Lew gives first public indications on MLB in SJ
by athletics68 on Mar 26, 2009 5:13 PM PDT
Email
Printhttp://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2009/03/23/daily101.html
Seems to me this is as close to an admission that San Jose is now the goal as you'll hear until the Giants are out of the picture. He strongly thinks that San Jose deserves an MLB team but he does stop short of saying the A's are that team. Also lists the price of the 14 acres in downtown SJ for the first time at a relatively paltry $80 million dollars and suggests that price could drop a further $25 million.
http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/03/23/daily82.html
Additional reports on the same event in the SF Business Times. Wolff went on to say the fate of the A's stadium search lies in MLB's hands now, which again points to SJ and the territorial rights issue.
43 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Your 2014 San Jose Athletics
Chicago. Where the Dead can Vote. Where the Voters of Tomorrow are found in the Obituaries of Today.
I guess the Giants Single A team should be offended
..saying San Jose doesn’t have a professional baseball team there. They DO! I’ve seen a few of the games. Worth all of $7 for “luxury cement” seats. At least there’s the “beer batter” thing going on (opposing play with lowest BAA who strikes out = really cheap beer for an inning or two).
by rollierollieOxenfree on Mar 26, 2009 6:03 PM PDT reply actions
why should the single A team be offended? *san francisco* doesn't even have a professional baseball team...
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
It's funny cuz it's true!
Play more Conan!
by oaklandSMASH on Mar 27, 2009 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Apparently Lew went on to say it's up to MLB
Implying the territorial rights ball is in the league’s court now.
Politics
This is all about playing politics and controlling the message. He told the San Jose leadership to hush so they wouldn’t pull a “Gonzalez,” and now he’s building up the idea that it’s unfair to San Jose that they are Giant’s territory.
But to be honest, just the fact that the A’s wont be a welfare team drawing on the system anymore should be enough to get every owner not associated with the Giants or AL West to vote to give San Jose to the A’s.
Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.
There is no way
territorial rights are going to hold up the A’s move to San Jose. Territorial rights are antiquated. THe MLB network is a small step towards making that system go away. IMO
I still think that the Giants should go to Portland and the A's move to Pac Bell park or whatever it is called now.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
Hell no. The giants can leave but I'm not driving that far
San Jose would be a good financial decision if it goes through. Think of Billy with a little more money.
by T-Money on Mar 26, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Honestly....the best deal would be....
a trade between the A’s and the Giants (with some help from MLB):
- A’s get shared territorial rights to San Jose and 1 additional draft pick
- Giants get Holliday
Everyone wins. MLB gets additional revenue. A’s get San Jose and 1 (instead of 2) draft picks as if they never lost Holliday. And the Giants get to a audition a real face-of-the-franchise offensive threat to compliment their stellar staff. That’s a lot of concessions on everyone’s part, but as i said: Everyone wins!
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
Everyone wins...
… except the A’s.
But then I think they’ll get the territorial rights for free when it comes right down to it.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
So do I
They lost them for free, seems reasonable they should get them back in the same manner.
by athletics68 on Mar 27, 2009 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Team names, notwithstanding ...
none of the “theys” involved are the same “theys” involved in the original transaction.
The A’s ownership bought the team with the understanding that it did not include Santa Clara County territorial rights and paid a price that was fair, given that being the case.
Similarly, the Giants ownership bought the team with the understanding that it did include Santa Clara County territorial rights and paid a fair premium because of it.
Perhaps as “gentlemen”, the previous ownership “owed” Walter Haas. The same argument cannot be made for present ownership.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
That's true
But if it’s MLB profits vs. Giant’s profits put to a league-wide vote, which do you think wins?
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Don't disagree ...
just talking about the principle …
And, if it came to that, I would guess they would come down with a compromise — with the A’s paying a relatively minor price for the rights …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
How about this compromise:
The A’s will pay 1,000,000,000 percent the amount the Giant’s paid the A’s for the rights. Seems perfectly fair to me.
