OT: Chargers Moving to Los Angeles

[SVN]

Curran: San Diego just a casualty of Goodell, NFL's pursuit of $25 billion

 

[Tunescribe]

Much better version of the logo.

It looks like the number 4, which is where they undoubtedly will reside in their division.

 

[SVN]

I don't get this. Didn't the Rams just move there and have lower ratings this season? I thought that it was either the Rams or San Diego were going to move, and since the Rams already did, that was it. This BS about getting someone else to pay for your stadium, at the expense of long-standing fan bases, is going to come back and bite the NFL in the arse. Aren't the Raiders also supposed to move to Las Vegas?

Listen up NFL - your ratings and your revenue are going down because you are pissing off your bread and butter - fans that have supported you and your franchises for years. In New England there is a concerted boycott, or at least NFL fatigue over the BS you pulled with Tom Brady that is not going away. St. Louis, San Diego and soon Oakland also have, or will have, a bad taste over you and your shenanigans. Your attempts to export the NFL to the world are failing - it's not catching on so big anywhere else, and home fans are pissed about losing home games for their teams. You refuse to hire full time refs and train them so that there is consistency in the way games are called.

You need to fix these problems rather than move teams around willy-nilly trying to come up with the best stadiums. That is only one small piece of the puzzle and you are failing big time.

Check out the foxsports article. The team/league doesnt really need tkt sales to make money.The Chargers' pending move to L.A. exposes the NFL's truth when it comes to fans | FOX Sports

 

[NormZauchin]

It's the only way that city is gonna win eight games next season.

Maybe the answer is to combine the teams into one (was done in 1943 when the Steelers and the Eagles became the Steagles). The new team could be named after the old Dodge SUV, the Ramcharger.

 

[zoostation]

The games in SD were unwatchable, this team is a total dumpster fire and Rivers is 3 times more choker than Tony Romo and no one calls him for that.

I do..... -- ->Mood In Houston: Fans Hoping For a Respectable Effort

 

[Seacoast Fan]

Imagine if other corporations started to ask taxpayers to build their facilities if you want them to stay

It should be illegal for taxpayers to fund private enterprises. These NFL teams try to hold their host cities hostage.

San Diego will lose a lot of business and tax revenues when the Chargers leave. And that's the power NFL owners have

Actually, private corporations ask for and receive tax breaks and other concessions from cities and states all the time.

 

[Seacoast Fan]

Happens everyday. It's called Tax Increment Financing, or TIF. Basically pays a much lower tax rate for the first 20 years or so, depending on the deal, saving the companies millions, increasing the other property owners taxes. The munincipalities usually win, win, win...

A TIF is only one way cities and states cut deals with private companies. There are others as well. And sometimes the cities and states win. Sometimes they don't. Google Schilling and Rhode Island and start up.

 

[TomPatriot]

Looks like something that goes on the side of puddle-jumper that goes from LA to Tijuana.

I once flew from Cancun to Havana. The plane, flight and crew were the best I've ever flown. US flights in many places are like those old photos of people taking a bus in the Bronx in the 1970s. America, F yeah!

 

[PatriotsReign]

Actually, private corporations ask for and receive tax breaks and other concessions from cities and states all the time.

Don't try to compare a tax break to funding building a new stadium

It's not apples to apples

 

[Seacoast Fan]

Don't try to compare a tax break to funding building a new stadium

It's not apples to apples

With all due respect, ultimately it is the same thing in terms of the effect on the public treasury . But it's not worth arguing about.

 

[DaBruinz]

Sucks for SD, but at the same time, Qualcomm wasn't exactly selling out consistently either

Why would it sell out when the team stunk?

 

[DaBruinz]

Two quotes

History repeats itself
...and
Man learns nothing from history​

Like others have said, LA has lots of transplants that don't care about football. The 70's Rams fans were the all time worst. Sports writers actually talked about a home field disadvantage with fans booing the Rams - they deserved to be without a team for 20 something years. They frequently choked early in the playoff...back then the Saints, Falcons, and 49ers were low feeders. A lot like the Colts recently and the non-competitive AFC South.

