Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Gator 82

OT: MLB to Vegas??

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Speaking of the A’s in Vegas:

Phuck the Giants. 

If for nothing else the A’s move would take a bite out of the Dodgers market share in Vegas and conversely, the Giants would completely own one of the largest markets in the country to themselves. Win-win for the Giants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Old_Sparty1857 said:

Agreed. It’s complicated as all hell.  The key may be the housing component. Even if it’s market rate, it’s still new housing in the Bay Area (and redevelopment in Oakland), which is desperately needed. 

God knows Oakland needs something good to happen for it. This redevelopment project may be just the ticket. There are easier pathways to a new ballpark, but the A’s proposal at Howard Terminal is a “go big or go home” proposal.  It may really change the future of the A’s and of Oakland. Like you, I hope a deal gets done. 

I think it has to go big. You can’t have Oracle on one side of the bay and a bag of crap or a facsimile on the other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

If for nothing else the A’s move would take a bite out of the Dodgers market share in Vegas and conversely, the Giants would completely own one of the largest markets in the country to themselves. Win-win for the Giants. 

The Dodgers don’t have all that much market share in Vegas anyway. I know for blackout purposes it’s considered “in the Dodgers market”, but the Dodgers are just one of several teams that are moderately popular in Vegas. And the Giants already own Northern California outside of the East Bay anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NevadaFan said:

If for nothing else the A’s move would take a bite out of the Dodgers market share in Vegas and conversely, the Giants would completely own one of the largest markets in the country to themselves. Win-win for the Giants. 

This thought has crossed my mind, too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

The Dodgers don’t have all that much market share in Vegas anyway. I know for blackout purposes it’s considered “in the Dodgers market”, but the Dodgers are just one of several teams that are moderately popular in Vegas. And the Giants already own Northern California outside of the East Bay anyway. 

The Dodgers do hold the largest market share in Vegas, and their games have been broadcast on the radio in Vegas for forever. But I agree that it isn't much relative to the entire Dodgers footprint. However, the Giants owning the entire Northern California market, including the East Bay and Sacramento, would be awfully big when it's time to re-up the regional TV contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

The Dodgers do hold the largest market share in Vegas, and their games have been broadcast on the radio in Vegas for forever. But I agree that it isn't much relative to the entire Dodgers footprint. However, the Giants owning the entire Northern California market, including the East Bay and Sacramento, would be awfully big when it's time to re-up the regional TV contract.

I know they technically have the biggest market share. But I remember as a Dodger fan moving to Vegas from Nor Cal I expected to be “in Dodger country” for the first time, and it definitely didn’t feel like it. I came across some Dodger fans, but it seemed like there were just as many Yankees and Cubs fans. Maybe the Dodgers presence was bigger when the 51’s were their AAA affiliate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

I know they technically have the biggest market share. But I remember as a Dodger fan moving to Vegas from Nor Cal I expected to be “in Dodger country” for the first time, and it definitely didn’t feel like it. I came across some Dodger fans, but it seemed like there were just as many Yankees and Cubs fans. Maybe the Dodgers presence was bigger when the 51’s were their AAA affiliate. 

Yeah, fandom there is pretty dispersed. Just a lot of people from a lot of different places who bring their allegiances to Vegas. The Dodgers have always been pretty popular. When I was a kid, the area had a lot of Padres fans because the LV Stars were the AAA affiliate of SD, and it was a GREAT time to have the Padres affiliation. So much future Major League talent came through there in the 80s. But the AAA affiliations in Vegas have changed a bunch since. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even with all the footsie between the A's and various suitors, it still seems pretty unlikely the A's move or that the Howard Terminal site becomes a baseball stadium

A couple months ago an SF Chronicle opinion article listed the potential outcomes in descending order of likelihood and their breakdown still rings true to me.  

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/ostler/article/The-six-likely-fates-of-the-Oakland-A-s-quest-16196700.php

John Fisher simply hasn't demonstrated he can make money himself because he's just a recipient of the Old Navy/Gap fortune from his father Don.  He should sell the team to a different ownership group like Chris Cohan did.

If the A's had already done an effective redevelopment of the Coliseum site there would be a track record to justify the significant public investment the A's want along the waterfront but neither their track record or actions indicate they can pull off what they put on paper, especially as Mr. Fisher has never been willing to use his own resources to support the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

Even with all the footsie between the A's and various suitors, it still seems pretty unlikely the A's move or that the Howard Terminal site becomes a baseball stadium

A couple months ago an SF Chronicle opinion article listed the potential outcomes in descending order of likelihood and their breakdown still rings true to me.  

