|
|||||
 |
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-25-2006, 01:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Al Davis Has Been Trying To Sell Merged
__________________
Quote:
|
| Sponsored Links | ||
| ||
|
|
|
11-25-2006, 01:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I heard something about this last week from an inside source
|
|
11-25-2006, 01:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I could be proved wrong later, but I'm very skeptical about that.
|
|
11-25-2006, 01:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well this only confirms what I've tried to tell many people that Davis does not nor ever has had 51% controlling interest in the Raiders, rather acts as the mouthpiece for the managing general partnership.
__________________
"You can't Appoint, Hire, or Declare Leadership" ~ Sonny Barger "Al Davis thought all owners were dilettantes with a new toy. He said to me many times through the years that owners are often the problem with their franchises, that too many of them think they can run things when they cannot, and the teams that succeed are the ones where the owner hires the best people he can and turns the game over to them."
|
|
11-25-2006, 02:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
im kinda young and dont get the whole share/percentage thing. Is it whoever has the majority of the percentage has the ultimate control over the team?
__________________
"When you play for the Raiders you play to win and you play tough. It's not something the coaches teach or talk about. It's just there, like in the air. It's an attitude--you are going to hit people and smash them if you are a Raider." - Phil Villapiano
|
|
11-25-2006, 02:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A Partnership can be a General Partner of a bigger Limited Partnership. Thus, Davis owns a controlling interst of a partnership, and has appointed himself manager. That partnership is the General (and sole managing) Partner of the Raiders. Davis, the manager of the General Partner, is totally in control of the Raiders. i'm going off the top of my head here ... so I may be wrong on the details ... but I'm fairly sure that's how it works.
|
|
11-25-2006, 02:17 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As for being in control without holding 51%, I'm not sure that is accurate. He jmay have a larger percentage than the minority owners something like 38% or close to it, but you do have to control the 51% inorder to sell the team etc. He may want to sell a good percentage, but certainly not a controlling interest. I may be wrong on this...
__________________
"You can't Appoint, Hire, or Declare Leadership" ~ Sonny Barger "Al Davis thought all owners were dilettantes with a new toy. He said to me many times through the years that owners are often the problem with their franchises, that too many of them think they can run things when they cannot, and the teams that succeed are the ones where the owner hires the best people he can and turns the game over to them."
|
|
11-25-2006, 02:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Only a rumor!
__________________
|
|
11-25-2006, 03:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That's why this plan of succession is more than likely not going to be smooth. As usual, Al probably has someone he wants to give control to (Matt Millen, with our luck) but it will have to be cleared with the rest of the owners. Al's non-majority status means he can't just sell off his controlling stake. It's going to be a mess. All we can hope for is that it is someone extraordinarily competent. I heard that the second largest stakeholder in the team, i forget the name of the family, sued Davis last year for mismanagement and were trying to get rid of him.. anyone know anything about that?
|
|
11-25-2006, 03:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's always possible. The Mercury News estimates the Raiders worth at $736Million.
At approximately 30% share, thats worth $220M to Al. If no one in his family is that interested in taking over, why not cash out? Again, its just a rumor but these are the decisions people have to make when they get to be Al's age. What will be interesting is if Al's family keeps its share after he passes. I don't think there is any guarantee they will control the franchise. As someone posted above, if you don't have majority share (51% or more) any agreement you have with the other owners to run the whole deal is tenuous. Even more so if your not alive I would imagine!
|
|
11-25-2006, 03:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Al Davis contolling interest
The McGaw family was the one who sued davis but it wasn't for mismanagement it was for him being shady with the books. Ultimatley the outcome was Davis had to buy them out of the interest in their stake of the Raiders.
Far as controlling interest it doesn't matter if he only had a 10% stake in the team if the the other partners are only in it for the money and Davis consistently pays them there fair share he will remain in control. Lew Wolf of the A's is in a similar situation where he rounded up the investors to buy the A's from Schott and Hoffman but of his own money that was investested in the transaction very little of it wasnhis own. Most of the money came from the family that owns Levi Strauss out in SF, they are silent partners behind Wolff. Same deal applies with the Raiders Davis controlls the football operations because he has been able to sucessfully pay the partners whatever it took to keep them quiet. If for whatever reason the raiders weren't profitable or Davis dies it would be up to the other partners how to proceed. They could find a Davis clone to run the org much the same way Davis did or they could choose to sell his interest in the team or they could choose to sell it all off. My guess is that the owners will eventually sell it all off once Davis passes as it's pretty much been the same ownership group of the team since the 60's and I don't think they are going to want any piece of running the thing without Davis there as a barrier or shield between the team and the rest of the sports media or local governments.
|
|
11-25-2006, 06:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is all hard to believe. Even if Al only owns 25% of the team, he is still in charge because he owns the biggest piece of the pie.
I doubt he is trying to sell, since Steve Young and Brent Jones wanted to buy this past off season, and Al said the Raiders aren't for sale. It's too bad, Young and Jones would have done a lot for us, including getting us a new stadium.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
11-25-2006, 06:16 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
 “People expect things to be a jump, quick, fast, in a hurry,” Russell said. “They don’t really know football, because there’s a process, and now we’re on one of those building stages of the process and I’m happy to be a part of that because once things are getting going, then everyobody wants to be praising, patting you on the back."
|
|
11-25-2006, 06:43 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I tend to believe this rumor. It sounds like Al. I can see him not selling to Jones and Young. My guess is that once a owner has bought the team and the papers are signed then we will hear the news. This almost reminds me of the coaching search. Al denies everything, then poof we have a owner. When asked about other potential buyers, he denies offering the team to them. They wanted to buy but I didn't offer.
__________________
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Pain heals, chicks dig scars, glory lasts forever... --LT Robert Gallery gave up a sack to Bertrand Berry on a play where QB Andrew Walter changed the play at the line of scrimmage to a draw, and then dropped back to pass.
|
|
11-25-2006, 09:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Actually, from reading with no inside sources within the Raiders.. Al now owns approx. 69 percent of the Raiders now. He previously owned 37 percent but settled with the McGrah's estate and leveraged his own shares as collateral to buy out the 32 percent owned (something at a price of 92 million American Dollars). To purchase a team now you have to own 51 percent of a teams share but Al grandfathers the rule.
__________________
Is it better to be respected or feared? I say is it too much to ask for both?
|
| Sponsored Links | ||
| ||
|
|
