MarlinatPenn Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I'm trying to make sense of these cryptic messages: The problems that face the Marlins right now, in order: - Poor lease --> Marlins don't receive sufficient revenue from stadium - Open-air stadium --> people don't go to games for fear of POSSIBILITY of rain - Location --> not close to downtown businesses in either Broward or Miami-Dade MY SPECULATION OF A COMPROMISE: -- Miami's Requested Concession from the Marlins: agreeing to a permanent dome A permanent dome still removes the threat of the POSSIBILITY of rain and ensures a dry ballgame --> more people go to the games, even if not as aesthetically pleasing... or maybe it seated less than the Marlins preferred? SO, MY QUESTION: What would Miami be likely to agree to concede in this compromise? pay more of stadium costs? ownership of the stadium? I dont know, thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapeFish Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I have reason to believe the following: Loria rejected the idea of having no gameday parking revenues. MLB is caving in to just get something done, but Loria and the County are not happy with that. The roof issue is nothing compared to the gameday revenue issue. Looks like another case of the City of Miami trying to screw the Marlins/Dade County through talks with MLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarlinatPenn Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I have reason to believe the following: Loria rejected the idea of having no gameday parking revenues. MLB is caving in to just get something done, but Loria and the County are not happy with that. The roof issue is nothing compared to the gameday revenue issue. Looks like another case of the City of Miami trying to screw the Marlins/Dade County through talks with MLB. so what's the compromise? Miami expects the Marlins to concede gameday revenues/parking, and also to the site that doesn't allow for a retractable roof? If this is a compromise, then what did Miami offer in return for these concessions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quadruple Play Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 im glad the marlins chose revenue over a skyline view in what sounded like another miami arena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapeFish Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 so what's the compromise? Miami expects the Marlins to concede gameday revenues/parking, and also to the site that doesn't allow for a retractable roof? If this is a compromise, then what did Miami offer in return for these concessions? Miami would put more money into the project. Miami may have also gotten control of operations on non-gamedays or ownership instead of the County. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 25, 2006 Author Share Posted August 25, 2006 "Looks like another case of the City of Miami trying to screw the Marlins/Dade County through talks with MLB." Look i am not a big fan of the people running the city of miami but I have to tell you i think they are not at fault here. When they were given the opportunity to deal with MLB instead of Samson they jumped at it. This was driven by MLB. This proposal was a compromise with all the revenue they would need (assuming the parking issue could be worked out). That was actually news to me. The parking revenue is something that could be worked around imo. It is just a matter of building some garages although it should be remembered that there will be less cars because of the fantastic mass transit access. In fact i remember hearing that the city of miami required the proposal to have additional parking. Bottom line is Loria has refused to compromise in anyway. Since he has been an owner he has managed to piss off Montreal, Expo Fans, The city of Miami, MLB, Marlin fans and his own partners. How much longer can we deny the obvious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishfan79 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 so what's the compromise? Miami expects the Marlins to concede gameday revenues/parking, and also to the site that doesn't allow for a retractable roof? If this is a compromise, then what did Miami offer in return for these concessions? Miami would put more money into the project. Miami may have also gotten control of operations on non-gamedays or ownership instead of the County. If miami tossed in a parking garage near there for all of downtown use and split that revenue I bet it would go over much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 "If you build a stadium without a roof, in 10 years, you are back to where you started from." This not accurate. I have said many times there was a significant compromise regarding the roof. On a side note, imo, the issue is not the rain but rather the perception of and possibility of rain. True. But for me personally, the THREAT of rain is what has kept me and everyone I know from going to several games over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 25, 2006 Author Share Posted August 25, 2006 "im glad the marlins chose revenue over a skyline view in what sounded like another miami arena." With all due respect, the marlins chose Dolphins Stadium over a compromise on the roof and all the revenue they need. BTW as far as I know there was no skyline view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveTheseGuysAStadium Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I hope the papers down here get off their a** and start reporting on this damn thing. If there really was a reasonable deal on the table and Loria turned it down, that'll be the tipping point for me. I've been on Loria's side since he got here...that may change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarlinatPenn Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 so everything was offered to Loria, except the all-important "retractable roof" and Loria balked? So what is Loria thinking? Possibilities: a. optimistic about Hialeah's chances of getting the retractable roof, along with the funding b. refuses, absolutely without exception, to accept anything less than perfect scenario c. he privately wants to wait for debt repayment deadline to pass what are opinions as to what Loria's reasons for rejecting this proposal are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 25, 2006 Author Share Posted August 25, 2006 So what is Loria thinking? Possibilities: a. optimistic about Hialeah's chances of getting the retractable roof, along with the funding b. refuses, absolutely without exception, to accept anything less than perfect scenario c. he privately wants to wait for debt repayment deadline to pass what are opinions as to what Loria's reasons for rejecting this proposal are? combo of b and c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveTheseGuysAStadium Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Someone has mentioned something about Selig having the power to remove Loria...I had never heard that before. How can a commissioner do something like that? Does he need votes from other owners? Does he need cause? I'm confused by that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quadruple Play Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 "im glad the marlins chose revenue over a skyline view in what sounded like another miami arena." With all due respect, the marlins chose Dolphins Stadium over a compromise on the roof and all the revenue they need. BTW as far as I know there was no skyline view. any stadium in the center of downtown would have a very nice view of buildings, period. thats what i meant. gobucks, the marlins didnt piss off the city of miami two years ago. the city of miami screwed themselves last time around. they tried to get the marlins to sign a terrible lease, arriola and other took shots at ownership in the paper, meeting became shouting matches and the constant calls to sell. just face it, maybe just maybe what miami and mlb had on the table wasnt all it was cracked up to be. knowing mlb was involved i wouldnt be shocked. it says something about whats going on in hialeah when loria killed the offer just a week and a half after being told. regardless of what you say on "the glass being half full". