Skip to content

AEG buyer will likely inherit L.A. stadium effort

File of the logo of Anschutz Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of the Anschutz Company, is seen in Los Angeles Reuters

On the surface, the decision of Philip Anschutz, billionaire (he owns a mansion und a yacht), to sell AEG throws a potential wrench into the company’s efforts to build a new stadium in downtown L.A.

But even if the new owner isn’t inclined to build and own a football stadium, it will be too late for the new owner to do anything about it — other than perhaps sell the football stadium.  Per a source with knowledge of the situation, if/when the L.A. City Council gives final blessing to the project during a September 28 meeting, AEG won’t be able to pull the plug.

At that point, the only thing that will stop the stadium from being built is a lawsuit that derails the project (all lawsuits attacking the project must be filed within 30 days and resolved within 175 days of city council approval) or the inability to attract a team to play in it.

Theoretically, the new owner could drive such a hard bargain with the league that it keeps a team from coming to L.A., but the reality is that, by the time a buyer has been identified and the sale is closed, it could be too late for the buyer to do anything to stop the stadium drive — especially if the pro-stadium forces within AEG now accelerate the efforts to lure a team to L.A.

So, basically, the only folks who should be interested in buying AEG are those who buy in to the L.A. stadium project.

Permalink 38 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Buffalo Bills, Jacksonville Jaguars, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
38 Responses to “AEG buyer will likely inherit L.A. stadium effort”
  1. mikealstott says: Sep 19, 2012 6:43 PM

    Who will move to LA?

    Thumbs up = Tampa Bay
    Thumbs down = Oakland

  2. mazblast says: Sep 19, 2012 6:50 PM

    Couldn’t someone file a lawssuit challenging the 30-day and 175-day limits stated in the article? Then, when they lose that suit, sue again? After all, perpetual litigation is the American way, particularly in California.

    I can see it now–A suit is filed challenging the construction of the stadium on the grounds that there’s no tenant, and all the possible tenants refusing to make a move on the grounds that there’s no stadium deal. Gridlock that rivals the 405.

  3. apbabyjesus28 says: Sep 19, 2012 6:51 PM

    They dont deserve a team. And after all the years of talk about my Vikings moving there, I hope they never get a team. Suck it LA (and Packer fans who wanted them to move). My team might be rebuilding. But at least i have a team.

  4. dougydougdoug says: Sep 19, 2012 6:52 PM

    Still won’t matter. LA isn’t going to have an NFL team for at least another generation. The leverage the league maintains over every other city, because of the open slot(s) in LA, can’t be overstated.

    Just ask the poor souls in Minnesota who overreacted to just the rumor that their sub-par franchise would leave for greener pastures.

    With TV revenue sharing, its moot whether there is a team in LA or not. The LA residents who all root for their hometown teams, already watch the games on Sunday, as it is.

    Unlike places like small market towns, who don’t have much imported tourist money, that simply isn’t an issue in Los Angeles. LA doesn’t need a SuperBowl. There is almost 100% occupancy in all the hotels 365-days a year.

  5. natelan69 says: Sep 19, 2012 6:53 PM

    I think this is good news as a Chargers fan…?

  6. echech88 says: Sep 19, 2012 6:55 PM

    I would imagine the potential for NFL ownership, Superbowls at Farmers Field/LA Live etc. would actually heighten the value of AEG instead of be something that would push away a new owner.

    If you are buying AEG, you are already getting the LA Kings, LA Galaxy, part of the Lakers, Staples Center….to want these but then be turned off by the NFL wouldn’t make much sense.

  7. kaferwerks says: Sep 19, 2012 7:09 PM

    i dont really support a team in LA. if a team HAD to move there, the only one that would make sense would be the raiders. there are 3 cali teams and 2 of them are 12 miles apart (49ers and Raiders) do we really need two franchises that close? not to mention it would cut down on 9er/raider fan violence

  8. lafan101 says: Sep 19, 2012 7:09 PM

    Dodgers new owners at Guggenheim are going to bid for AEG according to the Wall Street Journal. Does that mean the new L.A. football stadium could be built next to Dodger Stadium?

