| "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994836] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 15:45 |
|
Lerners get the Nationals
Citing a preference for a family-centered ownership group, Major League
Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig announced yesterday that the league
will sell the Washington Nationals to an investment team led by
Bethesda-based real-estate developer Theodore N. Lerner and his son,
Mark.
at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060504-123346-1322r.htm
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994837 ] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 15:52 |
|
That sound you hear is the MLB owners reaching deep into the pockets of DC
taxpayers. If the new owners had to finance a stadium, the Nationals would
have sold for $50 million.
<yared22311 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1146750326.097766.232950 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> Lerners get the Nationals
> Citing a preference for a family-centered ownership group, Major League
> Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig announced yesterday that the league
> will sell the Washington Nationals to an investment team led by
> Bethesda-based real-estate developer Theodore N. Lerner and his son,
> Mark.
> at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060504-123346-1322r.htm
>
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994840 ] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 17:12 |
|
> yared22311 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Lerners get the Nationals
> Citing a preference for a family-centered ownership group, Major
> League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig announced yesterday that the
> league will sell the Washington Nationals to an investment team led by
> Bethesda-based real-estate developer Theodore N. Lerner and his son,
> Mark.
> at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060504-123346-1322r.htm
I wonder if the Lerners, that coveted "family-centered" group, also
happened to coincidentally be the highest bidder and have the deepest
pockets? MLB is so warm-and-fuzzy in these things and is never
motivated by money, ya know.
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994853 ] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 20:22 |
|
MLB "capped" the bidding at a set figure. All of the groups,
therefore, were going to pay the same amount no matter who won. MLB
didn't go to a "highest bidder" takes all approach because they also
wanted to make sure that they had an ownership group that would fit in
to the Club (and not be another Angelos or Steinbrennner).
Does the Lerner group have the deepest pockets? Perhaps, but as the
Twins show, having the deepest pockets doesn't mean anything if the
owner also has short arms. The owner of the Twins is worth 2.8
billion dollars. The real question is whether the Lerner's will spend
their money on the team. I suspect that they will and I suspect that
the first thing that they will do is get involved with development in
and around the stadium and I would not be shocked if they put some
"real" money into the Stadium area to take care of perceived shortages.
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994854 ] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 20:33 |
|
Spare us this pious bullshit about the warm and fuzzy concern for the DC and
the Nationals. If MLB really wanted to do the right thing for DC, they would
have sold the Nationals for $1 and required the new ownership to build the
stadium instead of the DC taxpayers.
It would be interesting to see if Selig as a former owner gets any of the
profits from the sale. Any decent lawyer could put a clause in Brewers sale
contract saying the Nationals loot belongs to Selig.
"David the Nationals Fan" <davidthenatfan [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1146766946.558244.147700 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> MLB "capped" the bidding at a set figure. All of the groups,
> therefore, were going to pay the same amount no matter who won. MLB
> didn't go to a "highest bidder" takes all approach because they also
> wanted to make sure that they had an ownership group that would fit in
> to the Club (and not be another Angelos or Steinbrennner).
>
> Does the Lerner group have the deepest pockets? Perhaps, but as the
> Twins show, having the deepest pockets doesn't mean anything if the
> owner also has short arms. The owner of the Twins is worth 2.8
> billion dollars. The real question is whether the Lerner's will spend
> their money on the team. I suspect that they will and I suspect that
> the first thing that they will do is get involved with development in
> and around the stadium and I would not be shocked if they put some
> "real" money into the Stadium area to take care of perceived shortages.
>
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994856 ] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 21:48 |
|
sfb wrote:
> Spare us this pious bullshit about the warm and fuzzy concern for the DC and
> the Nationals. If MLB really wanted to do the right thing for DC, they would
> have sold the Nationals for $1 and required the new ownership to build the
> stadium instead of the DC taxpayers.
Yes. But that was never going to happen. MLB ownership has made it
their paramount goal that they will never again have to pay for the
place where they conduct their own business. They are willing to
strangle good and viable markets (like Minneapolis-St. Paul and Miami)
to avoid doing this. (That's the real problem in Miami and Minnesota.
They don't want to admit an owner who will be willing to build some or
all of the Stadium, and so they are doing their best to give the
taxpayers a choice of no team or a stadium. And to do that they are
destroying the teams.) That's a reality of life. And, of course, as
I wrote, the decision was both about money and about admitting to the
Club someone that they wanted as part of the Club and not necessarily
the highest bidder. In the long term, a compliant owner may be better
for the other owners.
As it is, at least the Nationals may have an owner that will pitch in
something toward the Stadium area generally and will not be in it for
the short term and for the purpose of looting the team and the City.
That would be the concern about some of the bidders, particularly those
that were perceived, fairly or not, of doing this in Seattle. When
examining an issue, you have to look at the range of things that COULD
happen in reality, not the range of things that could happen in an
overheated and delusional mind. And in the range of things that COULD
happen, this was just about the most positive end of the scale.
> It would be interesting to see if Selig as a former owner gets any of the
> profits from the sale. Any decent lawyer could put a clause in Brewers sale
> contract saying the Nationals loot belongs to Selig.
I really don't care. I think he's a lousy Commissioner who has no real
interest in doing anything other than making the owners rich. And
he's going to be well compensated for this. But he doesn't really need
any more money at this point in his life.
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #994887 ] |
Fri, 05 May 2006 10:15 |
|
yared22311 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Lerners get the Nationals
> Citing a preference for a family-centered ownership group, Major League
> Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig announced yesterday that the league
> will sell the Washington Nationals to an investment team led by
> Bethesda-based real-estate developer Theodore N. Lerner and his son,
> Mark.
> at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060504-123346-1322r.htm
Sounds like a Halachically sweet surname to me!ehehe Realto appears to
be slipping! LOL! Yep, a quick Google finds the Lerner family as chair
on the Charles E. Smith Jewish Day School in Rockville, MD, and having
donated to a gazllion other Jewish orgs. The Lerners are also partners
in Chelsea Piers, a 30-acre sports and entertainment complex located on
the Hudson River in NYC. You know, that "sports capital city" of the
world!ehe The son-in-laws/partners are also sweet: Tanenbaum & Cohen!eh
Realto just PLOTZED!eh Realto, wherever you turn, so shall be the Jew!
eh So you better get used to it! eh -D, NYC "I'm a spiritual person,
I'm an American, I'm a Jew, and all of those things influence every
breath I take, everywhere I go" - MANDY PATINKIN.."I am just a plain
Jew; I mean I have no training" eh - BEBE NEUWIRTH.."Our forces saved
the remnants of the Jewish people of Europe for a new life and a new
hope in the reborn land of Israel. Along with all men of good will, I
salute the young state and wish it well. - DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER.."If
you elect me the first Jewish justice of the peace, I'll reduce the
speed limits to 54.95!" eh - KINKY FRIEDMAN & THE TEXAS JEWBOYS.."What
I took back, because of my exposure to the Jewish music of the 30s and
the 40s in my upbringing with my father, was that kind of theatrical
songwriting. It was always a part of my character. This desire to make
people laugh - PETE TOWNSHEND.."I'm Catholic, he's Jewish, and it was
just easier to elope" eh - MARG HELGENBERGER
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #1005149 ] |
Fri, 05 May 2006 20:35 |
|
David the Nationals Fan <davidthenatfan [at] yahoo.com> trolled:
> sfb wrote:
Please do not respond to top-posters.
|
|
|
| Re: "Lerners get the Nationals" [message #1005151 ] |
Fri, 05 May 2006 20:58 |
|
> David the Nationals Fan wrote:
> > sfb wrote:
> > Spare us this pious bullshit about the warm and fuzzy concern for
> > the DC and the Nationals. If MLB really wanted to do the right
> > thing for DC, they would have sold the Nationals for $1 and
> > required the new ownership to build the stadium instead of the DC
> > taxpayers.
>
> Yes. But that was never going to happen. MLB ownership has made it
> their paramount goal that they will never again have to pay for the
> place where they conduct their own business. They are willing to
> strangle good and viable markets (like Minneapolis-St. Paul and Miami)
> to avoid doing this. (That's the real problem in Miami and Minnesota.
> They don't want to admit an owner who will be willing to build some
> or all of the Stadium, and so they are doing their best to give the
> taxpayers a choice of no team or a stadium. And to do that they are
> destroying the teams.)
I agree with all of that. I wish that fans would wake up say "Fine,
take your team(s) and go pound salt.", but I know that ain't happening,
either.
|
|
|