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cactus Leaguer Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Someone has mentioned something about Selig having the power to remove Loria...I had never heard that before. How can a commissioner do something like that? Does he need votes from other owners? Does he need cause? I'm confused by that. He would need a 3/4 vote from the owners to do that. Selig does not have as much power as some of you think he does. This is not David Stern we're talking about here. MLB is basically an oligarchy of large market owners who prop up the smaller market owners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Juanky Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Someone has mentioned something about Selig having the power to remove Loria...I had never heard that before. How can a commissioner do something like that? Does he need votes from other owners? Does he need cause? I'm confused by that. "Best Interest of Baseball" clause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarlinatPenn Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Loria bought the Marlins in September of 2002. $15 million of the $38.5 million loan from MLB would be excused if a new stadium is not achieved in five years. So... my reasoning... -- before September of 2007... he will only accept a perfect scenario, and will not compromise at all. -- after September 2007... times are more desperate, less than perfect scenarios, such as the non-retractable-domed Miami scenario will be more likly to be accepted. The problem is that there is a MLB team that does not have a stadium to play in after the next four seasons of baseball... What's the latest they can start construction in order to finish it by Opening Day 2011? I guess Loria believes that date is after September 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 25, 2006 Author Share Posted August 25, 2006 "any stadium in the center of downtown would have a very nice view of buildings, period. thats what i meant. " I guess you are right I just never thought of the skyline that they will be looking at is anything to write home about. "gobucks, the marlins didnt piss off the city of miami two years ago. the city of miami screwed themselves last time around. they tried to get the marlins to sign a terrible lease, arriola and other took shots at ownership in the paper, meeting became shouting matches and the constant calls to sell." I would say last time they both screwed up. Loria for using samson and not professionals and the city for using crazy Joe. I would say 65% of the blame goes to the city. "just face it, maybe just maybe what miami and mlb had on the table wasnt all it was cracked up to be. knowing mlb was involved i wouldnt be shocked." Maybe you are right. What i do know is it was a solution and that almost everyone Loria has dealt with since becoming an owner have had bad things to say about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHarrington Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 my two cents , i would not be angry at loria for walking away from a deal that does not give him the parking revenue but this reason points to the 800lb gorilla in the room Loria simply does not have enough money to be a major league owner , and his lack of money will negatively all aspects of the Marlins from a new stadium to a reasonable payroll the guy simply does not have the money or connections to get anything done . Seriously how many owners in baseball were given a loan to buy a mlb team ???? while their contribution to the stadium looks large really only 30 million is up front ,not to use big Stein as a comparision of a typical owner but the guy is building his own stadium . In all honesty several posters have more or less turned me on Loria i no longer think the guy is satan(un less he moves the team) in fact he seems like a passionate marlin fan but he is just too poor( in mlb owner terms) to own a mlb franchise and he should sell the team or be made to sell the team or the sake of the marlins and mlb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 25, 2006 Author Share Posted August 25, 2006 Samson was just on lebetard and went out of his way to talk about the stadium. At first i thought it was because his ego was hurt but then when pressed to say whether it was with Hialeah he replied "south Florida". Maybe he was trying to put pressure on Hialeah. My info is the Miami concept is finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strike 3 Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Since he has been an owner he has managed to piss off Montreal, Expo Fans, The city of Miami, MLB, Marlin fans and his own partners. How much longer can we deny the obvious? and Joe Girardi...but seriously, very valid point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quadruple Play Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Loria bought the Marlins in September of 2002. $15 million of the $38.5 million loan from MLB would be excused if a new stadium is not achieved in five years. So... my reasoning... -- before September of 2007... he will only accept a perfect scenario, and will not compromise at all. -- after September 2007... times are more desperate, less than perfect scenarios, such as the non-retractable-domed Miami scenario will be more likly to be accepted. if they sign a LOI (letter of intent) in september it doesnt mean a stadium is guaranteed see: miami negotiations. so this argument of "dont expect anything until february" doesnt make sense. the loan is probably worded so a stadium deal has to completely water tight. it's going to take many months for a hialeah or miami deal to go through all the approvals and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Altamonte Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 At the end of the day MLB will step in to resolve the gap issue as long as there has been a legitimite effort to solve the matter otherwise...I still believe Loria should sell majority stock to someone else but I believe it very possible that maybe another partner maybe brought into the picture one with deeper pockets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gj4marlins Posted August 27, 2006 Share Posted August 27, 2006 Awfully quiet in here on this subject all weekend. Come to think of it awfully quiet in all the local media for such a big "event" to have taken place in negotiations on Friday. Not questioning its authenticity - Just frustrated as always with the lack of news, and the two step forward and three steps back the stadium always seems to take. Anyone know if MLB still going to meet in New York this week with Hialeah, County, and Team? Expecially if we turned our back on there own deal. :banghead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobucks Posted August 27, 2006 Author Share Posted August 27, 2006 There was a meeting on thursday in NY. nobody was invited from Hialeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.