Skip to content

Rams face lawsuit over their Missouri practice facility

81042817 Getty Images

Their time in St. Louis is over, but their business there is far from done.

As explained by David Hunn of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Rams have been sued regarding the team’s apparent right to buy the 27-acre tract that houses the team’s now-vacated practice facility in Earth City.

Under the lease that the Rams signed in 1995, the Rams have the ability to purchase the land for the low, low price of $1 in 2024 — even if they have left the property and even if the property is being leased to someone else. The public board that governs the Edward Jones Dome wants to scrap the lease term and sell the property now; it previously was appraised at $19 million.

“The [Edward Jones Dome Authority] owns the training facility, which is a valuable asset,” attorney Chris Bauman told Hunn. “We have a responsibility to maximize the value of that. And to do that, we need certainty concerning this invalid option.”

The lawsuit is intended to obtain a ruling that the term in the lease should be rejected. The Rams haven’t commented on whether they intend to exercise or waive the option.

As the lawsuit unfolds, the Rams’ intentions will quickly be known. And the Rams have every right, whether folks in St. Louis like it or not, to take advantage of every benefit provided to the team under the terms of the lease that lured the team to town more than 20 years ago.

Sure, owner Stan Kroenke arguably should walk away from the ability to buy the property for just one of his billions of dollars. But Kroenke hasn’t built an empire by walking away from good business deals. This lingering branch of a deal done more than two decades ago allows him to potentially turn a single dollar into $19 million more.

Permalink 79 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Los Angeles Rams, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
79 Responses to “Rams face lawsuit over their Missouri practice facility”
  1. paulrevereshorse1775 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:33 PM

    well that was stupid

  2. patsbrat says: Mar 25, 2016 3:36 PM

    $19 million return on a $1 investment. This is how the rich get richer.

    The only way that can happen to folks like us is the lottery. And how many people buy a single lottery ticket and hit?

    And the real question is who the heck signed off on this in 1995?

  3. Hitdog18 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:37 PM

    just another screw job by your favorite local NFL franchise

  4. steamingpilerex says: Mar 25, 2016 3:41 PM

    Excuse us Mr. Kroenke, will you paying this by cash or check ? — : EJD Authority

  5. rcali says: Mar 25, 2016 3:42 PM

    My gosh Missouri folks, whose been negotiating your business deals, a bachelor contestant?

  6. jmc8888 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:43 PM

    This should be a reminder of why cities shouldn’t give sweetheart deals.

    Because it can come back and screw you over, and you still don’t have anything to show for it.

    Much like when Wal*Mart finds a locale that will give them a break on taxes bigger then the break you gave them on taxes… closes down that Wal*Mart, and builds another one a few miles away.

    But Kroenke should realize that if he’s going to enforce the letter of the law, so can St. Louis and Missouri in general.

    Overall this isn’t the type of publicity he wants.

  7. nels1959 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:45 PM

    This guy is satan

  8. jimmyt says: Mar 25, 2016 3:46 PM

    Wait until everyone see’s how Stan will plunder the LA/Cali tax payers. All of his own money, wont take a dime of tax payer money. What a joke. Watch.

  9. Kingmj4891 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:47 PM

    A deal is a deal. A contract a contract. Hey St Louis, get over it. You got the team won a Super Bowl and then blew it by not keeping the team. But the terms of the deal say YOU LOSE!

  10. myopinionisrighterthanyours says: Mar 25, 2016 3:47 PM

    This is no different than owners/GMs trying to get players to help them get out from under bad contracts. And just like I think every player that doesn’t run the risk of being cut should tell the owners/GMs to go up a rope, Kroenke should do the same here. Can’t fix stupid.

  11. myopinionisrighterthanyours says: Mar 25, 2016 3:48 PM

    P.S., I hope the idiot that wrote the lease is long since gone. Ditto for whomever might have reviewed it.

  12. bills72284 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:49 PM

    AS soon as the Rams moved back to LA all i could see in my head was lawyers with $ symbols above their head

    I’m sure they can find something to sue and profit off of

  13. rememberbenghazi says: Mar 25, 2016 3:50 PM

    Go REDSKINS!

  14. southpaw79 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:50 PM

    There is a reason why Kroenke is rich and has an NFL team and St. Louis can claim neither.

  15. pats are better than your team says: Mar 25, 2016 3:50 PM

    If he had any class whatsoever, he would buy it for $1 and donate it to the parks dept or something.

