Dingo18287 Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 Manfield apparently said he'd be open to the A's moving to Las Vegas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 7 hours ago, Dingo18287 said: Manfield apparently said he'd be open to the A's moving to Las Vegas. More than that, he said that if Oakland doesn't drop it's lawsuit that the team would be going to Vegas. The As should not get to develop city land to pay for their portion of a new stadium with public funding. Greed knows no bounds, I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils1854 Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 A's to Vegas, Rays to Nashville. Lets get it done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 5 hours ago, N4L said: More than that, he said that if Oakland doesn't drop it's lawsuit that the team would be going to Vegas. The As should not get to develop city land to pay for their portion of a new stadium with public funding. Greed knows no bounds, I guess I guess I should elaborate. The county of Alameda owns the land with the city of Oakland 50-50. The county wants to sell its portion to the As, who will then develop the land and turn a profit, which they can then use to build their new stadium. The As have offered 85 million for it, and the city cant afford to pay that kind of money for the land. The city has then sued the county to prevent the sale. Honestly, the land is worth more than 170 million and they should most certainly tell the As to take a hike and sell the property jointly, with very specific development guidelines and zoning. that way they get a say in what gets built, without building it, and without having the As involved. Idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 10 hours ago, N4L said: I guess I should elaborate. The county of Alameda owns the land with the city of Oakland 50-50. The county wants to sell its portion to the As, who will then develop the land and turn a profit, which they can then use to build their new stadium. The As have offered 85 million for it, and the city cant afford to pay that kind of money for the land. The city has then sued the county to prevent the sale. Honestly, the land is worth more than 170 million and they should most certainly tell the As to take a hike and sell the property jointly, with very specific development guidelines and zoning. that way they get a say in what gets built, without building it, and without having the As involved. Idiots. I'll have to disagree with you. An owner of land should be able to sell it to whoever they want for whatever they want. If the county owns 50% they can sell that 50% for whatever they want. It may be an unwise sale but that is their choice. The only thing that can or should prevent it is if there is a contract between the city and county regarding the land that limits its alienability. That is generally what the law says as well. I won't get into zoning because that leads too far into politics for this site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 5 minutes ago, mse326 said: I'll have to disagree with you. An owner of land should be able to sell it to whoever they want for whatever they want. If the county owns 50% they can sell that 50% for whatever they want. It may be an unwise sale but that is their choice. The only thing that can or should prevent it is if there is a contract between the city and county regarding the land that limits its alienability. That is generally what the law says as well. I won't get into zoning because that leads too far into politics for this site The county would be better served selling 100% of the land to a private investor for more than 170 million and getting 50% of the proceeds. Its a huge site in one of the most expensive markets in the world. Why should the county undersell the property? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 It's the right city to maybe light a fire under Oakland given the Raiders situation, the thing is, there's validity to it. We know the city of Henderson (which is basically a suburb of LV in the southeaster part of town) already had a location in mind for the stadium and was attempting to woo Arizona I believe it was. LV wants these sports teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelonebillsfan Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Playing baseball in Vegas is stupid as hell. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 21 minutes ago, Thelonebillsfan said: Playing baseball in Vegas is stupid as hell. How else are the Raiders gonna play on a dirt infield? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsoxsuck05 Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 23 minutes ago, Thelonebillsfan said: Playing baseball in Vegas is stupid as hell. We have a team in Colorado and it’s fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 3 hours ago, redsoxsuck05 said: We have a team in Colorado and it’s fine. "fine" Its like playing on mars with zero gravity. The ball doesnt break as much on breaking balls. Pitchers have to throw more fastballs. The outfield is so huge that routine outs turn into doubles. Its abnormal to say the least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 12 hours ago, N4L said: The county would be better served selling 100% of the land to a private investor for more than 170 million and getting 50% of the proceeds. Its a huge site in one of the most expensive markets in the world. Why should the county undersell the property? If the city owns 50% the country can't decide on it's own to sell 100%. And whether it would be better or not isn't the point. The point is whether they are allowed to. Real estate owners are well within their rights to make bad deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbie_Hancock Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Let moose and yaz walk. sign Cole. Profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbuff Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 That’s cute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 2 hours ago, bigbadbuff said: That’s cute. I mean could any of us even come up with one good reason why a guy like Curt Schilling wouldn't make a great MLB manager? The only skills required are leadership, communication, and working with others. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.