September 27, 200619 yr Here's the link, scroll to the bottom under "Times and Meeting" http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/basebal...-sports-marlins I can't believe this. What's going on? Is this positve or negative? Does anyone have a clue?
September 27, 200619 yr Just more heartache in a long and frustrating process. Keeping the fans in the dark seems to be the norm for this front office. Guess they are too buy throwing hissy fits with there over-achieving manager, or training for the Mini-Me Triathlons to worry about solving our long term future and stability as a franchise. Anyone with anymore details would be appreciated today. Capie? Gobucks? Someone shed some light on this latest delay. I had the 28th circled on my calendar, and am quite disapointed. :mad
September 27, 200619 yr Author Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front?
September 27, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB?
September 27, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? five years after Loria took ownership. Which comes out to September of 2007.
September 27, 200619 yr Hopefully we'll hear when it is rescheduled. At least it didn't say "postponed indefinitely" or "cancelled."
September 29, 200619 yr According to Sarah Talalay's blog on the Sun Sentinel website, the meeting was postponed due to Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations. http://blogs.trb.com/sports/custom/busines...eat_repeat.html
September 29, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? five years after Loria took ownership. Which comes out to September of 2007. I'm pretty sure Loria took over in Feb 2002.
September 29, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting.
September 29, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks.
September 29, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks. It doesn't make sense, but it is what it is.
September 29, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks. It doesn't make sense, but it is what it is. Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes.
September 30, 200619 yr Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. The sooner a stadium is constructed, the sooner ownership is selling naming rights, advertising on everything from cupholders to the jumbotron, getting 70% of the net on concessions, keeping 100% of the clubseat and skybox revenue, etc. $15 million dollars in the grand scheme of things is simply chump change.
September 30, 200619 yr Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. The sooner a stadium is constructed, the sooner ownership is selling naming rights, advertising on everything from cupholders to the jumbotron, getting 70% of the net on concessions, keeping 100% of the clubseat and skybox revenue, etc. $15 million dollars in the grand scheme of things is simply chump change. MAYBE-but, since Loria has no intention (IMO) of paying for any construction increases, and nothing in his MO should make anyone think differently, even the most ardent Loria supporters, I do not necessarily agree it costs him to wait, regardless of naming rights etc. Besides, he always thinks short term and the short term benefits him to wait. Dollars in his pocket now seem to be worth more to him than worrying about the long term issues.
September 30, 200619 yr Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. The sooner a stadium is constructed, the sooner ownership is selling naming rights, advertising on everything from cupholders to the jumbotron, getting 70% of the net on concessions, keeping 100% of the clubseat and skybox revenue, etc. $15 million dollars in the grand scheme of things is simply chump change. MAYBE-but, since Loria has no intention (IMO) of paying for any construction increases, and nothing in his MO should make anyone think differently, even the most ardent Loria supporters, I do not necessarily agree it costs him to wait, regardless of naming rights etc. Besides, he always thinks short term and the short term benefits him to wait. Dollars in his pocket now seem to be worth more to him than worrying about the long term issues. Loria will make much more money in the short term if a stadium is built ASAP, because as soon as any stadium deal is completed the value of the franchise nearly doubles to $500 million, easily. $500 million, stadium revenue (which we have little of now) and secure long term plan > $15 million, no stadium revenue, insecure future, plus increasing construction costs
September 30, 200619 yr Remember, the problem now is the revenue-sucking lease. economist Andrew Zimbalist reviewed the Florida Marlins' claim to have lost $34 million in their World Championship season of 1997. Zimbalist found that Marlins owner Wayne Huizenga, who also owned Pro Player Stadium through a different entity, attributed about $38 million of luxury suite, club seat, parking, concessions, advertising, and naming-rights revenues to the stadium rather than the team. Baseball Prospectus As I understand it, that is still the deal with the lease Henry and Loria inherited. With a new stadium and fair lease, a significant portion of the $38 million a year (in 1997 dollars, about $48.6 million today) would be falling into the Marlin's pockets. Since Loria has owned the team, and applying a CPI conversion, that portion of the lease has cost the Marlins about $227 million over Loria's five seasons.
September 30, 200619 yr Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. The sooner a stadium is constructed, the sooner ownership is selling naming rights, advertising on everything from cupholders to the jumbotron, getting 70% of the net on concessions, keeping 100% of the clubseat and skybox revenue, etc. $15 million dollars in the grand scheme of things is simply chump change. MAYBE-but, since Loria has no intention (IMO) of paying for any construction increases, and nothing in his MO should make anyone think differently, even the most ardent Loria supporters, I do not necessarily agree it costs him to wait, regardless of naming rights etc. Besides, he always thinks short term and the short term benefits him to wait. Dollars in his pocket now seem to be worth more to him than worrying about the long term issues. Loria will make much more money in the short term if a stadium is built ASAP, because as soon as any stadium deal is completed the value of the franchise nearly doubles to $500 million, easily. $500 million, stadium revenue (which we have little of now) and secure long term plan > $15 million, no stadium revenue, insecure future, plus increasing construction costs Quadruple Play, as you may remember back in the spring of '05 the funding gap of the proposed $420 million OB stadium was $30 million when the legislature said no to the tax rebate. Why do you think Loria didn't cover the $30 million gap if the additional $30 million investment would immediate double the value of the franchise? Note that I'm not arguing your assertion that the value of the franchise will double with a new stadium. I agree with you on that one.
