The Columbus Crew Have Been Saved!

adam

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
May 30, 2014
8,430
19,603
353
42
LBNY

Joe_Cos

Registered
Feb 19, 2016
100
224
43
According to Forbes : As part of the deal, current operator and chairman Anthony Precourt, who announced nearly a year ago that he intended to move the team to Austin, Texas, will get his wish. Although the new Crew owners are paying an "expansion fee" of $150 million, according to my source, they get the team in its current form. Precourt, who will not pay a fee, effectively gets an expansion team in that he needs to build a new franchise. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2018/11/21/columbus-crew-sale-price-said-to-be-150-million/#2ee163c96326
 

FredMertz

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jun 2, 2014
2,774
5,793
323
39
So to summarize, Precourt 1 - MLS 0.

And more importantly, Crew fans with a victory.

But he sure did take advantage of the system to get exactly what he wanted and bypass the expansion process. He paid $68 million for the team 5 years ago, by the way.
 

adam

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
May 30, 2014
8,430
19,603
353
42
LBNY
So to summarize, Precourt 1 - MLS 0.

And more importantly, Crew fans with a victory.

But he sure did take advantage of the system to get exactly what he wanted and bypass the expansion process. He paid $68 million for the team 5 years ago, by the way.
But $68mm 5 years ago was market. Orlando paid $70mm for their expansion fee back then. The $150 (if it goes to MLS and not Precourt) is a market expansion fee for today. What Precourt really did was get Austin a team without MLS approval for the city and it took him 5 years to do so. Who really got fleeced were the other cities in line for teams who used the correct process and followed the rules.
 

413Blue

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Apr 23, 2014
3,416
5,631
303
MA
So to summarize, Precourt 1 - MLS 0.

And more importantly, Crew fans with a victory.

But he sure did take advantage of the system to get exactly what he wanted and bypass the expansion process. He paid $68 million for the team 5 years ago, by the way.
Can't really call it a loss for MLS if they end up with a revitalized Crew in a new stadium and the Austin team they wanted as well.

My assumption is this worked out just the way the league wanted.
 

FredMertz

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jun 2, 2014
2,774
5,793
323
39
But $68mm 5 years ago was market. Orlando paid $70mm for their expansion fee back then. The $150 (if it goes to MLS and not Precourt) is a market expansion fee for today. What Precourt really did was get Austin a team without MLS approval for the city and it took him 5 years to do so. Who really got fleeced were the other cities in line for teams who used the correct process and followed the rules.
Hence the use of the words "bypass the expansion process". You have countered my main point with... my main point.

The "by the way" signified that the price of the expansion team was of tangential relevance.
 

mgarbowski

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 16, 2014
13,177
37,513
353
Queens, NY
mgarbowski.com
Hence the use of the words "bypass the expansion process". You have countered my main point with... my main point.

The "by the way" signified that the price of the expansion team was of tangential relevance.
Precourt "won" when he bought the Crew and MLS agreed to a negotiated clause allowing him to move to Austin. Everything that has happened since it's a result of that deal, and the league agreed to it. That's win-win not 1-0, at least for those 2 parties.
 

413Blue

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Apr 23, 2014
3,416
5,631
303
MA
We also don't know the terms of Precourt 's deal. Will he be Beckhamed to the outside of the league sitting on a franchise with no revenue for years and years to come?
 

FredMertz

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jun 2, 2014
2,774
5,793
323
39
Precourt "won" when he bought the Crew and MLS agreed to a negotiated clause allowing him to move to Austin. Everything that has happened since it's a result of that deal, and the league agreed to it. That's win-win not 1-0, at least for those 2 parties.
The league is adding an expansion team and not getting any expansion fee. That's a $150mm loss to me.

Had Precourt merely exercised his option to move the team, they would have received the expansion fee for a new team in Columbus or wherever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christopher Jee

413Blue

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Apr 23, 2014
3,416
5,631
303
MA
The league is adding an expansion team and not getting any expansion fee. That's a $150mm loss to me.

