyone’s talking about what to do with the damages award for a trial that doesn’t even begin for more than 2 months, if there’s not a settlement beforehand (which I doubt). Now, I don't like to count chickens before they hatch. Same time, it's getting real, and it's fun to imagine what it'd be like to win the lottery. Perhaps it’s time to consider what the payouts could actually look like, just to get a better idea of who could get what.
Here’s the hypothetical…
Total Damages being sought: $5BB. This figure recognizing the total monies spent to keep the team here under fraudulent conditions; the lost revenues of the City and Metro Area; the G-4 loans for the relocations of the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders; and the increased private valuation of the Rams, L.L.C. since the relocation to Inglewood.
Let’s say that the plaintiffs win on all counts, plus punitive damages, doubling the total award to $10BB.
Explanation: One of the big NFL media guys saying a new franchise is possible is Benjamin Allbright of Denver. The League uses him to leak rumors. Allbright has stated twice this past week that the League is currently anticipating damages of $8-12BB, after news broke last week of Kroenke’s fighting the indemnification agreement at the owners’ meeting, and of course before the MO Court of Appeals ruled today to keep the trial in the 22nd Circuit, STL City.
So, here’s the math. In the case of a $10BB award…
The RSA could theoretically move forward with the Bob Clark idea of a massive convention center with that much cash in hand. Meanwhile, I have no idea what the City or County would do with all that money. And, from the audio link that @pdm_ad posted above, it seems they have no idea yet, either. Speaking broadly, I’d say those monies should go towards police; education; poverty mitigation; and economic development.
Quick notes:
Here’s the hypothetical…
Total Damages being sought: $5BB. This figure recognizing the total monies spent to keep the team here under fraudulent conditions; the lost revenues of the City and Metro Area; the G-4 loans for the relocations of the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders; and the increased private valuation of the Rams, L.L.C. since the relocation to Inglewood.
Let’s say that the plaintiffs win on all counts, plus punitive damages, doubling the total award to $10BB.
Explanation: One of the big NFL media guys saying a new franchise is possible is Benjamin Allbright of Denver. The League uses him to leak rumors. Allbright has stated twice this past week that the League is currently anticipating damages of $8-12BB, after news broke last week of Kroenke’s fighting the indemnification agreement at the owners’ meeting, and of course before the MO Court of Appeals ruled today to keep the trial in the 22nd Circuit, STL City.
So, here’s the math. In the case of a $10BB award…
- $3.5BB off the top go to the lawyers, who have been working this entire case on a 35% contingency fee.
- $2.5BB (half of the punitive damages award) goes to the State, as Missouri has a “split-recovery” statute that allocates half of all punitive damages awards to the Tort Victims’ Compensation Fund.
- $4BB is the remainder that gets split evenly between the City, the County, and the RSA. That’s $1.34BB apiece.
The RSA could theoretically move forward with the Bob Clark idea of a massive convention center with that much cash in hand. Meanwhile, I have no idea what the City or County would do with all that money. And, from the audio link that @pdm_ad posted above, it seems they have no idea yet, either. Speaking broadly, I’d say those monies should go towards police; education; poverty mitigation; and economic development.
Quick notes:
- This is all just guesswork. We don't know what's going to happen, only an idea of what's reasonably possible.
- The 22nd Circuit is known nationally as a “plaintiff’s court” as juries have awarded massive amounts for damages, especially punitive damages against corporations. Think of the 2018 Johnson & Johnson case that awarded $4.7BB over talcum powder. When considering the amount of punitive damages that’d go to the State off the top, it’s quite possible that an award could be higher than $10BB, that they could award 3x or 4x damages being sought. Numbers like that are just giggle-worthy yet remain theoretically possible.
- Talk of an expansion team to STL has so far been framed as something possible to negotiate as the verdict goes into appeal. If there’s going to be a team coming to STL as a settlement, it’ll most likely be a settlement after the verdict. I cannot reasonably envision a franchise coming to STL as part of a pre-trial settlement.
- 134
Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't know if Parson being involved helps St. Louis...dweebe wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021Kind of shocking to hear this from Parson. I figured if he had his way the Mississippi would be dammed just above Kimmswick and St. Louis flooded with all of us in it.pattimagee wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021https://themissouritimes.com/should-st- ... weighs-in/
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
- 144
If getting a team back means putting a stadium on a floodplain with minimal public transit access in Maryland Heights, Earth City or St Charles County then I'd rather just take the money.
