Jump to content
UNLV2001

Adelsons withdraw investment from proposed Raiders stadium

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

8 things to know about the proposed Raiders’ stadium lease

 Raiders first: The lease makes clear that the Raiders would be considered the primary user of the stadium. This would allow the franchise to accept or reject any potential UNLV football game times and dates, or other collegiate bowl games or showcase neutral-site contests. The terms also stipulate that “under no circumstances shall field markings for the (Raiders) games be diminished or compromised in any way by the presence of collegiate football games of any kind.”

Home away from home: The NFL continues to expand its global presence, playing regular-season games last year in London and Mexico City, where the Raiders played against Houston. The lease terms would allow the Raiders to play as many as 10 home games out of the country over the 30-year agreement. The lease makes clear that no reimbursement is owed to the Stadium Authority for lost revenue based on international games — potentially a big deal given that each NFL team only plays eight highly lucrative regular-season home games per year.

• Capital steps: Under the terms of the draft agreement, local officials would be on the hook for any necessary capital improvements to the stadium. This issue recently became a major point of contention between the Arizona Diamondbacks and Maricopa County in a lawsuit filed by the team seeking either more help in fixing up Chase Field or the ability to seek a new stadium.

• Getting personal: The authority would retain the right to sell what are called Stadium Builder’s Licenses (SBL) as a means of generating revenue. You might recognize them better by their more dated name of Personal Seat Licenses (PSL).

Rent payment: The most widely reported aspect of the lease is the Raiders’ request to pay to a generously low rent to the Stadium Authority.

“The Authority acknowledges that the Team has made a substantial investment in capital expenses to construct the Stadium, and as a result the Team shall be obligated to pay the Authority the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) annually as annual rent.”

That provision raised eyebrows among local officials and looks quite likely to become a point of discussion at the next authority meeting.

• Beer here! If a cold brew or exquisite libation is your bag, fear not: The lease proposes to allow alcohol sales on game days all the way through the beginning of the fourth quarter. Your pregame tailgate and postgame celebration are, of course, not included.

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/jan/31/with-or-without-adelson-8-things-to-know-about-the/

This is an absolutely awful deal for UNLV football. I am officially off the Raiders to Vegas bandwagon. I will pray this deal falls through and UNLV gets a shot at building their own stadium.

Too bad the NV Legislature can't send Davis a bill for that special session.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

When the Raiders went before the Stadium Commission & offered up 1 Dollar in rent and wanted ALL revenue from advertising, suites, parking et al that kind of blew up on the return on investment for the stadium loan 

I think they went with that proposal to get out of coming to Vegas. They knew exactly what they were doing. 

 

4 hours ago, Poster17 said:

If this falls through, UNLV has $350 million in public money to spend on a $550 million on campus stadium.  Needs to raise $200 million in two years.  Very doable, but again this is UNLV where ineptitude is the rule not the exception.

I have a feeling majestic steps back in. They were involved in the raiders deal until the big boys (Adelson) stepped in. They were talking about $400 mil, so $200 might be doable. 

We'll see what happens, but with the deal the raiders proposed I hope we tell them to F off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is what Mark Davis gets out of all this.  People are saying Las Vegas got played but to the benefit of whom? 

It appears to me that Mr. Davis thought he could manipulate Clark County, Shelson Adelson and Goldman Sachs.  

1 out of 3 is good in baseball anyway. Maybe he should buy the A's.

It just seems to me that Davis was way out of his league.  Maybe I'm wrong and he comes over the top and gets it all done his way.  We will see in the next few months, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 4UNLV said:

I think they went with that proposal to get out of coming to Vegas. They knew exactly what they were doing. 

 

I have a feeling majestic steps back in. They were involved in the raiders deal until the big boys (Adelson) stepped in. They were talking about $400 mil, so $200 might be doable. 

We'll see what happens, but with the deal the raiders proposed I hope we tell them to F off. 

