NFL Denver to be sold in 2022 for $4B? Will NFL relax debt limit? UPD Walton group to purchase for $4.65B

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,615
19,591
Sin City

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,615
19,591
Sin City
Bezos was mentioned in article as one of a handful of folks who could come in and just pay for it, not having to have any debt.
 

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,615
19,591
Sin City
There's reason for NFL to fear Jeff Bezos. But it's not big enough to keep him out, especially if London is in play

If you’re commissioner Roger Goodell, you sell Bezos on being the man who will revolutionize the reach of the league rather than just another owner like everyo...


Bezo's worth about $200B, more than the major stakeholders of the 32 NFL teams combined.

And given Amazon as a business partner, pretty much he can write his own way.

But will he leverage his fortune to help the NFL to achieve its dreams?
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,705
17,088
Mulberry Street

If bidding gets really serious, they could top the record set by Walter & Co last week with the Chelsea sale.

I'm not sure how Harris is bidding. NFL rules state you can't own a team if you have ownership in teams in the other big 3 leagues that aren't located in the same city. Guessing he does what Kroenke did w the Avs/Nuggets and puts the team in his wife name or something along the lines of that.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,207
3,440
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
NFL rules state you can't own a team if you have ownership in teams in the other big 3 leagues that aren't located in the same city. Guessing he does what Kroenke did w the Avs/Nuggets and puts the team in his wife name or something along the lines of that.

Not quite. The rule was (possibly still is) that NFL owners can't own teams in other sports in another NFL owner's market. The Seattle Seahawks owner Paul Allen (now his estate) owning the Portland Trailblazers is totally fine; but Kroenke owning the St. Louis Rams, and the Nuggets/Avs in Denver was not.

They had the rule because NFL/MLB teams shared multipurpose stadiums A LOT, so if -- For Example (I'm not looking up ACTUAL lease details here) -- the owner of the Cleveland Browns buying the Cincinnati Reds or Pittsburgh Pirates might let them set the price on the rent of the Cincinnati Bengals or Pittsburgh Steelers; Or even allow the Browns owner to evict another NFL team from the stadium. The rule was meant to prevent THAT kind of shenanigans.

That's why the NFL really didn't care about Kroenke's WIFE owning the Avs/Nuggets: There's no chance of meddling in lease stuff. They compete for fans, sure, but even though they're two different people, it's not like the Kroenkes can't easily work in cahoots when they're husband and wife. But there's really no damage to be done.

They technically still HAVE the rule, but it's "relaxed" because the number of teams sharing stadiums with MLB/NBA teams (the New Orleans Jazz is why the rule includes NBA/NHL) has dropped.

From 1960-2016, 23 NFL teams shared stadiums with MLB/NBA at one point. But by 2003, it was down to FOUR. And now it's at ZERO.
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,705
17,088
Mulberry Street
Not quite. The rule was (possibly still is) that NFL owners can't own teams in other sports in another NFL owner's market. The Seattle Seahawks owner Paul Allen (now his estate) owning the Portland Trailblazers is totally fine; but Kroenke owning the St. Louis Rams, and the Nuggets/Avs in Denver was not.

They had the rule because NFL/MLB teams shared multipurpose stadiums A LOT, so if -- For Example (I'm not looking up ACTUAL lease details here) -- the owner of the Cleveland Browns buying the Cincinnati Reds or Pittsburgh Pirates might let them set the price on the rent of the Cincinnati Bengals or Pittsburgh Steelers; Or even allow the Browns owner to evict another NFL team from the stadium. The rule was meant to prevent THAT kind of shenanigans.

That's why the NFL really didn't care about Kroenke's WIFE owning the Avs/Nuggets: There's no chance of meddling in lease stuff. They compete for fans, sure, but even though they're two different people, it's not like the Kroenkes can't easily work in cahoots when they're husband and wife. But there's really no damage to be done.

They technically still HAVE the rule, but it's "relaxed" because the number of teams sharing stadiums with MLB/NBA teams (the New Orleans Jazz is why the rule includes NBA/NHL) has dropped.

From 1960-2016, 23 NFL teams shared stadiums with MLB/NBA at one point. But by 2003, it was down to FOUR. And now it's at ZERO.

Correct, I forgot the nitty gritty of it.
I think they repealed that rule not long ago.

You might be right cause Harris owns the 76ers/Devils so it wouldn't make any sense to be bidding.


Unless he does what I mentioned before and has his wife be the "owner"
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,545
5,150
Brooklyn

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,615
19,591
Sin City
Paywall

The Athletic is reporting that there are 4 remaining bidders. and there will be a bit of an "auction" on Monday (today). NO FAVORITES.

Walmart heir may be the top bidder at $4.5B.