  9. dougydougdoug says: Sep 19, 2012 7:13 PM

    mikealstott: No one wants the Raiders back here. Their only LA fans are all in county lockup, so they wouldn’t be able to attend the games anyway.

  10. jimmylions says: Sep 19, 2012 7:19 PM

    The LA Times is speculating that Los Angeles zillionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong (made his money in health care and is one of the partners who owns the Lakers), will probably purchase AEG. The Times further speculates that Soon-Shiong has already met with Goodell to talk about purchasing the Chargers and has Goodell’s blessing.

    The Times went so far as to guess that the Chargers will be owned by Soon-Shiong as early as this spring.

    Apparently the story is that Philip Anschutz (who I’m guessing is the “A” in AEG), has been willing to let people talk him into being looking at NFL deals for Los Angeles, but isn’t really much of a football fan. Also, he’d rather hang out at his home in Colorado than in LA.

    Thus it makes sense for Anschutz to sell AEG and let the new owner take over the sports properties and the acquisition of the NFL team.

  11. trevor123698 says: Sep 19, 2012 7:30 PM

    a team in LA will never win because the fans are clueless clowns. The city will also hold the players back from their potential. Look up what Mike Tyson said about the type of bloodsuckers that live there.

  12. duluthvikesfan says: Sep 19, 2012 7:36 PM

    I hate to see any team leave a community but the Chargers are starting to look like the logical team. Been in need of a stadium deal longer than any other team and ticket sales this year are not great yet no one seems to care. Plus, the fact that the team wouldn’t have to move far allows the “sting” of the team being relocated to be lessened. Don’t get me wrong, I want the Chargers (and every other team) to stay where they are. LA has had its chance and I don’t think they should get a team again!

  13. rajbais says: Sep 19, 2012 7:37 PM

    He Will probably do a better job than Philip Anschutz!!!!

    I’m sure that this guy knows that you cannot buy a franchise piece at a discount!!!

    Whoever it is needs to shut up and let the possible moving team have the majority of its way as much as possible!!!!!

  14. upperdecker19 says: Sep 19, 2012 7:43 PM

    Most of us NFL fans in SoCal are more excited at the prospect of a team playing for a year or two at the Rose Bowl (tailgating), than we are about the new stadium project. The new stadium is for corporate yutz’ to overpay for suites, etc. and do whatever they do at games besides watch.

  15. billybatty says: Sep 19, 2012 7:57 PM

    There will be a team in London by the time this bull gets sorted out.

  16. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 19, 2012 7:58 PM

    mikealstott says: “Who will move to LA? . . . Thumbs up = Tampa Bay . . . Thumbs down = Oakland”

    c. None of the Above

    Still holding out for the Rams.

  17. villa41 says: Sep 19, 2012 8:00 PM

    The only team going to LA is the Dolts. The team is a fradulent 2-0, but it’s 2-0 nonetheless. You would think even a town full of frontrunners, like San Diego, would be able to fill up that putrid stadium but there’s a scramble every week to sell out in order to avoid a black out. Oh, and I do mean putrid. It’s a known fact the air over metropolitan San Diego is often foul. There are news accounts to back this up. A simple internet search will verify this.

  18. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 19, 2012 8:08 PM

    kaferwerks says: i dont really support a team in LA. if a team HAD to move there, the only one that would make sense would be the raiders. there are 3 cali teams and 2 of them are 12 miles apart (49ers and Raiders) do we really need two franchises that close? not to mention it would cut down on 9er/raider fan violence

    Those two teams you’re citing are going to be about 40 miles (and a cultural world)apart in a short couple of seasons.

    Also, we don’t want the Raiders here. Neither does the NFL; the League needs whatever team that lands here to be successful, both on and off the field. It has to win, and it has to have a positive broadly marketable image . I do not — I promise — say this to poke Raider fans, but that team does not fulfill either requirement.

  19. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 19, 2012 8:10 PM

    trevor123698 says: a team in LA will never win because the fans are clueless clowns. The city will also hold the players back from their potential. Look up what Mike Tyson said about the type of bloodsuckers that live there.

