Will Kroenke choose to keep the L.A. market to himself?

AP

The Chargers currently reside not in San Diego or Los Angeles but in limbo, caught between their current home and their former home that could become their future home.

As a practical matter, they can’t stay there for very long.

The Chargers won the right to relocate on Tuesday, but it feels like a loss. It feels like a loss because they would be moving not on their own terms but on someone else’s, sharing space with the Rams in Inglewood.

And before they can move to Inglewood, the Chargers have to work out a deal with the Rams and owner Stan Kroenke. Given the recent example of the manner in which Kroenke negotiates with a city he claims to love, how will he negotiate with a partner who also will become a competitor?

Lost in the flow chart the NFL devised on Wednesday in giving Kroenke the first golden ticket to L.A. is the fact that he now controls whether the second golden ticket ever will be used.

Using the second ticket means that Kroenke will be sharing the market, competing with another franchise for hearts, minds, and dollars. Unless the dollars to be generated for Kroenke by making his new stadium available to a competitor will outweigh the benefit of hoarding the nation’s No. 2 market, he’d be crazy to give up the biggest — and most overlooked — asset that his partners have given to him, whether they realize it or not.

Full control of the Los Angeles market.

Sure, the owners can try at some point to force him to take on the Chargers, Raiders, or someone else under terms the owners dictate. But the man who just finagled 24 votes when no one expected it would need only nine to block any effort to change the new status quo.

That’s the new status quo. The Rams and Kroenke own L.A. And the Rams and Kroenke ultimately may not want the Chargers or the Raiders to move in.

70 responses to “Will Kroenke choose to keep the L.A. market to himself?

  1. This guy is a vile bag of greed. Worth over 7 billion yet wants the taxpayers to pay for a stadium for him.

    No city or state should ever give the NFL a single penny again. They can easily afford to pay for their own stadiums and extorting taxpayers for this is disgusting.

    Especially when you consider on top of their obvious revenue, they are probably raking in several billion more a year from the daily fantasy sites that they are shadow owners of.

  2. Wouldn’t the revenue generated from leasing to the Chargers be much more important than dividing the fan base in a huge city like LA? If I had to choose between extra jersey sales or leasing an entire NFL franchise, I’d choose the latter to make the most money.

  3. And why would the Chargers want to move in with him. It’s his stadium. His project. People in LA are excited for the Rams. The Chargers would have no buzz. They would be a joke up there. At least SD still loves their losing franchise. LA would ignore them so hard.

    Why not stay in the 8th largest city and actually try and support that community? Just showing you care would go a long way. They survived just fine with 2 teams in LA. The Chargers should be happy that Kronke is the only one up there.

  4. The option for the Chargers to partner with the Rams at Inglewood is in the agreement as I understand it? So it doesn’t matter what Kroenke wants.

  5. Why not keep the LA market solely for the Rams? That’s just smart business.
    Don’t tell me that “it’s not “fair”” because “fairness” is not a component of free market capitalism.

    Oh and don’t accuse Kroenke of being “greedy” b/c EVERY NFL player on the Rams will benefit from the extra leverage in contract negotiations b/c their agent (and the union boss De Smith) KNOW that the Rams will have increased revenue just b/c they are in the LA market.

    Therefore, if you call Kroenke “greedy” then must also call every current and future Rams player “greedy” as well.

  6. Chargers had no NFL neighbors to the immediate north of them for years. Now will have one or two??? They have to take Inglewood now or lose a ton of their current market.

  7. Grrr I hate rich people! He’s so greedy!!

    Laughable.

    If no city can support the Chargers or the Raiders then each city should lose their team. If no other city can bring them in then they should be dissolved. There aren’t enough QB’s in the league anyway so let’s make the talent pool smaller.

  8. He’d better. I’m not even sure that the LA market will support even one team, let alone two.

    If the NFL if foolish enough to allow two teams to move there, then we’ll be having this same discussion within the next decade.

  9. A lot to do about nothing…..second largest market for everything but football….how many failures will it take? Where will the Rams move once this ill fated experiment fails and billionaires cash in on betting against the success ultimately happens?

    There is no market….it’s smoke and mirrors.

  10. He looks like the one of guy that would throw in some radials if you just come down to the lot and look at this low mileage Buick.

  11. It’s hard to believe the language of the agreement wasn’t crafted to prevent giving Kroenke carte blanche in controlling the market. In fact that seems like a pretty naive standpoint. Not all of the other 31 inherited their money. Richardson, Jones, Biscotti, Kraft, Blank, Snyder, Khan and Allen to name some of the more business savvy in no particular order didn’t become billionaires because they were casual about giving away leverage.