September 30, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks. It doesn't make sense, but it is what it is. Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. You are wrong. It depends upon what the deal is. And there likely will be no deal here. SO it behooves him to grab what he can now. He'll take the sure dollars now, and he'll ask for whatever deal he thinks he needs form Miami or San Antonio, or whoever is dumb enough to give it to him. He won't be offering to cover the increases, and the chances of his staying here past 2010 are not looking good.
September 30, 200619 yr Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. The sooner a stadium is constructed, the sooner ownership is selling naming rights, advertising on everything from cupholders to the jumbotron, getting 70% of the net on concessions, keeping 100% of the clubseat and skybox revenue, etc. $15 million dollars in the grand scheme of things is simply chump change. MAYBE-but, since Loria has no intention (IMO) of paying for any construction increases, and nothing in his MO should make anyone think differently, even the most ardent Loria supporters, I do not necessarily agree it costs him to wait, regardless of naming rights etc. Besides, he always thinks short term and the short term benefits him to wait. Dollars in his pocket now seem to be worth more to him than worrying about the long term issues. Loria will make much more money in the short term if a stadium is built ASAP, because as soon as any stadium deal is completed the value of the franchise nearly doubles to $500 million, easily. $500 million, stadium revenue (which we have little of now) and secure long term plan > $15 million, no stadium revenue, insecure future, plus increasing construction costs Quadruple Play, as you may remember back in the spring of '05 the funding gap of the proposed $420 million OB stadium was $30 million when the legislature said no to the tax rebate. Why do you think Loria didn't cover the $30 million gap if the additional $30 million investment would immediate double the value of the franchise? Note that I'm not arguing your assertion that the value of the franchise will double with a new stadium. I agree with you on that one. A few reasons: It was no secret the Marlins and MLB weren't very "excited" about the lease the city of Miami put on the table. Reportedly it limited revenue from parking, concessions, and skyboxes, but it was a lot better than the lease at Dolphin Stadium and it secured the long term feasibility of the franchise in the South Florida and eventually the Latin American market. Another sticking point in the deal was who was going to control construction. Under the MOU the team was responsible for any penny the budget, failure to do so would result in the city foreclosing on the franchise. If the city of Miami had controlled the project they could have easily given the project to friendly enities and in a few years we would have had another Performing Arts Center/Metro Rail/Terminal at MIA situation on our hands. At Loria's and eventually the fanbase's expense. Under the OB deal the Marlins would have paid $30 million upfront and $5.4 million a year for 30 years ($162 million total) rent payments. For every million the project went over budget the team would pay $33,333.33 extra per year. An example: The stadium goes $50 million over budget, which was reasonably possible, rent would then increase to $7.06 million a year. Add $30 million to the team contribution and you have the ingredients for a financial disaster and we're at square one.....again. Sure the franchise would have doubled in value, but limited revenues from a lease at the OB combined with an overbudget project limits the team's ability to make and spend money on a yearly basis. (After all we all want the team to be able to afford a payroll of $85-90 million.) Such a crappy deal would have affected franchise value negatively as any incoming owner would have to pay off enormous amounts of debt. Lastly the last thing MLB wants to do after a stadium deal is completed down here is ever have to send another large revenue sharing check to a large market when there are markets that "need" or "deserve" the money more (smaller markets).
September 30, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks. It doesn't make sense, but it is what it is. Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. You are wrong. It depends upon what the deal is. And there likely will be no deal here. SO it behooves him to grab what he can now. He'll take the sure dollars now, and he'll ask for whatever deal he thinks he needs form Miami or San Antonio, or whoever is dumb enough to give it to him. He won't be offering to cover the increases, and the chances of his staying here past 2010 are not looking good. As rferry would say: JUST BECAUSE YOU REPEAT THE SAME THING AT NAUSEUM DOESN'T MAKE IT REMOTELY TRUE OR PLAUSIBLE.
October 1, 200619 yr It was no secret the Marlins and MLB weren't very "excited" about the lease the city of Miami put on the table. Reportedly it limited revenue from parking, concessions, and skyboxes, but it was a lot better than the lease at Dolphin Stadium and it secured the long term feasibility of the franchise in the South Florida and eventually the Latin American market. Were the concerns over these revenues (parking, concessions and skyboxes) related to the amount of revenues generated by the new stadium or were the concerns over the split of the revenues between the team, city and county? Another sticking point in the deal was who was going to control construction. Under the MOU the team was responsible for any penny the budget, failure to do so would result in the city foreclosing on the franchise. If the city of Miami had controlled the project they could have easily given the project to friendly enities and in a few years we would have had another Performing Arts Center/Metro Rail/Terminal at MIA situation on our hands. At Loria's and eventually the fanbase's expense. Under the OB deal the Marlins would have paid $30 million upfront and $5.4 million a year for 30 years ($162 million total) rent payments. For every million the project went over budget the team would pay $33,333.33 extra per year. An example: The stadium goes $50 million over budget, which was reasonably possible, rent would then increase to $7.06 million a year. Add $30 million to the team contribution and you have the ingredients for a financial disaster and we're at square one.....again. We disagree here. The control of the construction was not really an issue because all along the negotiation process Loria guaranteed the cost overruns as long as he controlled the construction and the city and county gave him the control. The hang-up on this issue, as I recall, was Loria's unwillingness to provide a Letter of Credit guaranteeing the cost overruns. After more than a year of zero movement on this issue I believe the issue was finally resolved when Loria used the team as collateral to guarantee the overruns. Given that the cost estimates were Loria's own estimate and given that Loria would control the construction I don't see why he would be so concerned over cost overruns unless his own estimate was a bogus one (as in the case of San Antonio stadium).
