[Stranger]

That's per team not total for LA market. Also it was stated that money will be paid upfront, not taken out of future revenues.

Where are Spanos or Davis getting that money from?

Exactly. If ESK doesn't move, how does the Charaiders come-up with a $1B-plus? They don't, which is why this is all such an obvious smoke-screen. It's a freaking shakedown so that Charaiders can fund new stadiums in their home markets. The NFL is an ugly place behind the shield.

[SoCalRam78]

That's per team not total for LA market. Also it was stated that money will be paid upfront, not taken out of future revenues.

Where are Spanos or Davis getting that money from?

Exactly. If ESK doesn't move, how does the Charaiders come-up with a $1B-plus? They don't, which is why this is all such an obvious smoke-screen. It's a freaking shakedown so that Charaiders can fund new stadiums in their home markets. The NFL is an ugly place behind the shield.

If it was the same total for one team vs multiple teams, I'm pretty sure that would be further ammo in an anti trust suit.

[max]

That's per team not total for LA market. Also it was stated that money will be paid upfront, not taken out of future revenues.

Where are Spanos or Davis getting that money from?

The money has to be paid upfront? I've never seen that anywhere. I think it's going to be paid over time.

Yup. I didn't see that anywhere either.

That's a huge difference. Anyone have a link to confirm?

[Stranger]

That's per team not total for LA market. Also it was stated that money will be paid upfront, not taken out of future revenues.

Where are Spanos or Davis getting that money from?

Exactly. If ESK doesn't move, how does the Charaiders come-up with a $1B-plus? They don't, which is why this is all such an obvious smoke-screen. It's a freaking shakedown so that Charaiders can fund new stadiums in their home markets. The NFL is an ugly place behind the shield.

If it was the same total for one team vs multiple teams, I'm pretty sure that would be further ammo in an anti trust suit.

Right. Not sure if I wasn't clear, but I was multiplying $600M by 2 (Raiders + Chargers). So, if ESK moves, the league gets $600M, but if Chargers & Raiders move, the league gets $1.2B.

If Charaiders move, then I guess ESK could make a great case for taking a large chunk of that $1.2B and using it for a new stadium in STL, Toronto or London

But we all know that the Charaiders are not coming up with any cash, especially if it's upfront.

[max]

Does anyone have a quote from Kaplans site?

It has an article on relo fees. But I don't have access to it.

[Rams the Legends live on]

OldSchool. In you comment, I get the underscored, but the bolded doesn't make sense to me. Please clarify. Are "they" the NFL?
It's also rumored to be er team. This could mean 2 things if I understand it correctly. 1) it's bit more problematic for each of the Charaiders as they are not rolling in dough, 2) the NFL gets an extra 1/2 billion for choosing the 2 team scenario. Is it Charaiders or Charams?
Along that line of thinking, I've frequently asked if anyone knows if the NFL makes more or less money having the 2 teams in Carson or just the Rams in Inglewood,, all financing considered? Anyone?

The money as far as the league will make will be static bro. As only one team will be playing there on any given Sunday. So whether they move two teams in or one their will only be one game played in the market. However the amount of revenue should negligibly be theoretically higher.

The 2 team scenario in my opinion is the worse option. As ya will have direct competition for product, In this competition ya are vying for premium dollars as these will be entertainment, leisure, recreational dollars. and etc.

Now for LA it will work out pretty good as ya have options ya supply and the consumer chooses the one they like best. However for the producer of the product competition equals a diluted market and less revenue.

For example lets look at say a restaurant and Pepsi vs Coke. Most restaurants carry only carry one brand. For the brand this works well as your revenue does not get diluted ya have no competition so ya don't have to market or compete for dollars. For the restaurant it works as well as ya can supply a demand and have no associated cost from the production side of manufacturing, labor, cost of goods to market/distribution, etc. The eatery is only gonna have to focus on making sure inventory meets supply and demand which they can profit from by getting their numbers right.

Now if the brands had to compete they now have several disadvantages as they now have to sell in a diluted market while their associated production, distribution and etc cost have not gone down yet now they have to spend more money to ensure ya associate their brand with the dinning out experience. So their market is diluted and their cost has risen.

It will be the same for SD and Oakland. They will have to compete in a diluted market meanwhile spending more dollars to associate their name with the experience. All the while competing in a market that has a percentage already carved out as brand loyal so your not gonna pick up any new customers or revenue there.

So your competing for new customers who are unaware of the brand or do not have a brand they are loyal to. Ya have to do this competition out of future revenue along with present revenue. Meanwhile ya have already earmarked a portion of your future earnings and present earnings for the cost to get into the market. So it is a less effective decision for the NFL to chose Carson as the market will be diluted, future revenues and present revenues are already spoken for as a percentage and ya will have lost revenue in the form of alienated previous brand loyal fans. The challenges are raised exponential more by choosing the 2 team option for a start up market.

So could be the NFL sees this very clear and has priced SD and Oakland out of the market with the relocation fee which SD and Oakland would have to commit more future and present revenue to, for the market. All the while dealing with lost revenue and now competing head to head for the same premium dollars. Meanwhile for the NFL the dollars remain static since ya can only play one game in the market on Sunday. The only foreseeable advantage for the NFL is instead of having a market where only 8 home games are played ya now 16. Which at first glance might look like they have doubled the market, but in fact they have not. As the move was a parallel move and any profit will be negligible since all they did was move from SD and Oakland to LA. Now if they planned to in the immediate future reclaim the vacated markets so the move was a growth move instead of a parallel move it would make sense. However to make a parallel move for negligible or the same static revenue stream makes no sense as the NFL is taking on exponential more challenges for more or less the same amount of premium dollars. However for LA it would be a good thing as they will have 16 home games vs 8 to fill their coffers with tax revenue.

[Elvis]

[snackdaddy]

This is actually good news for us. Spanos and Davis will priced out of the running for LA.

[Elvis]

This is actually good news for us. Spanos and Davis will priced out of the running for LA.

If it's true.

Story changes on a daily basis these days...

[OldSchool]

That's per team not total for LA market. Also it was stated that money will be paid upfront, not taken out of future revenues. Where are Spanos or Davis getting that money from?

They aren't, what this does is let's them know they have an additional $300m to use for their local stadium financing. .

OldSchool. In you comment, I get the underscored, but the bolded doesn't make sense to me. Please clarify. Are "they" the NFL?
It's also rumored to be per team. This could mean 2 things if I understand it correctly. 1) it's bit more problematic for each of the Charaiders as they are not rolling in dough, 2) the NFL gets an extra 1/2 billion for choosing the 2 team scenario. Is it Charaiders or Charams?
Along that line of thinking, I've frequently asked if anyone knows if the NFL makes more or less money having the 2 teams in Carson or just the Rams in Inglewood,, all financing considered? Anyone?

I'm saying one probable function of the $600m is to split it between Davis and Spanos to bridge the financing gaps in SD and Oak. The NFL gets the better city and the best owner option and they help their two pals get their financing done.