Wonder if UNLV burned the Majestic bridge already with the whole UNLV Now project?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, toonkee said:

What I don't understand is what Mark Davis gets out of all this.  People are saying Las Vegas got played but to the benefit of whom? 

It appears to me that Mr. Davis thought he could manipulate Clark County, Shelson Adelson and Goldman Sachs.  

1 out of 3 is good in baseball anyway. Maybe he should buy the A's.

It just seems to me that Davis was way out of his league.  Maybe I'm wrong and he comes over the top and gets it all done his way.  We will see in the next few months, I guess.

That's the way I see it. Davis was in way over his head with Adelson.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, SharkTanked said:

That's the way I see it. Davis was in way over his head with Adelson.

That was my second thought. That Davis is actually stupid enough to think he was going to be able to get away with that game. 

 

48 minutes ago, SharkTanked said:

Wonder if UNLV burned the Majestic bridge already with the whole UNLV Now project?

I thought I heard something not too long ago that they would maybe be back in if push came to shove? But maybe not, I don't remember where I heard it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, SharkTanked said:

Wonder if UNLV burned the Majestic bridge already with the whole UNLV Now project?

I totally forgot about them. It would be awesome to see them jump back in. 

Magestic: $200-400 M

Public: $300 M

Maybe some Fertitta $ and other private donations. We could end up with a $500-800 M stadium. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RoscoesDad

Well like with everything UNLV sits in a market rife with cashflow that could easily be had if you had the right people doing the PowerPoint pitch.  That 200mm could be easily taken care of via sponsorships, naming rights and exclusive partnership rights.  Look if you can't raise money in vegas  you are terrible at your job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BleedRed702 said:

I totally forgot about them. It would be awesome to see them jump back in. 

Magestic: $200-400 M

Public: $300 M

Maybe some Fertitta $ and other private donations. We could end up with a $500-800 M stadium. 

I don't think we'll see anyone put over 200m.

It will likely be a collection of donations up to 200m and then the rest being public.

The public money is free money. No reason to spend more than you need.

All UNLV needs is 1 big donation and the ball will start rolling. "Fertitta Stadium" sounds about right.

  • Like 1

All is well, For Rice is gone.                  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BestintheWest said:

I don't think we'll see anyone put over 200m.

It will likely be a collection of donations up to 200m and then the rest being public.

The public money is free money. No reason to spend more than you need.

All UNLV needs is 1 big donation and the ball will start rolling. "Fertitta Stadium" sounds about right.

Can UNLV just get a loan for the rest?

It would be awesome if it was just called Rebel Field/Stadium.

None of that Wisepies b.s.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Chris G just said (after she got her 'I told you so'' in) that the stadium authority should dissolve, and that the requirement that unlv come up with $200 mill should also be dissolved. She said a stadium for unlv should just be paid for by the money allocated. 

Good for her, lol. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 4UNLV said:

Well Chris G just said (after she got her 'I told you so'' in) that the stadium authority should dissolve, and that the requirement that unlv come up with $200 mill should also be dissolved. She said a stadium for unlv should just be paid for by the money allocated. 

Good for her, lol. 

Ya know, I'm beginning to like her style.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/1/2017 at 9:06 AM, ph90702 said:

For $450 million, we could build a retractable roof stadium that seats 50-55 k.

The Texas Rangers are going to be building a retractable roof stadium seating 42-44K.

 

 

Billion dollars.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UNLV2001 said:

Good synopsis of what options are there for the stadium deal:

10 key questions answered about proposed Raiders stadium in Las Vegas

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/stadium/10-key-questions-answered-about-proposed-raiders-stadium-las-vegas

 #4 on this list could be the way ahead.  Smaller scope stadium, 750M+500M=1.25B stadium.  Should be enough for an NFL quality stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 8:41 AM, SharkTanked said:

This is an absolutely awful deal for UNLV football. I am officially off the Raiders to Vegas bandwagon. I will pray this deal falls through and UNLV gets a shot at building their own stadium.