October 1, 200619 yr Can anyone shed some info on this matter. Does this add more fuel to the City of Miami Stadium front? Does anyone know the date on which MLB "forgives" $15 million of Loria's interest-free debt to MLB? It's only interest free if the Marlins fail to have a new stadium in place by a certain date(which I believe is Feb. 2007). It's more than $15 million. The terms call for a $15 milion forgiveness, PLUS forgiveness of interest on the entire 38 miliion loan......worth another $20 Million, PLUS a 20% interest due MLB on the first 5 years operating profit on the new stadium .......Worth another around $15 Million . So, the bottom line is it behooves Loria to wait until next spring to have a dea. He makes roughly another $50 Million simply by waiting. Meanwhile construction costs go up another $80 million and opening day is pushed back to 2011 leaving no margin for error... Explain to me how that makes sense? Thanks. It doesn't make sense, but it is what it is. Yeah a half assed conspiracy theory that makes no sense where it counts most......Loria's pocketbook. Why has Loria and the team been campaigning for a stadium since the post 2003 championship season? Under your conspiracy theory the campaigning should have started this offseason. The faster a deal is put in place the more money Loria saves and the more money he makes. You are wrong. It depends upon what the deal is. And there likely will be no deal here. SO it behooves him to grab what he can now. He'll take the sure dollars now, and he'll ask for whatever deal he thinks he needs form Miami or San Antonio, or whoever is dumb enough to give it to him. He won't be offering to cover the increases, and the chances of his staying here past 2010 are not looking good. As rferry would say: JUST BECAUSE YOU REPEAT THE SAME THING AT NAUSEUM DOESN'T MAKE IT REMOTELY TRUE OR PLAUSIBLE. But it is made plausible by the fact that I am able to support my position with facts and logic, whereas your empty "response" does not constitute a rebuttal, which is a pretty firm indication that you don't know what you're talking about.
October 1, 200619 yr It was no secret the Marlins and MLB weren't very "excited" about the lease the city of Miami put on the table. Reportedly it limited revenue from parking, concessions, and skyboxes, but it was a lot better than the lease at Dolphin Stadium and it secured the long term feasibility of the franchise in the South Florida and eventually the Latin American market. Were the concerns over these revenues (parking, concessions and skyboxes) related to the amount of revenues generated by the new stadium or were the concerns over the split of the revenues between the team, city and county? Another sticking point in the deal was who was going to control construction. Under the MOU the team was responsible for any penny the budget, failure to do so would result in the city foreclosing on the franchise. If the city of Miami had controlled the project they could have easily given the project to friendly enities and in a few years we would have had another Performing Arts Center/Metro Rail/Terminal at MIA situation on our hands. At Loria's and eventually the fanbase's expense. Under the OB deal the Marlins would have paid $30 million upfront and $5.4 million a year for 30 years ($162 million total) rent payments. For every million the project went over budget the team would pay $33,333.33 extra per year. An example: The stadium goes $50 million over budget, which was reasonably possible, rent would then increase to $7.06 million a year. Add $30 million to the team contribution and you have the ingredients for a financial disaster and we're at square one.....again. We disagree here. The control of the construction was not really an issue because all along the negotiation process Loria guaranteed the cost overruns as long as he controlled the construction and the city and county gave him the control. The hang-up on this issue, as I recall, was Loria's unwillingness to provide a Letter of Credit guaranteeing the cost overruns. After more than a year of zero movement on this issue I believe the issue was finally resolved when Loria used the team as collateral to guarantee the overruns. Given that the cost estimates were Loria's own estimate and given that Loria would control the construction I don't see why he would be so concerned over cost overruns unless his own estimate was a bogus one (as in the case of San Antonio stadium). To your first item, yes I believe the issue was the splitting of revenue. To the second item, I'm not sure but you may be correct. It's been so long, I'll have to go over the MOU tomorrow. I have it around here somewhere... CantCatchMe, You have yet to use a fact. Just half assed conspiracy theories. In the end, MLB has to approve a move and they've pretty much decided it's a lot more important to keep this team in Miami and paying alittle more than putting a team in much smaller markets in Portland or SA.
October 2, 200619 yr Polo, I read over the 2005 MOU and you are correct, the Marlins were going to control construction and development of the ballpark. My mistake.
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.