  12. How does it benefit the Chargers to partner with Stan? They get to play in a stadium they don’t own in a city where they won’t have the same fan base they currently have.

  13. Wow. Now this is a strong article. It sounds so obvious reading it now, but it appears that no one, including me, connected these dots until Florio did.

    I guess we all just assumed the Chargers or Raiders would be moving in, if Kroenke has the ability (which it appears he does) to make the terms so onerous on either team to move in, the Rams would keep that market whale all to themselves.

    Talk about cornering the market — reminds me of that guy from Nestle who wanted to buy ALL the drinking water in the world, so he could force humans to pay whatever he demanded. Wow.

    My take: if the Rams keep L.A. to themselves, and the Raiders and Chargers can be contented with their $100,000,000.00 each of FREE money – and use that to work things out in Oakland and San Diego, respectively — that might be a win-win-win scenario.

    It’s hard to feel too bad for the Raiders and Chargers ownership —> they each scored a windfall of $100,000,000.00 apiece. Why should NFL billionaires be pouting about “only” getting $100,000,000.00 in FREE money???

  14. Maybe the Chargers can now get the money for a stadium in SD.
    If I were them, I wouldn’t share the LA market, I would own the SD market.

  15. …the man who just finagled 24 votes when no one expected it …

    I expected it. I expected him to move no matter what the vote was as well. Just because it didn’t jive with the storyline you wanted to feed the lemmings doesn’t mean nobody else considered the possibility.

  16. 3menandablog says:
    Jan 13, 2016 9:30 AM
    People in LA are excited for the Rams. The Chargers would have no buzz. They would be a joke up there. At least SD still loves their losing franchise. LA would ignore them so hard.

    They survived just fine with 2 teams in LA.
    ————————————————
    LA is predominantly Chargers country already, and those not into the Chargers are into the Raiders. And right, they survived so fine with 2 teams that 20 years ago both those 2 teams moved out from their half empty stadiums.

    Bringing the Chargers or Raiders in as your roommate is bringing in the much prettier girl who will absorb all attention in that town. Bad idea Stan …

  17. ….pack up your bags Chargers and head EAST young man…..to a place called St. Louis & or San Antonio. Spanos really lost this fight, BUT too bad………he never worked in good faith with San Diego, so now the Chargers are nomads. The Oakland Raiders are winners because the NFL is giving them money and support to stay in Oakland. I like how this worked out

  18. I think they’re nuts to try and put two teams in LA in the same year anyway. Isn’t this a city that had teams and couldn’t support them? Does the NFL even know that the city can support one? Won’t doubling the number of teams going in double the chance of failure since you’re splitting interest?

    Very little of the obsession with LA makes any sense to me.

  19. How do the Chargers and the city of San Diego not get a beautiful waterfront stadium built in one of the nicest cities in the country? Both parties are blowing it. Crawl back to S.D. now Spanos.

  20. At the end of the day, It’s all about money with these owners. They had to choose Kroenke because he could deliver NFL in LA. Did anyone think they could vote for two broke owners building a 2 billion dollar stadium? It would affect the value of every team if something went wrong.

  21. I must be in the minority… for you know thinking this through, but that i know of only cowboys and packers have complete control of their stadiums, while the team is the primary user of these facilities usually there is a city/county/state board of some kind that actually has full control, so instead of crying about public money being spent on the stadium may be the concern should be how the stadiums are utilized, and even before that why they are not built with more functions in mind.. looks like Rams will own there own stadium and they are making it with the intent of being a multi function venue

  22. This guy is a vile bag of greed. Worth over 7 billion yet wants the taxpayers to pay for a stadium for him.

    —————————————————————

    Unless something changed in the last few hours, Stan is building the new stadium completely with his own money. So what do taxpayers have to do with anything?

    I think the St. Louis fans got a raw deal, but to say he’s a “vile bag of greed” is ridiculous. The other owners should take note from what Stan is doing as all those other owners are the ones wanting public money.

  23. Or as part of the back door deal, the NFL told Kroenke we want a second team if you want to relocate.

    Also an alternating home schedule is going to keep that stadium filled for the full NFL season. It is probably going to generate him a lot more revenue than one single team there. Los Angeles can support two teams but I wish they went the expansion route instead of taking one from another city.

  24. “This guy is a vile bag of greed. Worth over 7 billion yet wants the taxpayers to pay for a stadium for him.”

    Spanos is only worth about $1.5 billion. And since he’s the only owner mentioned in the article who wants a taxpayer-funded stadium I assume this line was directed at him.

  25. LA RAMS!!!!!!!!……….YES!!!!!!!!!!!
    Mr K has London, Denver and Los Angeles as markets for his franchises…..smart SOB.

