Monday, February 23, 2015

Manfred Still Upbeat About Rays' Stadium Saga

From the NY Daily News' interview with MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred, which they labeled "exclusive"...even though he's already done a number of other one-on-one interviews:
I feel positive about the Tampa Bay situation because I see stadium issues as fundamentally club, local issues and Mr. Sternberg has reiterated his desire and belief he can reach an acceptable solution in Tampa. I’ve had a lot of communication with Mr. Sternberg and what’s important is that Stu is committed to staying in Tampa and he is confident he’ll be able to. Regarding the A’s situation in Oakland, two points: One, it’s important to note the long history of franchise stability that has served this institution well. Communities make huge commitments to teams — in the case of the A’s, we’re talking about 47 years in Oakland — and baseball has had a natural reluctance to leave cities with that kind of history. Two, San Jose is complicated by ongoing litigation that was commenced by the city (the city of San Jose is suing baseball under anti-trust laws). Most good lawyers will tell you that litigation has a natural effect of slowing the process down, but that was their choice, not ours. I think the A’s need a new facility and it remains a priority of mine to get both clubs into facilities. I think because of geographic and political differences, the situation with the A’s is more challenging.
Somewhat encouraging news for Tampa Bay fans at least?

54 comments:

  1. I don't understand your position, Noah. You say that MLB is in the business of threatening markets to get them to build stadiums, that the commissioners words are essentially hyperbole. But then you'll take him for his word when he says stuff like this..

    Compliments are nothing. The same way it means nothing for Manfred to praise Montreal, it means nothing for him to have confidence in Tampa Bay. Do we expect him to say negative words about either region? Of course not, it would alienate a fan base.

    You know these are all just tactics to get make the most money for the owners, his employers, by taking the most from taxpayers. If Montreal could possibly build a stadium with owners kicking in the least amount, then it's time to sing Montreal's praises. If Tampa Bay can build a stadium with owners kicking in the least amount, then it's time to have confidence in Tampa Bay.

    It's all just words. The only thing that should encourage us is actual progress on the stadium front. Not words from the commissioner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry if you think that's "taking him at his word." It's simply posting a quote from him where he is complimentary of Tampa Bay for a change.

      Delete
  2. I just think it's hilarious that people think that Montreal will obtain another MLB team.. Lol. Yeah, it might happen. That is when the league expands to Louisville and Montreal. This may occur in 2060. lol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it's hilarious, and I don't know why it would be hilarious.

      All I was saying was that it makes no sense to say the commissioner's words are only used for leverage when he talks about Montreal, but when he talks about Tampa, it's a good sign and he's sincere.

      Delete
    2. Make up your mind, Anonymous!!

      Delete
    3. lol 2 different anonymous people. 1st and 3rd was me

      Delete
    4. You people forget that Montreal the last 7 years before they left could not even break 1 million in attendance there 3 best years saw them break 2 million every other year of there life they drew the same as the ray's do now. It's one thing to fill up 2 or 3 preseason games it another thing to do it 81 times a season. That why you guys lost the team in the 1st place. If the ray's where to move over there they would move to a place that would draw about as good as tampa but have to start all over in tv ratings and tampa and orlando gives them good rates so don't hold your berth Montreal

      Delete
    5. @Jared: Attendance =/= relocation

      Montreal's "crime," as it were, was that it refused to build the Expos/MLB a new ballpark on the public dime. This is what makes the its supposed interest in the Rays situation so peculiar -- they'd probably maybe like to have a baseball team back again someday, but at what price?

      Delete
    6. Real Reasons why Expos Fans Stopped showing Up

      http://exposnation.com/en/real-reasons-why-expos-fans-stopped-showing-up/

      There are many mischaracterizations of Montreal as a Major League Baseball market. Of the many misnomers said about Canada’s most cultured and attractive city, is the notion that it doesn’t have baseball in its roots, nor the fan base to support baseball. After all, the lasting impression the uninformed U.S. media and baseball fans have of Montreal is an empty stadium during home games.

      The problem is it wasn’t always that way. The problem is that people don’t see the collective factors that lead to this dwindling fan support. Remember Atlanta and Cleveland in the 80’s? Remember when they too were getting 2,000 fans a game? Here are the facts about Montreal and all of the factors that slowly destroyed the fan base.

