Move to Las Vegas might not add up for Raiders
SAN JOSE — Raiders fans know their math and love numbers. I know this because before home games in Oakland, I pull into the Coliseum parking lot and am greeted by some fans who flash me, um, a variation of the No. 1 sign.
Those fans also know percentages. That’s a significant skill these days. The Raiders cannot move to Las Vegas un- less 75 percent of the 32 NFL owners approve. Seventy five percent of 32 is 24. So it will take nine “no” votes to stymie the relocation proposal of Raiders proprietor Mark Davis.
Nine votes isn’t very many. Especially in a league with so many big-ego owners who tend to believe they invented fire and know the secrets of the universe and have strong opinions.
I can’t give you the precise nine names who might squash the Raiders’ proposed move. But I can definitely come up with nine reasons any owner could chose to vote “no” in January when the Las Vegas issue is expected to be addressed at a meeting just before the Super Bowl. That’s why I ex-
pect, at minimum, for there to be no decision rendered at that meeting. A complete rejection is also possible.
Here are the nine reasons:
1. Market size
We’re talking pure metrics logic. Las Vegas is the 40th-largest market in the United States, which would make it among the NFL’s five smallest markets if the Raiders move there. It also pales in comparison to the Bay Area, the league’s sixth-largest market. In terms of population, corporate dollars and television sets, metropolitan Las Vegas is less than one-third the size of the nine-county Bay Area. That’s one third. Not one half. One third. The league will not casually abandon that many potential customers or TV eyeballs, especially with television ratings taking a recent dip.
2. Risky logic
I know, I know. The idea is that an NFL team in Las Vegas will draw thousands of paying customers from out of town. But can you count on that, especially if the Raiders are having a bad season? Nevada legislators are actually counting on it. Their financing formula — a hotel room surcharge — is extremely optimistic. It assumes that one third of the 65,000 fans at any game, including in the exhibition season, will be tourists who stay in a hotel for 3.2 days and spend a collective $375 million per year. It doesn’t sound as if the NFL trusts those numbers. The league is conducting its own marketing study to see if they are fantasy or potential reality. If the report produces warning flags, owners’ votes could be swayed.
3. Adelson questions
You probably have heard the basics about the agreement Davis struck with Las Vegas and Nevada. Public money from the hotel surcharge is supposed to provide $750 million for the stadium project. Davis and the Raiders have promised to kick in $500 million, with $200 million of that from NFL loans and the rest from seat licenses or other franchise funds. The remaining $650 million is slated to come from Sheldon Adelson, a canny 83-year-old casino magnate known to always get what he wants. In this case, it’s unclear what he wants. Adelson has said publicly, for example, that he isn’t demanding a piece of the Raiders ownership in exchange for his stadium contribution. But journalist Jason Cole of Bleacher Report has said Adelson did discuss that possibility with Davis, who dismissed the notion. The NFL will want to know what’s up.
4. Legal concerns
Lawsuits also seem to follow Adelson around, which might not be unusual for a big businessman/developer, but will certainly cause the NFL to scrutinize the finer points of the financing language. According to various reports, Adelson settled two lawsuits against his company just this year, including one that had prompted a federal investigation. The last thing the NFL wants is to get involved in a stadium deal that might take a side trip into a courtroom. Essentially, the league believes that accepting the stadium package with Adelson’s major money will be like inviting him into its exclusive club. Certain owners are going to be careful about laying out the welcome mat.
5. Relocation fee
When an NFL team transfers operations from one city to another, the league requires a payment from that franchise. The logic is that other owners deserve compensation when a team takes away a potential market from the rest of them. The fee size varies. Rams owner Stan Kroenke paid the league roughly $515 million for the rights to leave St. Louis and occupy Los Angeles. The fee for a Las Vegas move surely wouldn’t be that high. But we all know Davis is not among the NFL’s wealthiest owners. Could he afford another $200 million on top of the money he has promised toward the stadium? League rules prohibit Davis from borrowing against his own ownership equity in the team. Skeptical owners might ask to see the Raiders’ books and accounting to make sure the dough is there.
6. The commissioner
It’s true that Roger Goodell might not wield the power of other league commissioners. At NFL meetings, the big voices among ownership are often Jerry Jones of Dallas and Robert Kraft of New England. They can be convincing voices. Both have said they look upon Las Vegas favorably. But other owners might heed Goodell, who is in pump-the-brakes mode about the Las Vegas fever. “There’s a great deal of work that needs to be done for ownership to make that kind of consideration,” Goodell said in his most recent remarks on the topic. At the very least, you would expect him to recommend to delay a Las Vegas vote until March or even later. Nine owners could easily agree.
7. Davis’ NFL stature
The Raiders owner has come a long way when it comes to his image and reputation among other owners. They respect how he has been a team player, specifically in the way he responded so magnanimously after losing his Los Angeles relocation bid with the Chargers earlier this year. But there remain doubts about his financial capabilities (see above) and whether he has the business chops to bring a team into a new market and have it succeed. Plus, depending on how the San Diego Chargers’ stadium vote goes, Los Angeles might open up again as a Raiders landing spot if Davis wants to share the Rams’ stadium with Kroenke. Some owners might feel more comfortable with him going to a market where the Raiders already have an established fan base.
8. NFL as developer?
Owing to the NFL’s inclination to keep the Raiders in the Bay, it has taken a recent direct involvement in Oakland’s desire to create a workable Raiders proposal. There are even murmurs about the league, in conjunction with Ronnie Lott’s group, getting involved as a real estate developer in a project on the current Coliseum site. Sounds wild. But if there’s any teeth to those rumors, it would certainly affect an owners’ vote, wouldn’t it? (Yes.)
9. That gambling thing
You knew we would get to that eventually. Saved it for last. Most owners, I believe, have overcome their concerns about putting an NFL franchise in a city with legalized sports betting. But the league has officially and legally fought against such betting or sports lotteries in other states. By becoming partners with Adelson and other casino interests backing the stadium, the NFL will basically forfeit any arguments it makes in those cases. I could easily see nine of the more traditional owners unwilling to abandon that high ground.
The point is, there are more complications than you might imagine in the Las Vegas Raiders story, which is a long way from reaching the goal line. And right now, the most important number is nine.