- 398
I have been adamantly opposed to having the NFL back. I was and am pretty butt hurt about how they treated our city. I did listen to the interview above, and have to rethink because long term, having a team here will do more for the community and could improve our reputation.Suburban Sprawl wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021If getting a team back means putting a stadium on a floodplain with minimal public transit access in Maryland Heights, Earth City or St Charles County then I'd rather just take the money.
I DO agree it needs to be in the city. The city needs the revenue associated with the team AND we as said in many other discussions we need a healthy core. Our core has the infrastructure to support it, including transportation, accommodations and hopefully other entertainment options adjacent to where the stadium would be.
I will still more strongly support the XFL
The state is not a party to the lawsuit, if I’ve got this down right. It was only filed on behalf of the City, County and the stadium authority. So, short of some boilerplate public comments like this, he can’t do sh*t.pop_scientist wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't know if Parson being involved helps St. Louis...dweebe wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021Kind of shocking to hear this from Parson. I figured if he had his way the Mississippi would be dammed just above Kimmswick and St. Louis flooded with all of us in it.pattimagee wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021https://themissouritimes.com/should-st- ... weighs-in/
Just another option that came to mind after reading this... if the stadium was realistically an option and CityofSTL wasn't interested... they could get paid out by the State/County (move it west) and be done with the NFL altogether? Also, their approval would be a key piece, so a lot of leverage there too.
Regarding a hypothetical stadium…obviously I’m cool with a city location…but considering that football stadiums and the surrounding parking generally don’t lend themselves to good land use…I’m fine with one in the suburbs.
Not in a floodplain, mind you. My pick would be at the SE corner of 70 & 170 with a new infill station on the Red Line.
![]()
Not in a floodplain, mind you. My pick would be at the SE corner of 70 & 170 with a new infill station on the Red Line.
- 134
Well to some extent, I agree...and I'll wait until it's all said and done. With the amounts of money being tossed around and the opening of the NFL's books, it's going to get really dirty from a lot of different angles.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021The state is not a party to the lawsuit, if I’ve got this down right. It was only filed on behalf of the City, County and the stadium authority. So, short of some boilerplate public comments like this, he can’t do sh*t.pop_scientist wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't know if Parson being involved helps St. Louis...dweebe wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021Kind of shocking to hear this from Parson. I figured if he had his way the Mississippi would be dammed just above Kimmswick and St. Louis flooded with all of us in it.
- 991
Not nearly big enough for all of the required parking and other infrastructure. It’s right next to two interstates, but there’s no good way to make that site easily accessible.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021Not in a floodplain, mind you. My pick would be at the SE corner of 70 & 170 with a new infill station on the Red Line.
Hell, I’d rather they just replace the Chesterfield Mall with an NFL stadium if that was ever an option.
You'd have to take out everything almost all the way to Hanley to match the footprint of other suburban stadiums and parking lots.Laife Fulk wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2021Not nearly big enough for all of the required parking and other infrastructure. It’s right next to two interstates, but there’s no good way to make that site easily accessible.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021Not in a floodplain, mind you. My pick would be at the SE corner of 70 & 170 with a new infill station on the Red Line.
- 991
Exactly. There’s plenty of completely empty sites in the region that would be better fits. Zero reason anyone should have to move out of their home for a new stadium.
What about the giant empty site at Grand and Dodier next to the former Sportsman’s Park site and current Boys and Girls Club? A neighborhood stadium like Lambeau Field would be awesome. And it looks like there could even be enough space nearby for a practice facility
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 340
Would the lawyers' contingency fees be subject to city tax?
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Looks like Chargers building new HQ and practice just down the road for LAs new stadium. .
https://www.enr.com/external_headlines/ ... 1021934J9T
https://www.enr.com/external_headlines/ ... 1021934J9T
- 2,631
It probably won't happen but I've always thought the best spot for a new stadium would be on the East Riverfront near the Eads Bridge. It's out of the way enough to not interfere with urban downtown (through street closures and incentivising surface parking) but close enough that out of towners would all still stay at downtown hotels and take transit over (or just walk across the Eads Bridge.)
Plus the across the river views of the Arch and Downtown would be AMAZING.
Plus the across the river views of the Arch and Downtown would be AMAZING.