    You’re citing Mike Tyson and you expect to be taken seriously?

  20. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 19, 2012 8:13 PM

    duluthvikesfan says: I hate to see any team leave a community . . . I want the Chargers (and every other team) to stay where they are. LA has had its chance and I don’t think they should get a team again!

    Baltimore “had its chance”
    Cleveland “had its chance”
    St. Louis “had its chance”

    Should they have not gotten teams again?

  21. dougydougdoug says: Sep 19, 2012 8:18 PM

    House41:

    As always, you’re incorrect about everything your mom types for you on these boards. Do you feed her the same skunky Bud Light that you and your “Nation” friends drink to drown out your sorrows?

  22. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 19, 2012 8:19 PM

    villa41 says: You would think even a town full of frontrunners, like San Diego, would be able to fill up that putrid stadium but there’s a scramble every week to sell out in order to avoid a black out. Oh, and I do mean putrid. It’s a known fact the air over metropolitan San Diego is often foul. There are news accounts to back this up. A simple internet search will verify this.

    Huh. Funny, I drive down to San Diego with some regularity, and it’s always been nice when I’ve been there. Been to a few Chargers games at the Murph, too. Sure, it’s not Jerruh’s football palace, but I’ve never had bad experience there (except of course, when the team I was there to see lost to the Chargers).

    Are you sure you’ve been there recently? Perhaps you’ve confused it with some other city.

  23. villa41 says: Sep 19, 2012 8:42 PM

    NoHomeTeam says:Sep 19, 2012 8:19 PM
    —————————————————-

    I’ve been to San Diego many times. Sometimes I’m there as part of the one and only real Nation that makes itself right at home when the so called Dolt “fans” sell us all their tickets, and other times I’m there on business.

    One time I stayed, on the company dime, at the Coronado. I can verify first hand the area literally stinks. I opened the doors to my oceanfront room expecting a refreshing breeze before I headed off to a long day of meetings, but I got something I didn’t expect. That something was the rancid smell of raw sewage. It was obvious there was illegal dumping of toxic waste near the hotel and in the Pacific. What a shame for the hotel and city in general.

  24. jimmylions says: Sep 19, 2012 8:43 PM

    LA Stations still carry the Raider preseason games, and the Raiders still have a huge following in Metroplitan LA. Likewise, there’s still a lot of Rams fans here.

    If they ever relocated to Irwindale (remember when Al Davis got Irwindale to give him money for no reason?), they’d sell out every game.

    The Chargers seem to be bigger in Orange County than LA, but that will change when they start playing in downtown.

  25. redstar504 says: Sep 19, 2012 8:48 PM

    @apbabyjesus28
    It isn’t so much about them deserving a team as it is about the money. LA is the 2nd biggest media market on the books, off the books it’s probably the largest. It just makes money sense to put not just one team there but two teams.

    As far as supporting them I will give them a pass. They had the Raiders and Rams the Rams were loosing a lot prior to the move to STL and the Raiders are the Raiders they tend to draw a different breed of fan (that’s not a knock I love Raiders fans).

    The Raiders are a great fit there since they got snubbed out of the 49ers new diggs. They have a strong base in the market all ready but to really make it work the NFL needs to put a new team there, LA loves all things fresh and new right?

    If the league expands that could also allow for a city like San Antonio to get a team or heck even OKC given the tremendous success the Thunder have had there.
    LA is a great idea but at the end of the day they need to get a team via expansion for it to really work.

    It’s not the best football town but it’s full of cash the NFL would love to get its hands on.

  26. whatchutalkinabouthillis says: Sep 19, 2012 8:50 PM

    It seems like AEG would want to hold off the hearing if they were interested in finding a buyer. I wouldn’t think it would be easy to find a buyer who is going to be forces to endure a relocation effort. If they wait, AEG will get their money, won’t have to wait to find a buyer, and the new buyer will have to tangle with any legal issues.