  16. btv77 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:51 PM

    If Kroenke doesn’t cash in on this deal he his doing someone a huge favor or he is a fool.

  17. baddegg says: Mar 25, 2016 3:51 PM

    Rams:

    1. Get a windfall from the Redskins but remain mediocre.

    2. Drafted Michael Sam as quid, pro, quo (Clarice) with the league to get out of Hard Knocks.

    3. Tried to shaft their employees by using workers comp laws from Missouri even as the operated out of California.

    4. Trying to screw St. Louis by a.) accepting a sweetheart deal to stay in ST. Louis, b.) leaving St. Louis, and c.) holding onto sweetheart deal anyway.

    SMH

  18. peytonwantsaflag says: Mar 25, 2016 3:52 PM

    why in the hell would this even be a thing? for the life of me I can’t fathom why something like this would even be agreed to.

  19. whispersd says: Mar 25, 2016 3:53 PM

    ….and this is why you cannot trust public officials to write 30-year leases. Whoever wrote this back in the ’90s was never going to have to face the blowback of this ludicrous clause.

  20. jxt2521 says: Mar 25, 2016 3:57 PM

    Maybe a compromise can be worked out where he buys it for a buck and then donates it back for it’s full appraisal value?

  21. justanotherfan101 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:03 PM

    And this will just keep going on and on like a bad divorce.

  22. In Teddy We Trust says: Mar 25, 2016 4:03 PM

    Earth City? This is the city we’ve chosen to represent our planet?

  23. montrealraider says: Mar 25, 2016 4:07 PM

    Ironic that this was probably written back in the day to lure the team to St-Louis and now it just feels like the final slap in the face.

  24. dogfromduckhunt says: Mar 25, 2016 4:08 PM

    Every city where he has owned/owns a team hates him… Except LA. But just wait, the honeymoon will end and you’ll be in bed with a snake.

    A great businessman he is. A great man he is not.

  25. xilikemenx says: Mar 25, 2016 4:09 PM

    Don’t break your crayons but that’s business! The City knew damn well what they were signing and they had a team of lawyers telling it to sign. Sorry Mayor, but you may go now.

  26. sf546 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:17 PM

    Hitdog18 says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:37 PM
    just another screw job by your favorite local NFL franchise
    —————————
    Don’t blame the franchise for your city giving away the farm to get the Rams to St. Louis. Remember that they made that deal to steal the Rams from LA. They made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

  27. melsredmazda3 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:20 PM

    Stop blaming the rams here. this was the deal they STL gave them in 1995. it’s their own fault..

  28. mrtullymars says: Mar 25, 2016 4:21 PM

    The lease on this practice facility will be used as a bargaining chip in some type of future negotiation. That’s my guess. The Rams won’t keep it, but they will use the threat of keeping it.

  29. sactogary says: Mar 25, 2016 4:21 PM

    There are a lot of ignorant comments on here from people who just don’t understand long-term leases. This is not an unheard of clause in a lease. Essentially the team agreed to buy the property twenty years ago, and structured the transaction as a lease. The lease payments should amount to more than enough to pay for the property, including interest. This financing structure just gives the EJD folks an easier “re-possession” if the team were to default. Odds are, the Rams have to keep paying the lease through 2024 – they will certainly try to sublease it, but they are probably on the hook for it if they want to exercise that $1 option.

  30. tridecagon says: Mar 25, 2016 4:30 PM

    They made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

    —————

    No, “they” don’t. I was 12 when we got the team. Had nothing to do with it. Now, I’m a taxpayer in a city that is left holding a $100 million check on an empty stadium, and about to watch the Rams steal yet another asset (that’s going to, what, sit there and rot for the next 8 years?)

    All because of the contract terms drafted up by some highly paid lawyer and agreed to by some hoodwinked city officials, trying to be heroes, none of whom are actually going to be held accountable for shortsighted decisions they made 20 years ago. Of course, they don’t bear all the blame: Stan Kroenke knew exactly what he was doing.

  31. tccoats says: Mar 25, 2016 4:30 PM

    The deal the City of St. Louis struck with the Rams 20 years ago gets worse by the day.

  32. stew48 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:34 PM

    Kroenke was a minority owner in 1995, so he probably had nothing to do with this contract. FYI

  33. ee00ee says: Mar 25, 2016 4:38 PM

    myopinionisrighterthanyours says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:48 PM
    P.S., I hope the idiot that wrote the lease is long since gone. Ditto for whomever might have reviewed it.”