      Facts about Montreal

      - Before Jackie Robinson ever heard of Montreal, and well before he played for the Montreal Royals in 1946, the city was home to North America’s largest minor ballpark. The Montreal Royals attracted crowds of 20,000 for AAA baseball before anyone had ever heard of Jackie Robinson

      - Babe Ruth actually played exhibition games in Montreal

      - The New York Highlanders (earlier name for the Yankees) actually owned part of the Montreal Royals

      - In the early 80’s, Montreal was one of the top National League teams in attendance

      - In 1993 and 1994, as the action heated up, Montreal was drawing crowds well north of 30,000, and sometimes even 40,000

      The real reasons that fans stopped going to Expos games

      - In a climate where it’s winter for six months a year, fans don’t want to spend time indoors in the summer, nor travel to an undesirable part of town with no night life or entertainment. This is a major reason why fans began to stay away in droves from Expos games in the east end of town

      - In 1991, a chunk of concrete falls of the Olympic Stadium, forcing the Expos to play the rest of their games on the road. This scared away a small portion of the fan base

      - In 1994, a strike occurred, cancelling the rest of the season. The Expos had the best record in baseball at the time. As a result, local ownership decided they couldn’t afford the top players and they didn’t bring back their cleanup hitter, their centrefielder, their top starting pitcher and their closer. It is estimated that anywhere from 15-25 percent of the base never came back

      - Following the 1996, the Expos deem Moises Alou too expensive and shipped him out. More fans stop showing up

      - After Pedro Martinez wins the Cy Young Award in 1997, the first such award for the franchise, the Expos ship him out. Many diehards become jaded and see the writing on the wall

      - In the late 90’s, the Expos try and get a new stadium with help from all levels of government. During the campaign, the team tells the media that Olympic Stadium is no longer viable. The fans receive the message and stop showing up. The stadium deal never happened

      - For the 2000 season, new owner Jeffrey Loria doesn’t like the media rights landscape and pulls the Expos from English radio. Dave Van Horne finishes out his broadcasting tenure with the team on Internet radio only, alienating more fans

      - Major League Baseball purchases the team and attempts to contract them, before eventually operating them the final three years. Signalling the end being near, fans found supporting the team to be painful and pointless

      - In 2003, the Expos somehow compete for a wildcard spot and Major League Baseball doesn’t allow them to call up additional players in September, combined with the team playing some home games in Puerto Rico. By 2004, the final season, Expos fans had had enough.

      If these conditions happened in any other small-to-medium Major League Baseball market, they too might have lost their team. Under reasonable conditions, playing in a new downtown stadium, Montreal IS a MLB city. Period.

      Delete
    7. And by the way, let's go back to what's Manfred said (for what's it worth) in February.

      SHAIKIN
      Montreal is working hard to get an MLB team back. Are there any thoughts of expansion?

      MANFRED
      There has not been a lot of talk about expansion. In terms of internationalizing the game, North America, in terms of sustained international activity, is someplace we need to focus. Canada, Mexico, if we were going to think about it, those would be the kinds of places that I would be interested in.

      SHAIKIN
      With the markets you would look at it in North America, would it seem as if your best available markets are not United States markets?

      MANFRED
      I think that is probably right."

      http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-manfred-transcript-20150204-story.html#page=1

      So forget Louisville, Portland & al. Once the situation is fixed in TB/Oakland, Montreal in on the short list. And if TB/Oakland are becoming a real problem, then Montreal is probably the only option.

      Delete
  3. Dear Montreal, even if you build a stadium, it won't guarantee anything. Just ask the owners of the Texas Rangers, Chicago White Sox, San Francisco Giants, Seattle Mariners, Oakland A's, KC Royals......MLB thrives because of lying and pitting cities against one another.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Tampa Bay, we know that we will be used as a boogeyman and this is a "passage obligé" to get a team these days.

      Once that said, we will never built a stadium before having a deal (written deal) to have a team (existing one or new one). We will not do what Tampa Bay did back in the 90's and what Quebec city did with the arena.

      We understand that, don't worry.

      Delete
  4. @jared

    Before anyone says Montreal doesn't deserve a team because they had less than 1 million in attendance the last 7 seasons and had similar attendance to the Rays the other years, let's be careful here.

    The Expos were told in 1998 by the government that they would not receive any public money for a stadium. This basically guaranteed that the team would move, there's your last 7 seasons. In 1999 Jeffrey Loria became the owner, and we all know he doesn't like paying for stadiums.

    If you exclude the last 7 seasons, the Expos yearly attendance was at 84% of the NL average over their existence. That isn't great. If you include the last 7 seasons, the Expos yearly attendance was at 72% of the NL average. Also bad.

    But the Rays on the other hand, have had a yearly attendance of 65% of the AL average over their existence.

    Even Washington, with their 2 versions of the Senators had a yearly attendance of 67% of the AL average from 1901-1971. Yet Washington, who had worse attendance than Montreal and better than Tampa-St. Pete managed to get a team back.

    The Rays also had 6 straight winning seasons (lowest win% in those years was .519) and had 4 playoff appearances in those years (including a world series appearance). In 36 seasons, the Expos had 11 seasons equal to or better than .519 and only 1 playoff appearance.

    I'm also willing to bet that the Olympic Stadium is worse than the Trop.

    So let's be careful before we say that Montreal doesn't deserve baseball but Tampa-St. Pete does.

    I got the numbers from:
    http://www.baseball-reference.com/
    http://www.baseball-almanac.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This person clearly did their homework. lol

      Delete
    2. I've be many times to the Big "O" and one time to the Trop last year. I do agree that the Trop is way better than the Big "O". Except that in Montreal, we have 2 Metro stations, so it is way easier to go in and out.

      So TB is lucky to have such stadium compared to Montreal.

      Delete
  5. Why can't St. Pete get over their feelings getting hurt and let them move. The Rays owe St. Pete nothing. MLB told ST.Pete not to build the Trop. St. Pete is the joke of the sports world.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sternberg will never, ever put up any real money towards building a stadium anywhere in the state of Florida. He's not stupid. Why would he throw in $300M or more and go from last in attendance to last in attendance? It will never happen, it makes no sense.

    If he sells his team, my guess is $800M or more, and it relocates to Montreal, there won't be a team left to sue to, just a shell of a company. I don't wish this on the Rays fans, I am just adding up all the dollars and (common) sense.

    All you are seeing is posturing; everyone is playing nice: St Pete and Montreal politicians, Sternberg, Manfred, all of them playing nice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If he sells his team, my guess is $800M or more, and it relocates to Montreal, there won't be a team left to sue to, just a shell of a company."

      ummmm, that's not how tort law works...

      Delete
    2. I'm not a lawyer and never read the Use Agreement but let's say the Rays move to Montreal, how a Florida judge will be able to force the "ExRays" to not play in Montreal considering it's not the same legal system.

      We are at a point where legal advices will be required (for us) to understand the implications of the Use Agreement and how it will be applicable cross-border.

      Delete
    3. MLB is an American corporation. The Rays are just a franchise of that. They wouldn't be a Canadian corporation.

      Anyways, I can sue a Canadian corporation if I am a Floridian... This doesn't even make sense...

      Delete
    4. If Sternberg won't put up money for a new stadium, as you say, then he made his own poor investment decision. If he isn't getting the ROI he desired on his baseball portfolio, it isn't this community's job to bail him out.

      Florida courts have personal jurisdiction over a matter such as this one under the Florida long-arm statute. Every state has one. Basically, if you enter the state to do business, enter into contracts, commit a tort, etc., then you can be hailed into court there. A person or entity leaving a state or the country does not wipe away a liability, but that would be nifty, eh? No problem there. /facepalm Regardless of the long-arm statute, many contracts have forum-selection clauses which state where disputes under the contract will be adjudicated. The Rays Stadium Use Agreement probably has a forum-selection clause. If it does, the courts of Pinellas County are the likely forums. Statistically, plaintiffs have greater success bringing actions in their local state courts, where they are more likely to face judges with local sympathies. Defendants generally prefer to be in federal court, which is more predictable and more insulated from local politics. Federal subject matter jurisdiction is limited to federal questions (ie cases involving federal statutes like the Clean Water Act or the Sherman Antitrust Act) or cases where the parties are diverse (FL citizen/company vs. GA citizen/company). St. Pete would probably bring an action in state court under the forum-selection clause and the Rays would not be able to create diversity jurisdiction (to get into federal court) simply by hurrying out of state. In a high-profile case covered by the national media, a Pinellas County judge would be presented with the full dirty laundry list of MLB's broken promises in Tampa Bay. The headline/reputational risk to the league and to the franchise is probably as great as the threat of being enjoined to play baseball through 2027 or being forced to pay X dollars in damages. As we learned with the NFL this year, eventually karma hits back and all of your chickens come home to roost.

      Delete
    5. Very interesting. That shed some light on the legal side of things which is what is missing in this whole debate.

      Delete
  7. I wonder how many more years before theres an owner shuffle. Sternberg taking another team. Ie I could see Wilpon selling the team in another 3-5 seasons where Sternberg arranges takes the Mets as he has been a good soldier for MLB, then MLB taking over the Rays for a couple seasons before moving to Montreal once they commit to building a new stadium.

    MLB has got to be concerned that a competitive team with playing home against the Red Sox and Yankees for a quarter of their games has the lowest attendance in baseball. New stadium or not, they really have to question the viability of this market.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That actually sounds exactly like what happened in Montreal about 10-15 years ago. Remember that?

      Delete
    2. Winning team in TB does not equal more people in the stadium. So the big question for Sternberg is what is required to make sure his $200M-$300M investment into a stadium will be profitable in the TB region.

      "But the biggest surprise is the deviation from the literature in the effect of winning on attendance. My results show that fans in the Tampa Bay area do not respond to winning on a game-to-game basis. This would seem to indicate that the Rays have maximized the return on winning to attendance. In other words, if the Rays wish to increase their attendance, winning more isn’t an option."

      http://tampabaybaseballmarket.com/guest-post-modeling-rays-attendance-a-restricted-model/

      Delete
  8. Lol, the Rays won't be leaving this market. 700 people a day move into Pinellas County alone. It will soon be the 10th largest market in the U.S. By the way, attendance doesn't matter. It's all about tv revenue. MLB wants you to think attendance matters. The Marlins could average 1500 people a game for the next 10 years. MLB wouldn't care. Why? Because they have a new stadium. it's all about acquiring $$$ money from the taxpayers and t.v. revenue. The day Montreal gets a team, will be the day that they lose their beloved "Hab's" to a team in the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it's the case, why they don't move the Rays in Port Charlotte, they have a beautiful small stadium where the Rays can play. End of story.

      Delete
    2. "The day Montreal gets a team, will be the day that they lose their beloved "Hab's" to a team in the U.S."

      And by the way, comparing a baseball team coming to Montreal to a move of the Habs, one of the most prestigious sports team in the world with more than 100 years of history is demonstrating a lack of understanding of what is going on in Montreal.

      The value of the Habs (~$1B) and its profitability is tied to the fact that the team is located in Montreal. This is not the case of the Rays which rely on revenue sharing.

      Habs are to hockey what the Yankees are to baseball.

      Delete
    3. Attendance matters some what. But most important is corporate sponsorship. That's also an area where Montreal laps Tampa Bay.

      TB really needs to start looking at the writing on the wall. Believing only TV rights matter. Having a brutal attendance despite hosting the Yankees and Red Sox for a fifth of their games. MLB wont care about 700 people moving into TB if theyre not spending any of their money on the Rays themselves. Good investment or not the Rays are going to find themselves in the same position as the Expos 15 years ago.

      Delete
    4. David,

      It's pretty cute seeing someone from a city that lost its baseball team salivating about stealing another city's team.

      Delete
    5. @Muko

      I don't like seeing people who are obviously from Montreal post here about how the Rays in the the Bay Area are done. I commented on an earlier post a few days ago that I'm sure none of them appreciated Washington, Portland, etc. picking on them like vultures.

      But that said, no one from Montreal would being doing any of that if the Rays' future here was safe.

      Delete
    6. This person clearly did their homework. lol

      Delete
    7. damn it. I replied to the wrong comment! (see above)

      Delete
    8. Exactly. I'm from Montreal and the reason I'm trying to understand the whole process and see hope from Montreal is because TB have no vision regarding their baseball team and the whole impact on the community.

      It is a joke. And I told the same thing back in 2002-2004 when I saw the mess with the Expos. It was a joke. And I quit.

      And sometime, you need to lose something to really appreciate the value.

      The only way to make sure we are out of the debate is to get things worked out. And right now, we (in Montreal) see a debate on how news are presented (message by this journalist or this newspaper), how the city council is going everywhere and nowhere (amateur), how strong is the TB Rays franchise in TB because of the Use Agreement and nothing will happen before 2028, how many people show up at the city council meeting back in December, how many people showed up at the FanFest, how the Breewers fans were cheering louder than the Rays fans when I was at the Trop last summer, how sad the players are playing in front on fans of the visiting team, I think you get it.

      In fact, it is sad and ultimately, the Rays need to be loved and cheered. And what we see (from Montreal), is the complete opposite, and it's even worse. I will call the situation and the fan response "inodore, incolore et sans flavor".

      So if the community and the fans are back to the stadium, I will be happy. Because they demonstrated that they deserved it.

      But if it's the Groundhog Day again and again (like it is for the last 5-7 years), then yes, we will be part of the debate.

      This is a wake-up call TB. It's up to you to make it work or live with the natural consequences. As a Baseball fan, I want a team back ASAP. This is why we are ready to adopt a team or get a new one. We'll see which one come first.

      Delete
    9. You makes some valid points. As I've said before, the Montreal rumors will go away when a stadium is announced. I also believe that expansion will only happen when these two stadium issues are worked out. Until then Montreal and Tampa Bay will be linked.

      Personally I'd like to see both teams. I watch Rays games whenever the Nats aren't playing, and have seen the team play in Boston, Detroit, and Toronto, in addition to taking in a game at the Trop last summer. They're a fun underdog team that you can't help but cheer for. Its just so strange that attendance never improved after such a great run, basically going against the whole winning = better attendance argument that all leagues stand behind.

      The problem is that clearly the stadium boom is over, and it might just be too late to convince the taxpayers. I think we all now if a stadium is going to happen, it will be at least 50% taxpayer funded, and that might be a conservative number.

      In the meantime, we'll just all continue the debate here. After all, more comments and clicks have to be good for the website, eh Noah?

      Delete
    10. Me too, I would love to come to TB to see the Expos!

      Does Noah is doing revenue sharing from clicks with folks from Montreal?

      Just kidding here. ;)

      Delete
    11. I am not from Montreal. I am a Rays fan who sees the writing on the wall. I am frustrated Noah and many of his followers have buried their heads in the sand and say don't worry about the Trop, we have them until 2027. I am not condoning jumping up and letting them immediately out of their lease, but I would like to see some sort of progress, on a potential stadium in Tampa. I think if St. Pete keeps dragging their feet with their eye on keeping the Rays until 2027, the Rays will have moved to Montreal by 2023.

      I think there is a race between Montreal and Tampa to get their stadium proposals off the ground. Montreal just about to break out of the gate, and St. Pete has pinning Tampa to the ground.

      Think of the progress made by Montreal in the last 3 years ago. 3 years ago, they were mentioned in the same breath as Portland, Durham, and Austin. Now they are without a doubt the chief rival of Tampa.

      If I thought there was any chance of the St. Pete getting out of the way and the region working towards a stadium by 2023, I would feel good about their chances, but alas I do not.

      Delete
    12. David, I think you mischaracterize where I'm coming from. I want my takeaways to be that if the Rays really want to make a stadium happen, they'd make an offer St. Pete can't refuse and open their wallets. But it's not profitable to build a new stadium unless the public picks up a big chunk of the tab...so they lie in waiting.

      It clearly isn't as big of a priority to them as they'd like you to believe. But of course they want to make more money....so if another city trips over itself to hand over $500M, they'd likely listen. It's just that, at that price, it may be in Tampa Bay's best interests to let them go.

      I think we'd agree, at least ,that it'd be nice if this region had more productive conversations with the Rays instead of each side being locked in "maintain leverage" mode.

      Delete
  9. There won't be an "owner shuffle." His team is now worth double what he paid. He's making money hand over fist. MLB doesn't want you to know that though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not about the value of the team. We all know the investment was highly profitable for Sternberg, no doubt about that.

      It's about making money because of revenue sharing. This is a major concern by other MLB owners that the Rays rely on such revenue program to be profitable. The Rays are on "Social Security" MLB program for years and I don't see how it will be "fixed" unless more revenues are generated (attendance, TV rights, merchandize, ...).

      MLB owners will be the ones asking Manfred and Sternberg to find a long term solution to revenue sharing.

      Delete
    2. Got a couple of questions to the poster directly above me:

      1. Are you from Montreal?
      2. Do you believe a theoretical Expos team would be paying into the revenue sharing pot, or receiving money from it?

      Delete
    3. 1. Yes

      2. No. The business plan (and what was discussed publicly) is to sign a contract with MLB to not have such shared revenue before at lest a certain number of years (4, 5, 8, to be determined). It will be unacceptable to gat a team and then asked for money to be profitable. If the investors are moving forward, they must accept to inject lots of money for a good number of years (if necessary). If they are not ready to do so, then we should not get a team. Period.

      Delete
    4. Regarding the other question, does the Expos need to contribute to the sharing program. Like any other teams based on the same formula. So if they need to pay, then yes, they should contribute. On the other hand, if they need money, they need to inject money for a certain number of years.

      When the investor group started to work on the Expos return back in 2009-2010, it was the first thing that was asked by Rodger Brulotte to help them and support them in the project. Without this important detail, there is no way the project will worked out.

      Hope that clarify the answer.

      Delete
    5. MLB is treading very lightly. They will lose all Antitrust protection if it is found teams are interfering with the Rays and the contract with the city of St. Pete.

      Delete
  10. They aren't concerned about revenue sharing. They say that they are. It's a ploy. There will always be the "halve's and the halve not's." This is a system they created. It doesn't mean that just because they "wax" concern, that the solution to the i'll's of MLB, boils down to having a baseball team in Canada. Lol. Get a clue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Give us some facts so we will get a clue. Otherwise, it's all vapourware!

      Delete
    2. If you research the blackmailing that baseball, NFL, et al., have done over the years, then you would see the facts.

      Delete
  11. What is fun with this debate and the fact that people from Montreal are vocal, is that:

    You have to know where you came from to know where you’re going…

    In Montreal, we know where we came from and we did our homework (and still continue to do them, it's a long journey) to know where we are going.

    In TB, you don't seem to learn from our experience and other cities experiences. And when (and if of course) it will hit, it will be like the "Deer in headlights".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When baseball is gone, we will have beaches and art and less debt. Montreal will have snow and hockey and baseball and more debt. St. Pete will keep growing like it has been. And Montreal can keep doing what it does. The sun shines year round here. Come visit right now and enjoy a parkside dinner outdoors. It is 10 degrees in Montreal right now, so come enjoy the 70-degree weather here. I will take you to the beach, or we can go fishing or kayaking or to a great museum. We know where we came from and we know where we are going--outside for a jog or a bike ride or a walk on the beach or dinner. In February.

      Delete
    2. Baseball (and a new stadium) in Montreal is an asset, not a debt. Because it's a way to consolidate tourism with people from Boston, NY, Toronto, they all love to come in Montreal to watch baseball.

      This is more money coming in to the city that we lost when the Expos left.

      And we need a stadium downtown near the water to consolidate the development of Griffintown or the old port (depending where the stadium will be located, to be announced in 2015 or 2016).

      Once that said, don't tease me with the whether, it was -30 Celsius last night in Montreal and we have a hell (cold) of a winter so far (more than 20 days bellow -20 Celsius when the average is 5 days).

      Just hope that the summer will follow the path and we can have beautiful weather all summer long.

      I was near TB last summer for 2 weeks and can't wait to go back.

      Thanks for the invitation.

      Delete
    3. The comment from the first anon pretty much sums up my frustration with this region. There just doesn't seem to be much of a appetite for baseball here. Yeah there is other stuff to do, but I want the Rays to stay. There are things you have to do to keep the Rays and people here don't seem to really care about it. Noah will wail about how unfair it is that MLB makes a ton of money and people watch TV, so no one should care about attendance or consider building a stadium, but that is not the reality.

      Delete
    4. ”This is more money coming in to the city that we lost when the Expos left.”

      In other words, Montreal has been better off for the Expos leaving town?

      Delete
    5. The Caisse de dépôt, essentially, Quebecers' pension fund has assets of $226B and is currently yielding about 12% return. The Caisse will be an investor in a Montreal Baseball stadium as it will become part of the project of building the new Champlain Bridge and linking a light rail system. Like a previous poster said, look for an announcent in 2015-2016.

      We (Montrealers) are not vultures. We do hope Rays keep their team, in the end its better for baseball and Montreal will soon after be an expansion team.

      Furthermore, Denis Coderre, the Montreal Mayor is spending alot of time and energy on this because he knows something. He is a a politician and is building his legacy. He is not doing this so some other guy (or gal) benefits form his lobbying for a team.

      Delete
  12. Stadiums aren't assets, they're holes that suck money. Period. Montreal won't be getting a baseball team again.

    ReplyDelete