CuttheMullet, from "The Thread":
"Whenever I’m about to do something, I think "would an idiot do that?" and if they would, I do not do that thing."
What are territorial rights though?
THe ability to move there without asking? THe giants ain’t leaving pac bell/
Radio and TV? Not an issue, its the same media market.
That's a good point
The territorial rights were granted to the Giants assuming they were moving to San Jose and later Santa Clara. Neither happened. Otherwise the Giants have no presence in the south bay that the A’s don’t already have there as well.
I think it may have an effect on marketing ...
you don’t see A’s community events or billboards (aside from inter-county buses) outside of Alameda or CC counties …
How’s this for a great ad? On the freeway as close as possible to Telecom to be named later park, a billboard with a picture of said park and of several championship rings, with the text: “Shiny Park or Shiny Rings, Champions This Way” …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
this method has been tried
there used to be a billboard on the bay bridge that said “While they built a park, we built a team.”
myspace music
This is true...
…and exactly the same argument I heard a Giants’ exec (Baer?) use on KNBR about a year or so ago.
The A’s ownership bought the team with the understanding that it did not include Santa Clara County territorial rights and paid a price that was fair, given that being the case.
Similarly, the Giants ownership bought the team with the understanding that it did include Santa Clara County territorial rights and paid a fair premium because of it.
But, while in hindsight the transferring of those “rights” should have been conditional and time limited, I believe that the Giants do not literally “own” them, but rather are assigned them by what is pretty much a pseudo-democratic-dictatorship known as MLB and can be revoked at any time for any reason.
Plus, any premium the Giants may have paid included the still then-current expectation that they would still be moving to San Jose.
Basically, circumstances change and MLB has more leeway to adapt for what they will feel is the collective common good in part because of their anti-trust exemption. The anti-trust exemption, I believe, will severely limit what the Giants may hope to gain or keep in a court if MLB decides against them.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
Giants can't even go to court
Giants can’t even take the matter to court. They’d be in violation of the MLB constitution if they did as teams cannot sue each other or the league. Yet another anti-trust exemption benefit. By the same token, you remove the anti-trust exemption it actually makes the A’s move to SJ even easier because the A’s wouldn’t need MLB’s approval to move. Giants are damned in either scenario. Best they can hope to do is appeal to the other owners and Selig under the current framework to get some form of compensation. Which appears to be exactly what Wolff has been brokering according to ballparkdigest.com.
Well, they COULD sue ...
which, if fully pursued, would lead to a quick evaluation of said exemption … the Giants may lose if that happens (as you describe — though I question that it’s true — MLB Teams aren’t independent businesses, they’re franchises of one larger business — they could implement rules, just like McDonalds could, that would stop a new franchise from opening across the street from an existing one or an old one from moving there), but they would lose less than MLB …
Because of that, MLB would NEVER let it be fully pursued.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
Doubt it
Lawsuits are in violation of the MLB constitution. Since the exemption exists, MLB could implement all manner of sanctions against the Giants if they chose to violate the constitution. Now could it bring the exemption back up for review, maybe. But the court has upheld the exemption 3 times already, doubt it will change a fourth time. Not when the Giants primary motivation for going to court would be their own greed at the expense of another organization.
Don't disagree, but...
…I don’t think MLB wants their exemption tested any more often than absolutely necessary. In the end I expect some money to change hands just to resolve it faster and quieter.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
the mlb constitution makes the commish sole arbiter
I don’t know if the Giants could even file a suit. Did you notice that uber lawyer Peter Angelos never sued the league even though there was no agreement between the league and the Orioles at the time the Expos move was announced?
myspace music
Your belief is true ...
the rights are held at the pleasure of MLB’s owners …
Plus, any premium the Giants may have paid included the still then-current expectation that they would still be moving to San Jose.
This, though, is not true — once the territorial rights were granted, without condition or limitations, (it really was dumb — they should have just said, sure, lets do it the same way as they do in Chicago or NYC, the entire area is shared) they were theirs, whether for movement or defense against others moving into what was then their territory.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
Crosby for San Jose?