  26. The Jets leased the old Giants stadium for decades before Metlife was built. It can work for the Chargers but I would prefer they stayed in San Diego. Make it happen.

  27. This is one big ploy to get LA as a superbowl host.

    The luster will fade within a few years,
    The attendance will drop.
    St Louis will get a team again.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  28. Honestly, on a beautiful autumn day, I have things to do other than watch a group of grown adults chase an inflated object up and down what amounts to a cow pasture.

    Come on people!

    Get real with your lives!!!

  29. Why would the NFL want two teams in LA? They haven’t had a fan b in 21 years. Let a team garner passion and loyalty before you try to over-conquer the market.

  30. If both the Chargers and the Raiders stay where they are with improved stadiums, it is a big win for Roger Goodell, who, at least in the eyes of fans most every where, needs one.

  31. It seems like the Rams moving back makes the most sense but it also seems like they are the team LA-area residents would least be excited about due to the team’s lack of recent success in St. Louis and their lack of success in the few years preceding the original move. Before the move St. Louis in 1994, I always thought the Rams seemed somewhat irrelevant in part because playing in Anaheim, not winning much, and the presence of the Raiders.

  32. Spanos would be well advised to stay put. The “crowds” flocking to games in LA will be disappearing well before Stan even gets his palace built. Let Kroenke jump this shark alone.

  33. All those teams are just running away from the thoughts of playoff and SB losses to the Patriots to new cities. Sad really.

    Honestly though, I don’t like the move really I liked the old Rams teams and definitely don’t want Oakland and SD moving. Solid franchises and fan bases. I can’t imagine it will be very amusing to banter with 1st year LA football fans on PFT.

  34. It was reported numerous times that most of the owners only want Los Angeles to have 1 team. So if Kroenke makes it nearly impossible for the Chargers or Raiders to join him in Inglewood, I doubt the other owners would put up a fight.

  35. They should be more concerned about the beaches and lifestyles of the natives. If your team stinks, they’ll just turn around and enjoy the beaches and other fun places in LA.

  36. From what I’ve seen as a long-time fan, the Los Angeles market is fool’s gold at best as the experience of past failed NFL teams in that location (including my Raiders’ 13 years there) has shown. So as far as I’m concerned if Kroenke wants La-la land all to himself then that’s fine with me.

  37. Jan 13, 2016 9:32 AM
    The option for the Chargers to partner with the Rams at Inglewood is in the agreement as I understand it? So it doesn’t matter what Kroenke wants.

    —————————————————————-
    No that’s not right. The agreement gives the Chargers the right to work out a deal with Kronke if they wish to move to. It does not say Kronke has to accept the deal. I understand he is footing the bill for the stadium so he will own the whole thing. All the cards are in his deck now.

  38. The NFL lacks integrity. Period.

    Purely from a “football fan”side:

    1] The Rams have always been the L.A. Rams.
    2] The Raiders have always been the Oakland Raiders.
    3] The Chargers have always been the San Diego Chargers.

    The NFL has enough money in it’s coffers to help San Diego and Oakland stay in their respective cities. It’s just the right thing to do. The Raiders and Chargers are both good for football.

    We are headed for another major recession in the US. and the NFL SOMEHOW just keeps getting richer. The consumer/fans are ‘struggling to make ends meet’ and Sunday NFL games used to be a way of de-stressing and rooting for your home team. We used to call it ‘entertainment.’ Instead, the NFL has become a microcosm of life. The NFL ‘stresses’ us now. It’s is our life. That’s they way Goodell wants it and all the greedy owners.

    We the fans are stupid enough to subsidize the NFL’s schizophrenia.

    NFL – Look what you have become. A national pastime that is past it’s time. All things come to an end sometime. I truly love the game, heritage, but not the hypocrisy of the leaders of this American institution. Humble out before it’s too late.

  39. danjor21 says:
    Jan 13, 2016 10:07 AM
    What I don’t understand is why the Chargers feel the need to move in the first place. Can someone explain this to me?
    ___________________________________

    The Chargers don’t want to move. Spanos does. Why does Spanos want to move to LA? The NBA San Diego Clippers moved to Los Angeles very quietly many years ago and recently sold for $2 billion.

    That’s why.

  40. harrisonhits2 says: Jan 13, 2016 9:23 AM

    “This guy is a vile bag of greed. Worth over 7 billion yet wants the taxpayers to pay for a stadium for him.”

    He’s paying for the stadium himself. No taxpayer money. Get your facts straight.

  41. All-American Voltron says: Jan 13, 2016 9:49 AM

    “LA is predominantly Chargers country already, and those not into the Chargers are into the Raiders.”

    You are very very very wrong. Sure the Raiders are still popular in L.A., but they came in a distant 2nd to the Rams in the NFL’s own study. The Chargers finished 3rd. Waaaaaaaaaay behind the other teams.

  42. Everyone in L.A. loves Kroenke right now but he needs to hire a good GM. Otherwise, he’ll be hated before too long. The Raiders seem like their arrow is pointing up, and the Chargers seem like theirs is pointing down. Rams need to hit on a QB in this draft. If Kroenke was smart, he’d offer Jim Harbaugh $75 million for 5 years.

  43. The NFL has already lost a generation of football fans in LA because we cheer for other teams including those in the same division as the Rams (49ers, Cardinals). It’ll be hard to convert fans to the Rams.

    gronkasaurus says:
    Jan 13, 2016 9:28 AM
    Wouldn’t the revenue generated from leasing to the Chargers be much more important than dividing the fan base in a huge city like LA? If I had to choose between extra jersey sales or leasing an entire NFL franchise, I’d choose the latter to make the most money.
    =======================================

    Uh, it’s a LOT more than jersey sales. If Kroenke allowed the Chargers in, he’d be competing for attention on the radio shows, TV news, local sponsors, the entertainment industry, and over 11 million people. The sponsor money alone would exceed the lease. The city is big enough with a strong enough economy to support two teams but Kroenke would get it all.

  44. Hopefully LA will once again prove it doesn’t deserve (or for that matter need) NFL franchises.

    Kroenke is being rewarded for producing years of substandard product with a ‘golden ticket.’ It’s too bad that **** never rolls uphill.

  45. dabears7190 says:
    Jan 13, 2016 11:16 AM
    danjor21 says:
    Jan 13, 2016 10:07 AM
    What I don’t understand is why the Chargers feel the need to move in the first place. Can someone explain this to me?
    _________________________________
    The Chargers don’t want to move. Spanos does. Why does Spanos want to move to LA? The NBA San Diego Clippers moved to Los Angeles very quietly many years ago and recently sold for $2 billion.

    That’s why.
    _____
    Plus, it doesn’t help that the Chargers play in one of those ugly, symmetrical, baseball/football stadiums that was built what seems like 1,000 years ago. The stadium can’t generate revenue on its own (corportate seats/suites) that newer stadiums can. The Raiders are in the same boat. The Spanos and Mark Davis are also the owners with the smallest net worth (relative, I know).

    What both of them need is an investor that is just as wealthy as Spanos & Davis who can take the $100 mil the NFL is offering, try to coax about that much out of their cities, and pay for the rest themselves.

    Of course what will happen is that Spanos will hold his nose and sign on as an Inglewood tenant, then eventually sell the team for a billion or four…..

  46. This article is based on a fundamentally flawed assumption about the LA market. LA is a city of transplants from around the country. It is a city full of Bears fans, Jets fans, Patriots fans, Cowboys fans, Bills fans, Lions fans, etc. I moved here over 25 years ago and remain a Vikings fan. I was here before the Rams and Raiders left LA and never became a fan of either team. LA went without an NFL team for 20 years and did not care. As such, Kroenke is already sharing the LA market with every other NFL team whether the Chargers or Raiders come or not. In the end, the NFL wanted a franchise or two in LA. Most of the people in LA could not care less because they are already fans of other teams.

  47. How is it so many super rich NFL owners can’t afford a haircut from a professional barber? They look like they had their gardener use a hedge trimmer.

  48. The Los Angeles market wasn’t willing to support one NFL team, and didn’t really care to bring a team in after losing the Rams and the Raiders. Now the league thinks that market will support two franchises, both of which haven’t exactly been models of winning in recent years?

    Some people in the league office are in dire need of a reality check.

  49. San Diego lost 2 NBA franchises and now stands on the precipice of losing an NFL franchise. St. Louis lost an NBA franchise and 2 NFL franchises. The uninformed and ignorant should stop with the false and flawed narrative that LA can’t support sports teams. The only thing LA couldn’t do, that most cities can’t do, is build billion dollar football stadiums on taxpayer dimes. And just because there are a lot of transplanted people in LA doesn’t mean they don’t like sports. Generally if they left their original homes for LA, it’s because they’ve had a chance to improve their financial situation.
    They’ll have more disposable income for things like attending games.

  50. welcomehomelosangelesrams says:

    He’s paying for the stadium himself. No taxpayer money. Get your facts straight.

    He’s paying for it with TIFs (your tax dollars) get your facts straight.

  51. Yes, I am a transplant and yes, I like sports. But the only time I am going to spend hundreds of dollars to see the Rams play live, if ever, is when my home town team comes to town. I imagine I am not alone in that regard.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.