    That’s the problem with so many civil “servants”. They give sweetheart deals like this to corporations with some side payoff. They can leave office and fall back on the spoils and the taxpayers are left holding the tab.

  34. mdintino1420 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:41 PM

    Kroenke shouldn’t pursue buying the facility. He has his team in Los Angeles and billions of dollars. Save the facility for STL expansion team. It would be a bad idea for Kroenke to ever set foot in or near STL ever again.

    Kroenke should concentrate on his team in L.A. STL should be pushing for an NFL expansion team, STL Stallions.

  35. pastabelly says: Mar 25, 2016 4:55 PM

    montrealraider says:
    Mar 25, 2016 4:07 PM
    Ironic that this was probably written back in the day to lure the team to St-Louis and now it just feels like the final slap in the face.
    ======================================
    The option should have been tied to the team remaining in St Louis. This was an obvious goof by St Louis and its attorneys. Kroenke hasn’t excercized the option. It’s possible he will continue to own the option as long as their is legal action against his moving the team to LA. He’s not stupid.

  36. FinFan68 says: Mar 25, 2016 4:58 PM

    peytonwantsaflag says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:52 PM
    why in the hell would this even be a thing? for the life of me I can’t fathom why something like this would even be agreed to.
    ~~~~~~~~~
    Because politicians are only concerned with short term implications. By the time any long term consequences arrive they are long gone and unaccountable.

  37. elvoid says: Mar 25, 2016 5:03 PM

    Dear St. Louis:

    I know farming out the writing and reviewing of city contracts to third graders must have sounded like a good idea at the time…

    Wow.

  38. sactogary says: Mar 25, 2016 5:08 PM

    Does anyone want to buy a $40,000 car for $1? Many leasing companies will do this for you. Pay $3000 down and $750 per month for 5 years. After 5 years, they’ll sell it to you for $1. This type of lease is very common for expensive business equipment, but also occurs with real estate.

    Without knowing all the other terms, you cannot judge the deal based only on the $1 buyout after 30 years of lease payments.

  39. streetyson says: Mar 25, 2016 5:08 PM

    sactogary says:
    Mar 25, 2016 4:21 PM
    There are a lot of ignorant comments on here from people who just don’t understand long-term leases. This is not an unheard of clause in a lease….Odds are, the Rams have to keep paying the lease through 2024 – they will certainly try to sublease it, but they are probably on the hook for it if they want to exercise that $1 option.
    —————————
    And yours is the most ignorant comment of the lot! You say “odds are…” over the most important part of this whole story because you couldn’t be bothered to check. And uet guess what? – the lease says the opposite of what you ignorantly surmised, to wit the lease says the Rams not only have the right to buy Rams Park for $1, but also that option “shall survive any termination of the Lease regardless of the reason for such termination, and Lessee shall after any termination continue to have the right to exercise the Option as herein provided.”

  40. slick50ks says: Mar 25, 2016 5:09 PM

    When you sell your soul for an NFL franchise in your city, you, you know, lose your soul.

    Get over it already.

  41. truths4all says: Mar 25, 2016 5:16 PM

    Indignant St Louis football fans are the same one who ran Kurt Warner out of town as a washed up, has been.

  42. sactogary says: Mar 25, 2016 5:22 PM

    Mar 25, 2016 5:08 PM – streetyson says:

    [sactogary] And yours is the most ignorant comment of the lot! You say “odds are…” over the most important part of this whole story because you couldn’t be bothered to check….

    Yep, you are correct. I was wrong. Sorry.

  43. guitarmaninks says: Mar 25, 2016 5:27 PM

    patsbrat says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:36 PM
    $19 million return on a $1 investment. This is how the rich get richer.

    The only way that can happen to folks like us is the lottery. And how many people buy a single lottery ticket and hit?

    And the real question is who the heck signed off on this in 1995?

    Total crap….Not all but most of the top 1% started with nothing…Bill Gates got turned down to rent a freaking car.

  44. abninf says: Mar 25, 2016 5:29 PM

    pats are better than your team says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:50 PM
    If he had any class whatsoever, he would buy it for $1 and donate it to the parks dept or something.
    ===================================

    Why? So maybe a few people will like him? The people who hate him will hate him regardless. Screw that, a deal is a deal.

