Angel Stadium deal is dead

[3pitchwalk]

maybe this leads to the angels leaving to somewhere else which leads to shedding themselves of whatever fucked up mojo it is that's shrouding over them.

[Robrock30]

I have been following this story from NY and I don't understand the drama here.  This deal is a win win for Angels and Anaheim tax revenue and development.  Just cut a deal for tax credits 80 - 20 tax abatement to provide low and moderate income housing and infrastructure and transportation improvements.  Cut a deal and everyone wins.  Makes too much sense.

[Taylor]

$10 says the same or similar deal will be drawn up when the new mayor is in office.

[Dollar Bill]

9 minutes ago, Robrock30 said:

I have been following this story from NY and I don't understand the drama here.  This deal is a win win for Angels and Anaheim tax revenue and development.  Just cut a deal for tax credits 80 - 20 tax abatement to provide low and moderate income housing and infrastructure and transportation improvements.  Cut a deal and everyone wins.  Makes too much sense.

That's pretty much what they did. But, when the opponents' concern is whether the Angels paid fair value for the land and then the FBI says the mayor gave the Angels the confidential city appraisal to use in negotiating against the city in the hopes of a million-dollar campaign contribution ...

[Robrock30]

2 hours ago, Dollar Bill said:

That's pretty much what they did. But, when the opponents' concern is whether the Angels paid fair value for the land and then the FBI says the mayor gave the Angels the confidential city appraisal to use in negotiating against the city in the hopes of a million-dollar campaign contribution ...

The appraisal process needs to be transparent not confidential to alleviate the appearance of a below market sweetheart deal. Should be open to public review and then shovels in the ground.  Perhaps appoint an above reproach Ex Mayor Mike Bloomberg who has overseen many of these deals to mediate.

[mmc]

 

[Jason]

1 hour ago, mmc said:

 

Paywalled

[jsnpritchett]

4 minutes ago, Jason said:

Paywalled

Pay.

[failos]

6 minutes ago, Jason said:

Paywalled

Read it in “reader mode” on your iPhone.

[Jason]

38 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Pay.

No thanks 

[Jason]

37 minutes ago, failos said:

Read it in “reader mode” on your iPhone.

I love you 

[jsnpritchett]

11 minutes ago, Jason said:

I love you 

Bill Shaikin does not love you, though.

[failos]

12 minutes ago, Jason said:

I love you 

Right back at you, amigo

[cals]

Frankly, the fact that Sidhu was busted for giving the Angels inside info in exchange for a million in campaign donations (the article didn’t say but I can’t imagine this actually occurred) coupled with the fact that the Angels aren’t going to litigate has the look that the Angels may have been involved in some shenanigans themselves, or we’re at least going along with Sidhu.  Hope not, but that’s the impression I’m getting.

[Dollar Bill]

On 5/28/2022 at 2:48 PM, jsnpritchett said:

Bill Shaikin does not love you, though.

He appreciates you and invites you to sign up for $1:

https://www.latimes.com/subscriptions/

[Docwaukee]

On 5/28/2022 at 4:14 PM, cals said:

Frankly, the fact that Sidhu was busted for giving the Angels inside info in exchange for a million in campaign donations (the article didn’t say but I can’t imagine this actually occurred) coupled with the fact that the Angels aren’t going to litigate has the look that the Angels may have been involved in some shenanigans themselves, or we’re at least going along with Sidhu.  Hope not, but that’s the impression I’m getting.

This 100%.  Also has me wondering if Arte basically knows his options and what the ultimate outcome is gonna be.  By not suing maybe it kinda mends fences with the city a bit with a chance to restart negotiations.  

Or...maybe Arte is looking to sell the team soon and doesn't want some messy stadium land deal lawsuit mucking up negotiations.  

What do you think the odds were that some arbitrator or judge would force the deal through even if the Angels did nothing wrong?  Am I incorrect in saying that really the most he could sue for or expect to win on would be for wasting his time.  And even then my guess is that he'd probably have to go after Sidhu personally and I'd bet his assets are locked up pretty hard right now considering the FBI is involved.  

[cals]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

This 100%.  Also has me wondering if Arte basically knows his options and what the ultimate outcome is gonna be.  By not suing maybe it kinda mends fences with the city a bit with a chance to restart negotiations.  

Or...maybe Arte is looking to sell the team soon and doesn't want some messy stadium land deal lawsuit mucking up negotiations.  

What do you think the odds were that some arbitrator or judge would force the deal through even if the Angels did nothing wrong?  Am I incorrect in saying that really the most he could sue for or expect to win on would be for wasting his time.  And even then my guess is that he'd probably have to go after Sidhu personally and I'd bet his assets are locked up pretty hard right now considering the FBI is involved.  

If Arte wanted to sue to enforce the contract (and he had completely “clean hands” in the deal), then he could try to force the sale per the terms of the contract.  Though I don’t know how far along this was, I assume the actual contract had been signed.  Then again you also get into real estate transaction law which has its own ins and outs beside that of pure contract law.  Generally, again if Arte had clean hands, then he could also find an alternative and sue for the cost difference assuming he attempted to mitigate his damages.  

That’s a real basic explanation and I’m not the guy to go beyond that, but my point is that if Arte was completely free of any bad behavior in the deal, knowing that he isn’t one to back away from litigation, then I think he would have sued to enforce the contract, especially if the terms are better than what he thinks he can expect be renegotiating.  He didn’t just agree to let Anaheim out of the deal because he’s a nice guy.  My money is on that it was a shady deal all around and they don’t want to risk that coming out by litigating.  Just my opinion, of course.

[Taylor]

Arte:

[Stradling]

I always thought that if the deal went through Arte would then look to sell the team.  Now I think there is a much better chance he sells the team rather than move the team.  Just the timeline of all of it and his age tells me that logically he is selling and not moving. 

He is 75, has a lease and options where he plays in the stadium, basically for free until he is close to 90 years old.  He has said in the past his kids aren’t fans of baseball, so he would sell rather than hand them the team.  So if he opts out in 7 years he is still 82 years old.  No city in California is going to fund a stadium.  There is zero chance he is going to spend half of his net worth the build his own stadium.  So that leaves one other option, moving it Vegas or some other city that will fund and build him a stadium.  But even if Vegas does build him a stadium, he isn’t going to devalue the team by going from the 2nd largest market to the 40th largest market.  

He is going to sell.  

[mmc]

48 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I always thought that if the deal went through Arte would then look to sell the team.  Now I think there is a much better chance he sells the team rather than move the team.  Just the timeline of all of it and his age tells me that logically he is selling and not moving. 

He is 75, has a lease and options where he plays in the stadium, basically for free until he is close to 90 years old.  He has said in the past his kids aren’t fans of baseball, so he would sell rather than hand them the team.  So if he opts out in 7 years he is still 82 years old.  No city in California is going to fund a stadium.  There is zero chance he is going to spend half of his net worth the build his own stadium.  So that leaves one other option, moving it Vegas or some other city that will fund and build him a stadium.  But even if Vegas does build him a stadium, he isn’t going to devalue the team by going from the 2nd largest market to the 40th largest market.  

He is going to sell.  

I don't think you can really say something that far out is a certainty

[Docwaukee]

45 minutes ago, Stradling said:

He is going to sell.  

I'm kinda getting that sense as well.  Having that stadium deal probably brought a nice chunk of additional value for him and my guess is that even if a new deal costs an additional 50 or 100 mil it still brings money to the franchise that he can turn around.  

I've never thought he'd wait around for this deal to get realized and his approach not to fight just confirms that for me.  Not because I think the org is completely innocent but more so that it would just invite two years of litigation.  

2 hours ago, cals said:

Generally, again if Arte had clean hands, then he could also find an alternative and sue for the cost difference assuming he attempted to mitigate his damages.

wondering if he just plays nice on this for now and then takes that opportunity after the deal is done.  Or leaves that opportunity for someone else.  Kinda playing out the scenarios here.  

Get a deal done.  Then sue.  COA claims the Angels got documents they shouldn't have.  Scapegoat claims he got the docs but never showed them to anyone and it didn't influence the deal.  Judge gets to decide.  Scapegoat get a golden parachute.   

[Stradling]

34 minutes ago, mmc said:

I don't think you can really say something that far out is a certainty

If he was in his 40’s or 50’s I’d agree with you, but he’s 75, doesn’t plan on leaving the team to his kids, and I can’t imagine wants to spend $1.5 billion on a stadium or devalue the franchise by moving it out of the market. I don’t see an alternative based on what we know about him. 

[cals]

Arte has shown he’s about as litigious as INO so if he thought he could save money and not bust himself, he’s be suing.  It’s that simple.

[Taylor]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

I always thought that if the deal went through Arte would then look to sell the team.  Now I think there is a much better chance he sells the team rather than move the team.  Just the timeline of all of it and his age tells me that logically he is selling and not moving. 

He is 75, has a lease and options where he plays in the stadium, basically for free until he is close to 90 years old.  He has said in the past his kids aren’t fans of baseball, so he would sell rather than hand them the team.  So if he opts out in 7 years he is still 82 years old.  No city in California is going to fund a stadium.  There is zero chance he is going to spend half of his net worth the build his own stadium.  So that leaves one other option, moving it Vegas or some other city that will fund and build him a stadium.  But even if Vegas does build him a stadium, he isn’t going to devalue the team by going from the 2nd largest market to the 40th largest market.  

He is going to sell.  

[UndertheHalo]

I think the chances of moving out of Southern California are pretty remote.  They’ll work something out with the city of Anaheim most likely.  It makes the most sense for everyone. Not just the Angels it also makes sense for Anaheim.  

Edited May 30, 2022 by UndertheHalo