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/ostler/article/The-six-likely-fates-of-the-Oakland-A-s-quest-16196700.php

John Fisher simply hasn't demonstrated he can make money himself because he's just a recipient of the Old Navy/Gap fortune from his father Don.  He should sell the team to a different ownership group like Chris Cohan did.

If the A's had already done an effective redevelopment of the Coliseum site there would be a track record to justify the significant public investment the A's want along the waterfront but neither their track record or actions indicate they can pull off what they put on paper, especially as Mr. Fisher has never been willing to use his own resources to support the team.

It's too bad the Warriors owners, Lacob and Guber, weren't able to buy the A's a few years ago. They showed interest in the Howard Terminal site, too, and they would actually be able to pull it off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NVGiant said:

It's too bad the Warriors owners, Lacob and Guber, weren't able to buy the A's a few years ago. They showed interest in the Howard Terminal site, too, and they would actually be able to pull it off. 

Guber was involved? He’s one of the big minority owners of the Dodgers, that’s surprising. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Guber was involved? He’s one of the big minority owners of the Dodgers, that’s surprising. 

Sure was. Or at least, that was what was rumored. I think he would have had to sell his share of the Dodgers to make it happen. But it never went that far, so who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as a Giants fan, I know selfishly there are many advantages to having the entire market with one MLB franchise, but I'd hate to see the A's leave Oakland. The Bay area is simply a better sports town with multiple teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, NVGiant said:

Sure was. Or at least, that was what was rumored. I think he would have had to sell his share of the Dodgers to make it happen. But it never went that far, so who knows?

Yea he would have had to sell. Would have been a smart move, he’d have cashed out big time and would have probably been able to buy an even bigger share of the A’s and had money leftover. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sewer water can only help so much. The coliseum has backed up sewers... ick... but the Colorado river is running low, and Vegas will soon have to recycle even more sewer water for drinking purposes. Why does nobody seem to be paying attention?  Vegas and towns of the lower Colorado basin will soon be shedding people like crazy.  It’s completely unsustainable. Maybe another desalination station in the Pacific could help, but it will be a couple years too late. Get real people! Vegas is about over... The town is in its death throes and the people just can’t grasp it yet. Gotta wake up and move... maybe to the Bay Area. It was in the 60’s in SF yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A member of my family owns a large rental co. At one time they had over 150 rental units in the greater Vegas area. But they are liquidating.  I was told that most people moving to Vegas are elderly. They aren’t looking at living there, or anywhere, 10 or more years from now. So the crippling drought won’t bother them. Commercial investors are flipping houses. The long-term play is over. It’s like shorting stocks. Sports teams are transient, they will go where the $$$ is. Give them bread & circus. They don’t care if Vegas is a ghost town in 10-20 years. They will just move on again, to the highest bidder. Enjoy🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

Wonder what Charley Finley would say about this in the Heavens?

Charlie walked out on a lease and the voters had just approved a new stadium when he moved the A's from KC to Oakland. And previously tried to move them to DFW, Atlanta and Louisville. I'd say he'd be cool with just about anything.  The Royals were born when the city threatened to sue MLB.

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

7 hours ago, RSF said:

Charlie walked out on a lease and the voters had just approved a new stadium when he moved the A's from KC to Oakland. And previously tried to move them to DFW, Atlanta and Louisville. I'd say he'd be cool with just about anything.  The Royals were born when the city threatened to sue MLB.

Is this the reason that KC landed an expansion team so soon after the A's bailed out? I imagine that KC getting a new stadium underway soon was also a condition of landing the expansion team

Old Municipal Stadium was a small capacity relic of the old Negro League / Minor League era located in an older residential area ............Royals came into being in 1969 and by 1973 new Royals & Arrowhead opened out in a wide open space between the 70 & 435 freeways 

Saw a few Royals games in old Municipal Stadium & was at Royals stadium a few times between 1973 to 2000 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

Is this the reason that KC landed an expansion team so soon after the A's bailed out? I imagine that KC getting a new stadium underway soon was also a condition of landing the expansion team

 

The voters had already approved funding for what became the Royals and Chiefs stadiums.

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

4 minutes ago, RSF said:

The voters had already approved funding for what became the Royals and Chiefs stadiums.

Aha ! So the vote was in to build the new stadiums, but the A's bailed anyway, so thus the lawsuit ?!?

I was born in KC but moved out west when I was 2, but all the family was there, so we went back often so that's why I was a long time Royals / Chiefs fan.........Didn't know the city was going to sue MLB for losing the A's considering the A's were only there for about 10-12 years (1955-1967 I think) - I was born in '60 & moved out in '62 

I saw games in Municipal Stadium in 1970, 71 , 72 - Had postcards of Royal's Stadium opening and was there in 1973 for first time I think 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...