Too bad the NV Legislature can't send Davis a bill for that special session.

I've been trying to warn you guys.  You guys should be fighting this tooth and nail.  Sharing a stadium with a NFL team would virtually assure UNLV football remains what it currently is...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.lvsportsnetwork.com/2017/02/02/audio-clark-county-commissioner-chris-g-says-dump-the-raiders-pitch-and-move-on-unlv-stadium-project/

Ball could get rolling for UNLV sooner rather than later, don't know how likely this is though. Like the idea of nixing the $200m requirement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't over by a long shot. According to the Atlanta Falcons owner who originally questioned the move to Vegas and now appears to be on board has publicly stated the move to Las Vegas is still on track. Why, because of the $750 mill in public money on the table IMO.  The NFL is against gaming owning an interest in the team or stadium. My prediction is that AEG will partner up with Davis. From the Las Vegas Review Journal:

 

Posted February 3, 2017 - 2:21pmUpdated February 3, 2017 - 3:05pm

Atlanta Falcons owner: Raiders relocation process still on track

img
Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank answers questions while holding his only media availability in Houston for the Super Bowl against the New England Patriots during a news conference at the George R. Brown Convention Center on Friday, Feb. 3, 2017, in Houston. (Curtis Compton/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)
 
By JON MARK SARACENO
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

HOUSTON — Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank said Friday that the Oakland Raiders’ proposed move to Las Vegas is not in jeopardy because of the withdrawal of Sheldon Adelson as a stadium financing partner.

Blank, whose Falcons are competing in Sunday’s Super Bowl against the New England Patriots, said he did not believe it would be difficult for Raiders owner Mark Davis to find another stadium investor to replace Adelson, Las Vegas Sands Corp. chairman and CEO, because “demand for NFL ownership is unique.’’

“I think Mark is anxious to complete that move,’’ he said. “I think he won’t have a problem finding a partner.’’

“But it’s a guess,’’ said Blank, one of the NFL’s most influential owners and a member of the NFL finance committee, which heard from Davis last month.

Adelson, who was integral in advancing the proposal for a $1.9 billion stadium through the Nevada Legislature, on Monday withdrew his $650 million investment in the dome. A $500 million contribution from the Raiders, who have applied to the league for relocation to Las Vegas, and $750 million funded by Clark County hotel room taxes remain committed to the stadium project.

Raiders officials told the Review-Journal earlier Friday that they were unavailable for comment this weekend.

The league’s 32 owners meet next month in Phoenix. A vote on Oakland’s relocation to Southern Nevada could occur then. Three fourths of ownership, or 24 teams, must approve the move for the Raiders to leave Oakland for the second time in their history.

Blank said he was unsure about the timetable for a vote. Owners also meet in late May. Blank suggested that expediency in such matters was of utmost importance.

“I know the league tries to move these things along as quickly as possible,’’ he said. “Whether or not all the information will be gathered and vetted properly (by next month), I am not sure. I think there is a chance of getting it done (with a vote) in March.’’

The Review-Journal is owned by the family of Las Vegas Sands Corp. Chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson.

Jon Mark Saraceno can be reached at jsaraceno@reviewjournal.com. Follow @jonnysaraceno on Twitter.

 

10 key questions answered...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/1/2017 at 4:38 PM, 4UNLV said:

Well Chris G just said (after she got her 'I told you so'' in) that the stadium authority should dissolve, and that the requirement that unlv come up with $200 mill should also be dissolved. She said a stadium for unlv should just be paid for by the money allocated. 

Good for her, lol. 

I just don't see this going back to the legislature for amendment.  The law SB-1 was actually defined with three outcomes.  The first was the NFL stadium.  If that fails then the room tax would decrease and that portion of the money would then potentially end up with the UNLV stadium with the $200 million provision.  Third, if the UNLV stadium falls through then the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors authority would then get the money.  The convention authority would fight any amendment that would take away millions from their pocket.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...