Raiders move to LA in hopes of taking the fans from the Rams. In 96' both teams move out. LA had a chance at an expansion team by 2002, but let Houston outbid them.

On paper, the 2nd largest city should support a team or two, but history indicates Southern California is just not that much into pro football.

Having lived in So Cal for 4 years, I can say that they are into football. However, as others have pointed out, there are a huge number of transplants with MANY being from New England. Any given sunday, the bars there are packed from the 1st game to the last. And it's because they are watching Sunday Ticket to see THEIR team play. Something they couldn't do 30 years ago.

 

[DaBruinz]

Happens everyday. It's called Tax Increment Financing, or TIF. Basically pays a much lower tax rate for the first 20 years or so, depending on the deal, saving the companies millions, increasing the other property owners taxes. The munincipalities usually win, win, win...

I always get a laugh when people talk about tax breaks that companies get and how they lament the "extra burden" put on tax payers. It tells me that people just don't understand how taxes work for corporations.

Corporations never pay taxes. And it doesn't matter if it's property taxes or Corporate taxes. Corporations figure that cost into the good or service being provided. So, it's the consumer who ultimately pays it. With the top Federal rate of 39.5% for Companies/corporations that make more than 18M per year, that's a lot of money being taken from the taxpayer. And, thanks to the wonderful tax law, any deductions that "offset" taxes, get turned into extra money for the company owner.

And before anyone says that it isn't true, it is. From the lowest end of a person renting a house to the high end of companies that own multi-family apartment buildings, to corporations that own Stadiums.

 

[DaBruinz]

How long before either the Rams or Bolts (or both) move out of LA? OVER/UNDER 8 Years

It will probably be the Chargers. I believe that the Rams already have a stadium deal, don't they?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I always get a laugh when people talk about tax breaks that companies get and how they lament the "extra burden" put on tax payers. It tells me that people just don't understand how taxes work for corporations.

Corporations never pay taxes. And it doesn't matter if it's property taxes or Corporate taxes. Corporations figure that cost into the good or service being provided.

You have the right idea, but it's more complicated than that. Who actually bears the tax depends on the relative elasticities of customer demand, labor, and vendor supply. You are 100% correct that "the corporation" will never, ever pay the tax. The tax is instead collectively paid by the shareholders, the workers, the customers, and the suppliers. How much of the tax is paid by each group depends on those relative elasticities.

For example, if you're selling a commodity product with lots of competition you can't raise the price. So the tax will come out of the pockets of workers and shareholders. If workers are a dime-a-dozen then most or all of the tax will come out of workers' pockets. If it's a field where workers are in high demand then most or all of the tax will come out of shareholders' pockets.

Same scenario, but your suppliers are a dime-a-dozen and you can easily switch between them. In that case, the tax will mostly come out of the pockets of the suppliers when the company insists on lower vendor pricing.

And so on.

"Tax incidence" is the term to search for.

 

[PatriotsReign]

With all due respect, ultimately it is the same thing in terms of the effect on the public treasury . But it's not worth arguing about.

I see them as different because in one case, taxpayers are giving them money.

With a tax exemption, it can be argued the increase in tax revenues generated by the business will be greater than the exemption

Some of my retailer clients ask us for money when we sell them something. We prefer to fund them based on performance

Either way, we give them money but one way is a little better than the other

 

[denverpatsfan]

Good for the Chargers owner. Glad he will stay profitable. Greed is the American way.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Heh, love this quote from San Diego's mayor:

“At the end of the day, Dean Spanos was never willing to work with us on a stadium solution and demanded a lot more money than we could have ever agreed to,” Kevin Faulconer said. “We live in a great city and we will move forward. San Diego didn’t lose the Chargers, the Chargers lost San Diego.”

Mayor takes parting shot at Chargers

 

[italian pat patriot]

so sad to see after more then 50 years Chargers leave SD...very sad

and i am so sorry about the loyal Bolts fans in SD

i was hoping to see them stay there...

 

[BradyFTW!]

I've been to the StubHub center a bunch of times to watch the Galaxy play. It's pretty near to where I live, so I like the location.

With that in mind, it has no business hosting an NFL team. Not the stadium, not the area.