  45. mongo3401 says: Mar 25, 2016 5:29 PM

    If I was Kroenke Inwould not let them out of the deal. St Louis made the lease, Rams signed it and now St Louis is moaning ? They are crying now but they were laughing in 1995. What goes around comes around St Louis.

  46. thejohnsmith1122 says: Mar 25, 2016 5:32 PM

    sactogary says:
    Mar 25, 2016 5:08 PM
    Does anyone want to buy a $40,000 car for $1? Many leasing companies will do this for you. Pay $3000 down and $750 per month for 5 years. After 5 years, they’ll sell it to you for $1. This type of lease is very common for expensive business equipment, but also occurs with real estate.

    Without knowing all the other terms, you cannot judge the deal based only on the $1 buyout after 30 years of lease payments.
    —————————————————

    Exactly! This is a LEASE so that means they were or are still currently paying “something”, most likely on a monthly basis. And maybe the deal was that if they pay rent long enough, they can outright by the land for $1, by which I’m assuming, in these scenarios they probably paid more than what the land was originally worth over the life of this deal.

  47. HankTheDog says: Mar 25, 2016 5:50 PM

    Thomas Eagleton is sticking it to the citizens of Missouri from the grave! Why send a man who had shock therapy to negotiate on behalf of the city?

  48. savior72 says: Mar 25, 2016 6:00 PM

    They could use a Walmart in Earth City. I’m sure that’s his plan.

  49. mrlaloosh says: Mar 25, 2016 6:13 PM

    Don’t worry St Louis. You still have he arch!

  50. mogogo1 says: Mar 25, 2016 6:29 PM

    Sad thing is there’s some local politician out there right now thinking the real mistake was that they didn’t give the Rams even more.

  51. russrpm says: Mar 25, 2016 6:31 PM

    “Kroenke hasn’t built an empire by walking away from good business deals.” No, he did it the old fashioned way, by marrying into the Walton family.

  52. jstamper3377 says: Mar 25, 2016 6:43 PM

    Does the nfl ever just do the morally right thing? I know business is business but pro sports only exist as viable businesses because of a completely illogical and one sided perception on the part of the fans that these teams “represent” our cities and that there us a real bond.

    When a team like the rams reminds everyone how wrong that perception is can’t they leave it at that without rubbing salt in the wounds on the way out of town?

  53. shlort says: Mar 25, 2016 6:48 PM

    Nice spin. It sounds like the Rams are getting the 19 million dollar property for one dollar. Conveniently leaving out the cost of the lease baited in some of those anti rich folks. Good one.

  54. gowiththeflodin says: Mar 25, 2016 6:50 PM

    What really sucks is that the tax payers probably payed to build the practice facility along with the dome. The perfect example of what ios so messed up about this country. A fricken billionaire gets gifted $19 Million for moving a team to LA. Sick! Welfare for the rich, but don’t you dare give poor people an extra $10 a week for food.

  55. coloradocowboy says: Mar 25, 2016 6:51 PM

    It’s not a lease. It’s a purchase option claus that is added to a lease. And this option specifically says that it “survives” the lease.

    The lease is dead. The Rams no longer make payments of any sort for that land. But they still have the option to buy it in 2024. No one will lease that land will the idea of changing/developing the land as long as the Rams hold a purchase option.

    If I had to guess, I would bet that the owner arranges a $15 million purchase of the option as a part of a new lease deal to some other party.

  56. captainwhodat says: Mar 25, 2016 6:52 PM

    guessing the guy who wrote the deal got a sweet, sweet payout underneath the table…just guessing

  57. harrisonhits2 says: Mar 25, 2016 7:03 PM

    “why in the hell would this even be a thing? for the life of me I can’t fathom why something like this would even be agreed to.”

    Rams bribe politicians. Politicians give sweetheart deal that totally screws that taxpayer. Pretty easy to figure out.

  58. jag1959 says: Mar 25, 2016 7:04 PM

    It’s good to be the Kronk. Business is business and right now if your Kroenke business is good. It sucks but it is what it is

  59. harrisonhits2 says: Mar 25, 2016 7:06 PM

    “Does the nfl ever just do the morally right thing? ”

    Nope. Never ever. Not with Goodell and his utterly and totally corrupt cronies running the league.

  60. fmckenney says: Mar 25, 2016 7:25 PM

    Florio simply gave a hypothetical; Kroenke decides to exercise his rights relative to the lease agreement…but he hasn’t done anything and too many of you are condeming him based on the hypothetical. RELAX.

  61. kissmysandwich says: Mar 25, 2016 7:32 PM

    Why shouldn’t Kroenke stick it the them? They were stupid enough to sign the idiotic lease. They may have thought ahead and countered it with something about the team moving, but nope. They gave the land away for $1. Everyone hates on Kroenke, but Kroenke is a businessman seeking profits. The stadium authority is a public entity that exists because of taxpayers. They have an obligation to the people. Kroenke doesn’t.

  62. jonathankrobinson424 says: Mar 25, 2016 7:50 PM

    …….don’t worry St.Louis. ..you can make the exact same deal but 10x worse , when you steal yet another team from some other city. Mark Davis are you paying attention?……

  63. truthinesshurts says: Mar 25, 2016 8:04 PM

    Kingmj4891 says:
    Mar 25, 2016 3:47 PM
    A deal is a deal. A contract a contract. Hey St Louis, get over it. You got the team won a Super Bowl and then blew it by not keeping the team. But the terms of the deal say YOU LOSE!
    ++++++++++++++++++++++

    Chill down there, Willy Wonka…

  64. lambeaudungbarn says: Mar 25, 2016 8:11 PM

    This is exactly why I am ready to leave the TV off on Sunday and Watch College games. Why not? The player turnover is about the same, and at least you see genuine effort by every player on every down,
    and I know the team I support will still be here in 10 years!

  65. mizzouram says: Mar 25, 2016 8:36 PM

    Let’s be clear…Enos built his empire by marrying a Walton.

  66. streetyson says: Mar 25, 2016 8:46 PM

    @sactogary – your full apology, made above, is both accepted and earns my respect. I think we can both agree that the Rams’ that $1 contract clause, as written, is both totally unexpected and insane.

  67. breadmeatcheese says: Mar 25, 2016 8:57 PM

    St. Louis should have known: when you lure someone away from another person, someday someone else will lure them away from you.

  68. deacon85 says: Mar 25, 2016 10:31 PM

    streetyson says:
    Mar 25, 2016 8:46 PM
    @sactogary – your full apology, made above, is both accepted and earns my respect. I think we can both agree that the Rams’ that $1 contract clause, as written, is both totally unexpected and insane.
    ———————
    I’m not sure that sactogary should be apologizing. The Rams lease obligated them to pay “$250,000 per year, in twelve equal monthly
    installments, due and payable on the first day of each consecutive month.” So they’ve paid $6 million, and would have been on the hook for $3 million more if they stayed the full 30 year term. I agree it was a bad lease for the city, but they figured they could keep the Rams for 30 years and the $9 million would partially offset the loss if the Rams sold the practice field property in 2024. Another city blunder was including a “state of the art” clause in the lease requiring the stadium to be among the top tier stadiums in the league, reviewable every ten years, which is a financial burden they couldn’t possibly meet.

  69. namriverrat69 says: Mar 26, 2016 12:19 AM

    The Rams organization’s track record is intact. They shafted and left Los Angeles for Anabeim’s sweet deal. The Rams shafted and left Anaheim for a sweet deal in St. Louis. Now they shaft and leave St. Louis to come back and shaft Los Angeles again.

    When they bailed on LA the first time I stopped caring about them. When I need a good laugh I think of the 1978 Super Bowl (Rams lost to Pittsburgh) when Rams owner Georgia Frontiere’s husband, Dominic Frontiere, was busted for scalping Super Bowl tickets. Scalping Super Bowl tickets?? What a sleazeball. His only redeeming quality was he write the original theme for “The Outer Limits” TV show and now that I think about it, that was nothing to write home about.

  70. stevent92 says: Mar 26, 2016 12:35 AM

    I am presuming that Kroenke didn’t negotiate this deal, but rather former owner Georgia Frontiere would have. Stan is simply the beneficiary of it having purchased the team.

    For the myriad of reasons there may be to dislike Kroenke, this wouldn’t be one of them. Blame the STL pols.

  71. citpyrc says: Mar 26, 2016 12:54 AM

    Ha Ha! Your a baseball town anyway right?

  72. citpyrc says: Mar 26, 2016 12:56 AM

    A dollar and a dream

  73. tanstewie says: Mar 26, 2016 1:33 AM

    Oit okay first of all for those above who said that the Rams have probably paid more than the value of the land over the course of the lease you need to look at the Math. the rams paid $25,000 a year for the lease. If the lease was signed 21 years ago that’s $525,000. Not anywhere close to $19 million.