  27. dougydougdoug says: Sep 19, 2012 9:45 PM

    redstar504:

    You’re still missing the crucial point. The league’s TV revenue sharing makes the local LA TV market a rather moot point. The NFL ratings are ALREADY sky-high in Los Angeles county, and all 32-owners get their cuts of that revenue. That same revenue sharing allows Green Bay to coexist in the same league as the New York Giants. I’m sure you already understand that, but it really is the reason LA has not needed a team in all this long time.

    As for the Raiders & Rams. The Raiders failed to succeed (financially) down here before, despite the (seemingly) fanatical base. That fanatical base is as fair-weathered as any in CA, despite what trolls like House41 would have you believe. The TV demographics prove such, as the Raiders are essentially shut out of CBS broadcasts in Los Angeles, in favor of the (gasp) San Diego Chargers. It didn’t used to be that way, but the decade of Oakland suck, and the fleeting nature of their fan’s interest has borne that out.

    The Rams are a slightly different story. They had greater financial success than the Raiders ever had in LA. In a decade or so, when LA does get a team, it will most likely be two (NFC & AFC), sharing a common stadium, and they will be expansion teams.

  28. rohlo says: Sep 19, 2012 10:55 PM

    quote-

    jimmylions says:
    Sep 19, 2012 7:19 PM
    The LA Times is speculating that Los Angeles zillionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong (made his money in health care and is one of the partners who owns the Lakers), will probably purchase AEG. The Times further speculates that Soon-Shiong has already met with Goodell to talk about purchasing the Chargers and has Goodell’s blessing.

    The Times went so far as to guess that the Chargers will be owned by Soon-Shiong as early as this spring.

    Apparently the story is that Philip Anschutz (who I’m guessing is the “A” in AEG), has been willing to let people talk him into being looking at NFL deals for Los Angeles, but isn’t really much of a football fan. Also, he’d rather hang out at his home in Colorado than in LA.

    Thus it makes sense for Anschutz to sell AEG and let the new owner take over the sports properties and the acquisition of the NFL team.

    reply-

    FIRST OFF you are in-accurate in your post. he might buy AEG,BUT THE CHARGERS are not for sale!!! the spanos family has said repeatedly they are not selling! SP STOP MAKING cr@p up about someone buying the chargers!!! they have already been approached bout selling but they said “NO THANK YOU” its in the family and the 3rd generation of the spanos family under their dad dean spanos is the grandchildren of alex spanos who purchased the team decades ago…the spanos kids are entrenched in the scouting dept and and running of the organization..the chargers came out and said they are waiting for the vote in san diego on the stadium which is scheduled for fall 2013.. face it LA will be getting the raiturds or rams back or both!!! davis son already said he is interested in moving back there.he said that back in march of this year as there is NOTHING,not even a vote scheduled in oakland!!!!

  29. true9erfan66 says: Sep 19, 2012 11:31 PM

    @redstar205 Um you need to get your facts right. The 49ers said they are willing to work with raiders. But the niners paid most for stadium and it would be there stadium. The raiders didn’t like that they want league to pay for there own stadium, Cause IDK I guess heaven for bid they don’t get what everyonelese supposably got even though Jets & Giants share a stadium. You also can’t blame the niners for saying its there stadium because they went all though the red tape did all the leg work political work. Plus they put up more money than raiders would to join them. So raiders wasn’t kept out of anything they need to realize there is other teams (49ers) who have more history than them. And there not like this big class of the NFL AN GET OVER THEMSELVES. Cause they could be a part and yes just a part of it and have a brand new very beautiful top of the line stadium that will have the best in league sound system tv’s Internet best set up. At each seat you will have your own laptop connection and headphones ect. Yes it will only be best till next stadium proabaly LA opens cause that’s the way it goes but for each set to have headphone hook ups and laptop hook up with own net connections yes I’m a 9er fan and I’ve read about stadium and very excited for it to open. The Raiders coulda been apart of it so dont try and give us the typical raider crap were oh no one cares about raiders league dumps on them. Cause the 9ers & league tried to get them to join and only the raiders would care that it technically belongs to the 9ers own it or not cause it would have all the raider backs and banners and signs ring of honor would all be up for there games. So what would it matter if roles were reversed. I could careless all the 9ers stuff would be up for are home game. Plus it would actually Benifit the niners more cause they wouldn’t have to invest so much money for a new stadium. So figure it out at least once right in my life.

  30. pschmiddy says: Sep 19, 2012 11:36 PM

    The reason AEG and Roski can’t and won’t get this done is they want all or a large part of a team a some discounted price. NO owner will agree to that, love the way you guys bash teams and their fans. So very smart, LA blows and only money will drive some greedy A-hole to move there.

  31. redstar504 says: Sep 20, 2012 12:07 AM

    @dougydougdoug
    No your right because of revenue sharing it isn’t as much of an issue and look being here in New Orleans I know because without it the Saints and Packers couldn’t compete on an even plane with a New York or Chicago. That said dragging LA into the ball game just adds to the pot. I know local stations here pay big money for the rights to have a Sean Payton show or the Jon Villma show. That big money here is chump change to what major outfits in your market would pay. That money just adds to the pot.

    Two expansion teams in a joint stadium is indeed the best way too do it. They have the tallent out there to add about 4 teams and go back to the 3 division format.

    I couldn’t even picture the excitement if that stadium does get built next to staples in December with two football teams and two basketball teams both in action right next door to one another.

  32. thermalito says: Sep 20, 2012 1:05 AM

    The Rams will be back in LA next year.

  33. NoHomeTeam says: Sep 20, 2012 1:26 AM

    villa41 says: I’ve been to San Diego many times. Sometimes I’m there as part of the one and only real Nation that makes itself right at home when the so called Dolt “fans” sell us all their tickets, and other times I’m there on business.

    One time I stayed, on the company dime, at the Coronado. I can verify first hand the area literally stinks. I opened the doors to my oceanfront room expecting a refreshing breeze before I headed off to a long day of meetings, but I got something I didn’t expect. That something was the rancid smell of raw sewage. It was obvious there was illegal dumping of toxic waste near the hotel and in the Pacific. What a shame for the hotel and city in general.

    Ah. I think I get what’s going on here now. I was not aware of your “nation” affiliation. I believe I understand the underlying subtext of your posts on this subject. I am slightly embarrassed to have engaged you. My apologies.

  34. Robert says: Sep 20, 2012 2:43 AM

    1. Los Angeles Rams return.

    2. Miami Dolphins move to L.A.

  35. alonestartexan says: Sep 20, 2012 7:26 AM

    dougydougdoug,

    You’re missing the point. The NFL will be able to re-work their contracts with the networks if/when they add a franchise (or two) to Los Angeles, and their new contract will likely be worth double what it is now.

    Regardless of the current ratings in Los Angeles, having a team in the nations 2nd largest market would be a major money maker for the league. Merchandise sales would go through the roof alone.

  36. sj39 says: Sep 20, 2012 7:58 AM

    The days of NFL teams relocating are over due to the economic realities of the day. Teams moved because a desperate city and state paid them large amounts of money to lure them there. You would have to build them a state of the art stadium that they get every penny of revenue from, the best lease agreement in the NFL (like a buck a year) and they would not pay a dime to help build it. You would have to give them all kinds of tax breaks, build them a state of the art practice facility, pay their huge relocation fee and who knows what all else. These owners are not about to spend one dime of their own money to relocate and everyone needs to get that through their heads.

  37. chazsunderland says: Sep 20, 2012 8:04 AM

    Southern California Chargers

  38. jimmylions says: Sep 20, 2012 4:40 PM

    @rohlo: Dude! Unwind your slinky!

    I was just quoting the LA Times, and also clearly stated it was speculation. No need to explode over it or accuse me of making up things.

    That said … when owners say something is not for sale and that they will never move a team, I take that about as seriously as a politician who says he’s not a candidate.

    The handwriting is on the wall. The NFL wants a team in LA – that’s going to happen sooner rather than later and the owner will probably be Patrick Soon-Shiong. A number of LA news outlets have picked up the story that he’s the favorite to buy AEG.

    Soon-Shiong is considered the richest man in Los Angeles and loves sports. He tried to buy the Dodgers, but was unsuccessful. Buying AEG will also increase his ownership share in the Lakers.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!