Had Precourt merely exercised his option to move the team, they would have received the expansion fee for a new team in Columbus or wherever.
Not clear on this. The league may be receiving the fee for the Crew, so, in effect. They are getting the expansion fee in advance of the Austin club launching.
 

mgarbowski

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 16, 2014
13,177
37,513
353
Queens, NY
mgarbowski.com
Not only just nuts. Likely wrong as well.
So the league is getting something from the Haslam consortium. Maybe it's $150mm, maybe less, because he's bailing them out of an embarrassing situation.
But then the winner isn't Precourt. Precourt paid the going rate for an expansion team several years ago in a city he did not want, with an option to move to Austin. He was forced to operate in Columbus for 5 years before getting what he wanted. I don't feel sorry for him, but he's hardly the big winner. That would be Haslam -- if in fact he and his gang got a discount off the current expansion fee -- and the politicians in Ohio, who leveraged a statute of dubious enforceability, and whose stated time period had already expired, into bluffing MLS to stay in Columbus even though the league showed no interest in staying there.
Losers are Crew fans, who keep their team but now have the same ownership as the Cleveland Browns.
 

Gotham Gator

Registered
Donor
Feb 9, 2015
10,840
22,511
353
55
Bronxville, NY
Worth noting that Precourt is giving up a team with a history, front office, academy, infrastructure and stadium for a team that has none of those things in exchange for being in the city he prefers.
 

Shawn Ryu

Registered
Jul 27, 2015
644
458
63
28
Brooklyn
www.instagram.com
So the league is getting something from the Haslam consortium. Maybe it's $150mm, maybe less, because he's bailing them out of an embarrassing situation.
But then the winner isn't Precourt. Precourt paid the going rate for an expansion team several years ago in a city he did not want, with an option to move to Austin. He was forced to operate in Columbus for 5 years before getting what he wanted. I don't feel sorry for him, but he's hardly the big winner. That would be Haslam -- if in fact he and his gang got a discount off the current expansion fee -- and the politicians in Ohio, who leveraged a statute of dubious enforceability, and whose stated time period had already expired, into bluffing MLS to stay in Columbus even though the league showed no interest in staying there.
Losers are Crew fans, who keep their team but now have the same ownership as the Cleveland Browns.
Actually the Browns are finally starting to look like an NFL team under Haslam ownership.
 

mgarbowski

Registered
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 16, 2014
13,177
37,513
353
Queens, NY
mgarbowski.com
Oh great. Here comes another FC and white away kits.


Do these FC loving idiots not realize that the reason "Location FC" names have cachet is they have history, going back to when people literally formed local clubs to play the sport? Same for Inter, Real, Athletic, United or whatever. There is a real, historic reason for those names and that is why they resonate with people. I hate that MLS and so many of its fans think the way to create our own history is to adopt foreign names and conventions that have no local resonance or connection to place.
 
Last edited:

QuigrNYCFC

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Jun 3, 2016
627
884
93
Brooklyn, NY
Oh great. Here comes another FC and white away kits.


Do these FC loving idiots not realize that the reason "Location FC" names have cachet is they have history, going back to when people literally formed local clubs to play the sport? Same for Inter, Real, Athletic, United or whatever. There is a real, historic reason for those names and that is why they resonate with people. I hate that MLS and so many of its fans think the way to create our own history is to adopt foreign names and conventions that have no local resonance or connection to place.
Hot take: They shouldn't allow any more FC, United, SC, Inter etc. until MLS agrees to play on the international schedule. If they want to look and sound like the rest of the world, they should follow the same schedule of the rest of the world.
 

Fantazma

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 9, 2014
6,850
7,782
303
Hot take: They shouldn't allow any more FC, United, SC, Inter etc. until MLS agrees to play on the international schedule. If they want to look and sound like the rest of the world, they should follow the same schedule of the rest of the world.
Fair to an extent....I mean brazil also doesnt follow the international schedules. They have a bunch of SC ( Sporting Club) and some FC ( Futebol clube) but the difference i guess is that they are legit multiple sport clubs.