    Next, the city or EJD has a strong argument to make. The terms of the lease grants an option to buy the property for $1 but this option has no end date. In contracts for property you cannot tie some piece of property up in perpetuity, its unenforceable. They could very well get this clause invalidated. Florio probably expelled the rule against perpetuities from his law school days and I don’t blame him but it’s a decent argument

  74. dretwann says: Mar 26, 2016 8:37 AM

    4. Trying to screw St. Louis by a.) accepting a sweetheart deal to stay in ST. Louis, b.) leaving St. Louis, and c.) holding onto sweetheart deal anyway.
    ————————————

    This implies the team new 21 years ago that they would leave. I doubt that was the intention and even if it was, it will be impossible to prove in court. The reality is, St. Louis, MO is crying foul now but should have done that 21 years ago. Stan has no obligation to be gracious. In fact as a pure business decision, he would be insane to let this go. In what other way can you turn $1 into $19 mil that doesn’t involve gambling?

  75. walkinginthewasteland says: Mar 26, 2016 9:47 AM

    “Sure, owner Stan Kroenke arguably should walk away from the ability to buy the property for just one of his billions of dollars. But Kroenke hasn’t built an empire by walking away from good business deals. This lingering branch of a deal done more than two decades ago allows him to potentially turn a single dollar into $19 million more.”

    I dont see why the City can’t take the property under Imminent Domain.

  76. rootpain says: Mar 26, 2016 10:10 AM

    streetyson says:
    Mar 25, 2016 8:46 PM
    @sactogary – your full apology, made above, is both accepted and earns my respect. I think we can both agree that the Rams’ that $1 contract clause, as written, is both totally unexpected and insane.
    ==============================
    Hey streetyson,
    I think you owe sanctogary an apology. His original comment said, “odds are”, and you responded, “you ignorantly surmised”. And yet, you conclude that the “contract clause….. totally unexpected and insane.”
    It seems to me that sanctogary hadn’t actually ignorantly surmised, but rather, added a perspective that in many cases, would be correct.
    So how about you apologizing as well and let’s get back to talking football.

  77. daramsman says: Mar 26, 2016 10:28 AM

    Indignant St Louis football fans are the same one who ran Kurt Warner out of town as a washed up, has been.
    ——————————————————————-

    Now how did the fans run Warner out of town? There wasn’t one fan that drew up Warner’s contract with the Rams. These are the type of stupid comments people make when they don’t know what they are talking about…

    The good people of St. Louis didn’t negotiate these deals. It was spearheaded by now deceased Sen Thomas Eagleton’s task force. Who once famously said, by the the time the “first tier clause” in the stadium lease (which allowed the team to leave) was enforced he’d be dead and gone. And he was absolutely correct.

    Trust me, the city of LA will be asking themselves what have they gotten themselves into when they get a load StanK up close and personal.

    Just ask Arsenal fans, Denver Nugget Fans and St. Louis Rams fans. There is a pattern here and if you think just because the Rams are in LA all will be different and I just jaded and a hater…you’ll see soon enough.

  78. sporting4231 says: Mar 26, 2016 10:54 AM

    Stop blaming the attorneys. Attorneys don’t sign deals and don’t tell people to sign deals. Quite often attorneys are explaining why something is a bad deal and shouldn’t be signed – and clients ignore the advice and sign anyway. The lease payments may have been a disguised purchase. By making them lease payments they can be expensed for tax purposes. If they were a mortgage payment for a purchase it would have to be treated as an asset and accounted for differently. My guess is that the people signing never dreamed the team would leave before it was over – despite the language that said they could pay the dollar even if they weren’t still there. In hindsight a very dumb deal, but not necessarily the lawyers’ fault.

  79. raiders757 says: Mar 27, 2016 12:43 PM

    Isn’t this the same property that sits near a smelly landfill that is now a super fund site with radioactive waste? I recall an article about how when the wind blows in the right direction, the Rams practice facility would smell so horrible that it literally made one want to throw up where they stood.

    How in the world can this property be worth 19 million dollars? When you look at a map of the area, they’re nearly next door neighbors. Someone mentioned donating the land as a public park. Yea, talking about a way to stick to the residents of St. Louis even more, build them a park next to a radioactive dump that smells like death armed over. Great idea.

Leave a Reply

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