He plays third and second now!
I am Ray Fosse's infatuations with Clay Wood and high-definition television.
by franks a lot on Mar 27, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Never in a million years...
I am a die hard A’s fan, and also local San Jose resident that is tired of this circus surrounding the A’s finding a new home. Oakland and Fremont apparently don’t want it, and MLB office doesn’t want to touch the subject with a 9 foot pole. San Jose has been treated like a forgotton stepchild with no legal will to divorce itself from these “territorial rights” (thanks CBA)! Given that Holiday is almost as gone (IMHO), and the season seems destined for another episode of MASH, the most expedient path for the franchise to move forward is to perform something like i suggested above to put this issue to rest immediately. It’s more than likely that Holliday won’t resign with the A’s, and Beane has said he would be fine with a couple of draft picks if that happened. So why not?
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on Mar 27, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't see why the A's should help out the Giants...
…by giving them a player like Holliday who will probably make people want to watch him play there instead, especially when the A’s shouldn’t have to give the Giants anything for San Jose in the first place.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
While I agree with you in principle...
the facts are that baseball recognizes the Giants territorial rights presently. This has to be coughed up by the Giants peacefully (through bribery/concessions/etc.) or by forcibly by the MLB. I also think its insane they Giants would hold this over the A’s after W. Haas granted the Giants those rights when they were thinking of relocating. Makes me sick to my stomach how despicable Giants executive management/owners are. But by cajoling the Gnats now and avoiding the forthcoming dispute by dangling such a carrot, may move the franchise forward that much faster to have a sizable and continuous revenue stream in the South Bay for the A’s.
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on Mar 27, 2009 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe the A's should hire Scott Boras to sell MLB owners on the San Jose A's?
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
I don't think so
I expect a deal, if one is even achieved, to center more on a cash payment and the A’s moving some of thier games from Comcast Sportsnet California to CSN BA in future seasons. It will be about revenue streams, not rosters.
myspace music
But rosters can effect revenue streams..
Look at the circus show surrounding the Giants supposed (non) luring of Manny when season ticket sales were going about. Imagine the attendance boost (and revenue accordingly) if they land a marque player of Holliday’s stature. They can go on and woo him and Boras to make it a permanent deal, which would be much high value (imho), than getting a one time lump sum payment from the A’s. Yes, the idea is a bit far fetched, but i’m just trying to think outside the box so hopefully, get the A’s a real permanent home.
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on Mar 27, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions
But
That is hardly what the Giants will want… they will want guaranteed revenue, not one guaranteed year of Matt Holiday. Opportunity to woo him or no/
The hypotehtical deal I mentioned above, having the A’s play some number of games on CSN BA, lines the Giants pockets with media revenue. If they agreed to do that for, say 5 years, it will pay way more than Matt Holliday ever would.
myspace music
Oakland wants them ...
there just isn’t a good location for the kind of mass development (or the market anywhere in the area) that would be required to keep them there.
Cities don’t have the “right” to a team. San Jose has no more right to have one than Oakland does to keep one. You can’t force a business to move into your area, no matter how much the area might want it to …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
I never said...
San Jose has the rights to the A’s. It’s just ludicrous that the A’s want SJ and SJ wants the A’s, except the only obstacle is MLB itself, who proclaims SJ as the Gnats territory. If it weren’t for the Anti-Exemption clause for MLB, this would have been a done deal a long time ago.
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on Mar 28, 2009 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions
The Giants don't "own" the rights...
They were handed them by the owners amongest threats of a St. Pete relocation.
The A’s situation is exactly the same, without the direct threats to leave the Bay.
The rights can be rescinded by the owners with a vote.
Who needs homeruns?
I think that's exactly how it will go down
A financially healthy A’s are better for MLB than the current A’s. The money will be the overriding factor in this, and there’s more money for MLB as a whole with the A’s in SJ.
Maybe Crosby can help sell tickets with that MVP season
Gammons was raving about a few years ago?
"Where's the beef?"
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
