Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
In Assessing Chargers Options, Do Cost Comparisons
Relocation fee, entry fee, it's just semantics because they are the same thing. I refer to it as a relocation fee because that's what the NFL calls it. You can call it what you want. But again you don't pay attention. It's not a fee for " the perceived value of a bundle of rights over and above what the team has today". It's a fee based on the increased value the team will gain from moving into a larger media/fan base market and from playing in a new, probably larger stadium. Not the same thing Since you only joined 2 days ago, have only commented on this story, and continually have ignored factual information provided because it seeming doesn't fit your ideals, in my opinion you have nothing to contribute to this discussion, which, by the way has already been played out several times in the Reader. In other words, you appear to be nothing more than a troll. As such, you can find someone else to share your witty(not) repartee with. 'm off to find a more intelligent conversation.— May 25, 2011 12:04 p.m.
In Assessing Chargers Options, Do Cost Comparisons
No actually you don't hear me. I used Dallas as an example because they are the highest valued team in the NFL and the second most valued sports team in the world, behind only Man-U. The wouldn't move into the countries 2nd largest market and lose value. A large portion of their value is due to their new stadium. Assuming a stadium of equal value, they would indeed increase in value do to the change in market. The Chargers are only the 24th most valuable team in the NFL. Generally speaking, any team not in the New York Market, would benefit from moving to a new stadium in the # 2 market. I have no idea on the rent of the stadium. There are way too many factors for any outsider to have any idea. Accordingly I have no opinion on what the relocation fee,. The NFL will make that determination. Much of it has to do with the revenue generated by the stadium, so until plans are finalized and approved and a stadium location and capacity is known, it's all just speculation. As I said above, the general concensus in the media is a MINIMUM of $200 million depending the factors I mentioned plus many more I'm sure. As I said there will be no money for Al Davis. Zip, nada,nunca, zilch, zero. He has no grounds. The suit will never make it to court, there will be no settlement. Al Davis will NOT be a factor in any way. At this point, it is high likely that Davis is not even mentally competent to participate and he is the only one that wants to due. The lawyers just do what he asks because it's a fat payday. I have no comprehension of why the Spanos clan would offer any particular amount towards a new stadium. I would say that if the Chargers move, it will be precipitated by at least a partial change in ownership, meaning the new owners will pay a percentage of the relocation fee, probably at least equal to their percentage of ownership. I would also expect that in such a case I would expect that the new ownership would be the majority, if not the complete, cost of the buyout from the current lease. ANY smart businessman would make that a condition. I haven't really followed the Chargers since Dan Fouts retired and really don't care either where they play in San Diego or if they stay. I will say, as someone who has been to several of the newer stadiums, including Cowboy Stadium, that by comparison the Murph is a dump. Agree, disagree, I don't care. I have been to the others and that's my opinion. Feel free to disagree.— May 25, 2011 11:53 a.m.
In Assessing Chargers Options, Do Cost Comparisons
zeus, you are not paying attention. There is no "entry fee" There are only two "fees" a team would have to pay. If it is a new expansion team, it's the franchise fee. It's exactly what it sounds like; the price someone pays for buying an NFL franchise, basically no different then buying a McDonald's franchise. That fee is established by the other league owners and is loosely based on the expected value and expected profits of the newly created team.The other fee is the relocation fee already discussed. Reread my previous post for a description. The determination of that fee won't be made until a specific team considers a move, because it is partly based on the increase value in value the team gets from moving. For example, the Dallas Cowboys are valued at about $1.8 billion, almost 2x that of the Chargers. A relocation fee for them would be considerably higher than of the Chargers. Conversely, the Raiders are worth $150-200 million less than the Chargers. But instead of e lower relocation fee, a move by them into a market like LA would likely result in a higher fee because of a larger increase in over all value than the Chargers would gain.. Al Davis may think he is owed money if a team moves to L.A., but he will never see a penny. He doesn't "own" the rights to the L.A. area any more than the Oakland area, the NFL does. As I stated above, it was a relocation fee. If you move, you pay and you don't get your money back if someone replaces you in that location. It's not a refundable "fee". Davis just didn't lose his case over the Hollywood Park stadiun(in Inglewood, NOT Hollywood Hills, btw) he got THUMPED. What he actually sued for was breach of contract, unjust enrichment and other violations of the league constitution and bylaws along with claims that the NFL acted with "oppression, malice or fraud " in dealing with the team. He tried to claim juror tampering and misconduct when he lost the verdict 9-3. The final ruling in the case by the California Supreme Court was UNANIMOUS. Some of the jurors in the original trial later said the reason they found in favor of the NFL was because of the press release the Raiders themselves put out when they moved. It simply said "The Raiders organization has chosen to relocate to Oakland".— May 25, 2011 9:06 a.m.
Wonderwall w/ George Harrison: Lost 1968 Psychedelic Gem Now on DVD
Jay Is this a newer restoration? this came out on DVD at least 10 yrs ago I think. here's the trailer http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/wonderwall… and the plot description from the back of the dvd box. In the London of the swinging '60s, a reclusive professor (Jack MacGowran) becomes infatauted with a beautiful model, Penny Lane (Jane Birkin), the girlfriend of a Svengali like fashion photographer (Iain Quarrier). The professor embarks on a noble quest to become her champion. To rescue Penny, he enters the magical realm of the Wonderwall and returns to his laboratory a transformed man. The kaleidoscope of images and George Harrison's musical soundtrack catapult the audience into a lost world of innocence, where love and laughter reign supreme.— May 24, 2011 10:37 p.m.
In Assessing Chargers Options, Do Cost Comparisons
Al Davis did not pay a fee because the NFL owned the "rights" to the L.A. area. The NFL has specific procedures for relocating a team. A team that wants to relocate from must make an application. Among other things, the application has cover issues of expected profitability in both cities, along with perceived fan support and the attitude of municipal authorities in both locations. They also have to address the issues of the actual and any proposed stadiums and the terms of the leases. They can also bring up any other issues they think are relevant to its case. The team’s application is submitted to the commissioner, who then issues a report to the League board and eeventually there is a vote. I think there is a specific timetable to all of this that is followed. I don't know exactly what it, but it does relate to the regularly scheduled owners meetings. The NFL can , and apparently most of the time does, require the team to pay a relocation fee as a condition of the League’s approval. Basically, a bribe to me. When the Rams moved to St' Louis, their relo fee was $29 million. I don't think Al Davis ever paid a relo fee. His judgment when he won his case against the NFL was about $35 million and ended up getting about 1/2 of that. His lawsuit was over the antitrust issue. My assumtion has always been the either the NFL gave up on the relcation fee issue when they lost their case or that Davis ultimately accepted 1/2 he was awarded because the relocation fee was not part of the court case. The NFL bases their relocation fee based on how much a team’s value increases by moving to a new market, everything I have read puts the amount the Chargers would have to cough up at somewhere around $200 million as a minimum. If the Spanos clan only sells part of the team, they would most likely have to pay part of it. I can't see a group agreeing to only a partial interest AND paying the whole fee. BTW, the NFL, not the teams control the designated market areas, as they call them. They are the ones who came up with the 75 mile rule, the secondary market rule, the blackout rule and all of the other rules regarding team territories. Personally, I would prefer the downtown location, but I would go to either. That said, I don't see either as coming to fruition anytime soon. I still remember John Semcken, Roski's VP at Majestic saying in an interview on TV a year ago this past Christmas that there was a 50/50 chance of a team returning to LA for the 2010 NFL season and a 100% chance for the 2011 season. How well has that gone so far???!!!— May 24, 2011 10:13 p.m.
The Terminator's Lawyer Tried to Intimidate the Reader, Too
We live about 30-45 minutes, or about 8 miles, from the SM Pier. We've spent a fair amount of time in SM over the past 30 yrs. SM politics is really not something I pay attention to, but Bobby Shriver has been involved with a lot of issues in L.A. over the years. He has done some good things so he has been talked about for a long tim, especially on the west side. I have heard him compared to Tom Hayden. Coincidentally, or not, for years we have been going to Patrick's Road at least once a week. We used to see Arnold there once in a while, pre-governator days. He had an area that was roped off and reserved just for him. I also read this morning that one of his Malibu neighbors, Jane Seymore, says that there are at least 2 more children that no one knows about yet. As Woody once said, "Wait, I have more." LOL— May 23, 2011 10:43 a.m.
Filner For Mayor?
I understand that. Perhaps I should have phrased my comment differently. I meant it more as suprise at your reference to something that was more than 20 yrs ago. Things, and people, can change substantially in that period of time. Given your many remarks regarding Schwarzenegger and President Obama relative to your disappointment in their performance vs. expectations, I was suprised that your opinion wasn't based on a more recent performance in office. As I said, people can change over that amount of time. In my experience, that is especially true of politicians who frequently change in order to keep their all important donors happy, many times at the expense of their constituents.— May 20, 2011 9:03 a.m.
The Terminator's Lawyer Tried to Intimidate the Reader, Too
Bobby Shriver is actually the Mayor of Santa Monica. He won the election last year, Before that he had been on the city council for a few yrs. There was a nice piece written about him a few months ago. I hadn't realised that he is the only member of the Kennedy clan still in elected office. He's been in L.A. for a long time. I remember from his bio when he first ran for CC, that he was a reporter for the Herald Examiner before he went to law school, so that's quite a while ago. I'm pretty certain he and Maria are the only ones in Ca. One of the brothers lives in Florida and was/is considering running for gov. Another brother lives in the DC area and runs Save the Children back there and I know that the other one heads up the Special Olympics. I think Jean Kennedy Smith has done some valuable work as well.— May 18, 2011 11:20 p.m.
Filner For Mayor?
TARP is/was HR 1424 the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. It was Bush signed it into law before the election even took place. Unlike my "representative" Henry Waxman, Filner voted no. Based on comments of yours I've read over the last couple of months,I am somewhat suprised that you don't know the difference between TARP and ARRA. I find it curious you would make a selection for a mayoral candidate because you like the fact he heckled a sitting president more than 20 yrs ago. Perhaps he was one of your professors?— May 18, 2011 10:34 p.m.
Filner For Mayor?
HR1 is House Resolution 1 better known as the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009. You know, the one paying for the high speed bullet trains to nowhere, all of those "shovel ready" projects that don't seem to have materialized. It was supposed to : Preserve and create jobs and promote economic recovery; Assist those most impacted by the recession; Provide investments needed to increase economic efficiency by spurring technological advances; Invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits; and Stabilize state and local government budgets. So anyone care to comment on how that's worked so far?— May 18, 2011 6:52 p.m.