The groups, as first reported by 9News, are led by Walmart heir Rob Walton, Philadelphia 76ers and New Jersey Devils owner Josh Harris, private equity firm founder Jose E. Feliciano and Mat Ishbia, another private equity firm billionaire who was a reserve on the 2000 Michigan State men’s basketball team that captured a national championship.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
26,195
9,757
Paywall

The Athletic is reporting that there are 4 remaining bidders. and there will be a bit of an "auction" on Monday (today). NO FAVORITES.

Walmart heir may be the top bidder at $4.5B.
This sets the bar for what the Seahawks will go for assuming that the reports are correct that the sports teams need to be sold.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,207
3,440
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Honestly, only $4.5 billion for an NFL team is a bargain.

I know Forbes has their methods, but NFL teams get sold so rarely (10 in the last 25 years) that if you want to get into the NFL, you pretty much have to blow the Forbes value out of the water.

A third of the league has been owned by one family since either the 1930s, or the franchises' entire existence. And 17 teams last "ownership change" was within a family due to death and not the team going up for sale.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
26,195
9,757
Honestly, only $4.5 billion for an NFL team is a bargain.

I know Forbes has their methods, but NFL teams get sold so rarely (10 in the last 25 years) that if you want to get into the NFL, you pretty much have to blow the Forbes value out of the water.

A third of the league has been owned by one family since either the 1930s, or the franchises' entire existence. And 17 teams last "ownership change" was within a family due to death and not the team going up for sale.
That’s one thing that may change in the nfl moving forward. These teams have been owned by the same family but when the patriarch/matriarch passes does the family have the money from non football sources to cover the inheritance tax now that teams are work $4.5 bill plus?

Like with the raiders the Savis family doesn’t have anything that makes them money outside the raiders. So when Al’s widow passes, I don’t see mark securing the funds to cover the taxes.

Same goes for some of those older families. Be it the Bears, Lions, etc.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,207
3,440
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
That’s one thing that may change in the nfl moving forward. These teams have been owned by the same family but when the patriarch/matriarch passes does the family have the money from non football sources to cover the inheritance tax now that teams are work $4.5 bill plus?

Like with the raiders the Savis family doesn’t have anything that makes them money outside the raiders. So when Al’s widow passes, I don’t see mark securing the funds to cover the taxes.

Same goes for some of those older families. Be it the Bears, Lions, etc.

Yeah, I'd think that the NFL will absolutely adjust policies so that the tax can be covered. I don't think there's much problem getting a loan to cover the tax when the bank can see the Raiders are bringing in $400 million in revenue every season, so the loan will get paid back. They just need the NFL to allow the debt on that loan to approve the transfer from Carol to Mark.

We can see the debt isn't a big deal because the Yankees added like $500 million in debt when they opened their new stadium. They paid it off in like 5 years or less, because the Yankees generate $150 million in profit every year. No big deal. (The Mets opened their stadium at the same time, and they sold the naming rights to cover the debt).

The NFL policies are made by the owners, and it's like all of them in this situation, so they'll probably adjust the policy the second one of them gets an inheritance tax bill larger than the NFL max debt.
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,705
17,088
Mulberry Street
Yeah, I'd think that the NFL will absolutely adjust policies so that the tax can be covered. I don't think there's much problem getting a loan to cover the tax when the bank can see the Raiders are bringing in $400 million in revenue every season, so the loan will get paid back. They just need the NFL to allow the debt on that loan to approve the transfer from Carol to Mark.

We can see the debt isn't a big deal because the Yankees added like $500 million in debt when they opened their new stadium. They paid it off in like 5 years or less, because the Yankees generate $150 million in profit every year. No big deal. (The Mets opened their stadium at the same time, and they sold the naming rights to cover the debt).

The NFL policies are made by the owners, and it's like all of them in this situation, so they'll probably adjust the policy the second one of them gets an inheritance tax bill larger than the NFL max debt.

They pretty much already did.

 

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,615
19,591
Sin City

blueandgoldguy

Registered User
Oct 8, 2010
5,294
2,566
Greg's River Heights
With a typical NFL franchise now being worth well over $3 billion (and $4 billion + for a top-10 team like the Broncos), I don't know there are so many people in southern Ontario who actually think a team will ever relocate there or the region will receive an expansion team. It would cost around minimum $6 million Cndn. to secure a team and a stadium.
 

tank44

Registered User
Feb 1, 2012
646
168
Seattle, WA
With a typical NFL franchise now being worth well over $3 billion (and $4 billion + for a top-10 team like the Broncos), I don't know there are so many people in southern Ontario who actually think a team will ever relocate there or the region will receive an expansion team. It would cost around minimum $6 million Cndn. to secure a team and a stadium.
This price tag alone basically takes away most remaining US Markets for a NFL team. I don't see San Antonio or St Louis or really anyone else pony up that kind of money espeically when public funding likely needed.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad