Dea Spanos vs. Dean Spanos

[Trumpet Man]

Scott Kaplan has had an axe to grind for a long time in regards to this team. I put him in the same category as Rex Ryan in that respect, so anything these guys say I take with a grain of salt. It's too bad there's so much opportunity lately for them to pile on.

Yeah but he is spot on regarding Spanos in that linky.

[Trumpet Man]

You guys are high. Dean didn’t want to stay in San Diego despite whatever public pronouncements he and his attack dog Fabiani said. They had their eye on LA for years. If they had wanted to stay in Mission Valley from the jump it would have happened but they rope a doped with the downtown and other locale bullshit.

And ?

:larry:

[jamrock]

Pffft....if the transient occupancy tax would have passed, Dean would have hit the jackpot on the taxpayers dime with a new stadium and stayed and avoided the headaches and debt incurred in a move. The tax was a non starter with the voters BUT if it passed there was no reason to move and an NFL owner has his taxpayer paid palace. What a coup for a billionaire and NFL bragging rights.

His sons were born here and were against the move as well. Dean just did not get his free lunch in a stadium and paid back the league with the soccer stadium pissing off the NFL and more........

Nope. Pay attention to what Fabiani was saying and Dean swallowed. Not enough $$ in San Diego to generate significant luxury box revenue which is the holy grail for NFL owners because it’s the only money that isn’t shared. It was never gonna be enough for Dean in San Diego. He paid $850m in loans to move to LA.

[Trumpet Man]

Nope. Pay attention to what Fabiani was saying and Dean swallowed. Not enough $$ in San Diego to generate significant luxury box revenue which is the holy grail for NFL owners because it’s the only money that isn’t shared. It was never gonna be enough for Dean in San Diego. He paid $850m in loans to move to LA.

I did pay attention. It was a negotiation tactic by the attorney and a smart one I might add. He used a market disadvantage (lack of luxury boxes) to construct a new stadium to also be figured into the "give and take" in coming to a stadium deal. A shot across the bow if you will at the powers to belly up to bar. I read that statement completely differently. Fabiani was right and smart to use that in negotiations. Very smart.

[Boltx]

Can someone explain this entire saga to me like I'm 10 years old?

Will anything significant come of this ie the Spanoses forced to sell, etc?

[Bolt-O]

As a reminder, please don't re-litigate the move from SD to LA. It was a painful time for this forum, and we lost a huge part of our membership.

[jamrock]

I did pay attention. It was a negotiation tactic by the attorney and a smart one I might add. He used a market disadvantage (lack of luxury boxes) to construct a new stadium to also be figured into the "give and take" in coming to a stadium deal. A shot across the bow if you will at the powers to belly up to bar. I read that statement completely differently. Fabiani was right and smart to use that in negotiations. Very smart.

Not if your goal was to stay in San Diego, which it wasnt

[Trumpet Man]

Not if your goal was to stay in San Diego, which it wasnt

Disagree and here is why.

There were subtle changes the Chargers made which went largely unnoticed - namely the Chargers dropped the name "San Diego" years ago and were simply called "Chargers". Look at the marketing material when the stadium issues and ticket guarantee were in full swing. This was intentional to send a message. Not many fans noticed it even in the forums or what it meant at the time.

The city could have offered land around the stadium and let Spanos develop it since they are developers by trade and Spanos was willing to do that type of deal to finance a stadium so I do not buy the "intent" all along was to get the F out of dodge. Nope. There was a lack of creative thinking on the city and counties part and then you have the NFL.

It would have been nice to have another Jack Murphy to come to the rescue.

Edit: Opppss...last post on the issue. No re-litigating per MODS....didn't know it was bad juju !!

Next !!
















That one marketing signal said to this fan - we would really like to stay here otherwise the name San Diego

[jamrock]

Disagree and here is why.

There were subtle changes the Chargers made which went largely unnoticed - namely the Chargers dropped the name "San Diego" years ago and were simply called "Chargers". Look at the marketing material when the stadium issues and ticket guarantee were in full swing. This was intentional to send a message. Not many fans noticed it even in the forums or what it meant at the time.

The city could have offered land around the stadium and let Spanos develop it since they are developers by trade and Spanos was willing to do that type of deal to finance a stadium so I do not buy the "intent" all along was to get the F out of dodge. Nope. There was a lack of creative thinking on the city and counties part and then you have the NFL.

It would have been nice to have another Jack Murphy to come to the rescue.

Edit: Opppss...last post on the issue. No re-litigating per MODS....didn't know it was bad juju

You’re proving my point. Dropping San Diego showed their intentions. Sure give them land to develop. That’s a joke. Especially in the political climate. And what has Dean developed? That was all Alex. They didn’t want to spend a dime but have ended up spending $850m. They could have spent that and gotten a little help from the Cory/County. Raiders LV stadium wasn’t that expensive.

[Boltjolt]

I think those that are still here are over them moving. It's been like 6 years.
Move again other than Vegas or SD and I think I'm out.

[Trumpet Man]

Can someone explain this entire saga to me like I'm 10 years old?

Will anything significant come of this ie the Spanoses forced to sell, etc?

Best case - Dean gets removed as Trustee and his sister Dea now has control of 51% of the team and will sell. The 3 siblings have the legal right to buy out Dea. Do the siblings have the cash ? Most say NO plus team debt limits are $500 million per NFL rules (I think its the same number) so there is that. If that is the case we may have new 51% owners of the Chargers. Booyeah baby !!!

Medium case - Dea gets bought out and nothing changes except she is - well - bought out.

Worst case - Dea drops or loses in arbitration tucks tail and takes the pain

To explain the saga as best I can, the Spanos trust owns 36% of the team.

The trust makes money and spends money.

The trust is losing $11 million per year which damages the beneficiaries of the trust or the 4 Spanos siblings who all own equal shares in the Spanos trust (9% each x 4).

Losing money can get the managing co-trustees ass (Dean and sister Dea) in hot water because the trust spends MORE than it makes.

If you are a company spending more than you make it spells trouble (insolvency).

If there is no plan to correct this deficiency or refusal to address that is grounds for removal as a co-trustee for mis-management and is an illegal act by the managers of the Trust.

There are attorneys in this thread who may have a different slant or I got some of the facts wrong so to those dudes please chime in.

This case was filed in court last year and has been "stayed" pending arbitration with the NFL.

Stay tuned.

[Trumpet Man]

You’re proving my point. Dropping San Diego showed their intentions. Sure give them land to develop. That’s a joke. Especially in the political climate. And what has Dean developed? That was all Alex. They didn’t want to spend a dime but have ended up spending $850m. They could have spent that and gotten a little help from the Cory/County. Raiders LV stadium wasn’t that expensive.

Yeah uuuhhhh.... MODS request we drop this topic soooooo.....

Party on dudes !!

:larry: