SVLG makes plea to Selig
- 09.08.10, 23:12
- 92 Comments
It’s best that I just post the contents of the letter sent by SVLG to Commissioner Selig today (Merc article), so without further ado…
September 8, 2010
The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball
Allan H. (Bud) Selig, Commissioner
245 Park Avenue, 31st Floor
New York, NY, 10167Dear Commissioner Selig,
The Silicon Valley Leadership Group strongly supports a new home for the Athletics baseball team in downtown San Jose. We were encouraged to learn of San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed’s positive conversation with Major League Baseball President Bob Dupuy regarding the timing of a possible election next spring should the A’s be granted approval to pursue the construction of a baseball-only state of the art Ballpark in downtown San Jose.
By way of background, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group was founded in 1977 by David Packard and has grown to become the largest organization of its kind in Silicon Valley with more than 300 member companies. Combined member companies employ more than 250,000 local workers – nearly one of every three jobs – and generate more than $2 trillion worth in global revenue.
We, the undersigned CEOs and senior executives, are committed to bringing jobs, revenue, a rich culture, and a thriving business climate to Silicon Valley. We believe that an intimate state of the art ballpark located on a prime downtown San Jose parcel, close to mass transit and major highways will be a catalyst for economic development in our region. We also believe downtown San Jose offers a compelling location for the advancement of Major League Baseball in the 21st Century. Silicon Valley is well known throughout the world as the cradle of innovation and the leading incubator of new ideas and new possibilities for human kind. There is no better location than San Jose, located in the heart of Silicon Valley, to advance the Major League Baseball brand on a global basis.
San Jose is a world-class community, and the ballpark proposal not only secures a quality Major League Baseball team for America’s 10th largest city, but also creates jobs, strengthens our economy and enhances the cultural opportunities for our workers and their families. According to an economic study commissioned by the City of San Jose, a new ballpark will generate thousands of construction jobs and permanent positions at the ballpark and surrounding area.
The Silicon Valley Leadership Group, along with other respected and diverse organizations, stands ready to offer any support needed to move this important project forward. The Silicon Valley Leadership Group is comprised of both devoted A’s and Giants fans and we will continue to enthusiastically support both teams. We strongly believe that both teams will thrive in a vibrant two team market anchored by San Francisco and the Bay Area’s largest city, San Jose. Today, the Bay Area is the only two team market in Major League Baseball where the teams don’t fully share their common geographic territory. The divided territory was imposed at the request of San Jose baseball boosters in 1992 in a previous attempt to secure a Major League Baseball team. We can only hope moving forward that the Bay Area can be restored to a shared marketplace for the two teams in a manner similar to Chicago, Los Angeles and New York.
It is integral to our mission that we support and promote opportunities to improve the quality of life for families who live and work in Silicon Valley. A new A’s ballpark will provide a great entertainment and community asset that will capture the essence of Silicon Valley. It will be a tremendous benefit to our region, with a wide appeal that can help to promote Silicon Valley – and Major League Baseball – on a national and international level. The new venue will be a great source of pride for our innovative region, and deserves your consideration and approval to move forward.
Please call on us to help make this decades old dream to attract a Major League Baseball team to Silicon Valley a reality in the near future.
John Chambers
CEO, Cisco Inc.Carol Bartz
CEO, Yahoo!Tom Werner
CEO, SunPowerJohn Donahoe
CEO, eBayMike Klayko
CEO, Brocade Inc.John Doerr
Partner, Kleiner PerkinsCarl Guardino
CEO, Silicon Valley Leadership GroupShantanu Narayen
CEO, Adobe
Other signatories include Lew Wolff, former mayor Ron Gonzales, the publisher of Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, the presidents of Santa Clara University, UC Santa Cruz and Foothill-De Anza Community College District, the CEO of Palo Alto Medical Foundation, and the head of Goodwill Silicon Valley, who happened to be head of the Valley’s largest beverage distributor a couple years ago. Just about everyone else on the second page is either the head of a tech firm or a bank. Including the main heavy hitters, that’s 75 companies and organizations, and the vast majority of them are not small businesses.
The crux of the letter is the request to share the Bay Area the same way New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago are shared. My guess is that this won’t happen because of certain long term implications. Unlike those other three markets, the Bay Area is uniquely set up for a game of franchise musical chairs once any lease ends and a team wants a new stadium. The others aren’t. If a T-rights compromise were to occur, the definitions would look much more like Washington-Baltimore just because of the decades of history there (and here) that can’t be easily wiped away. That said, the letter’s soft pitch does have one statement that has some hidden teeth.
We strongly believe that both teams will thrive in a vibrant two team market anchored by San Francisco and the Bay Area’s largest city, San Jose.
Something’s missing from that declaration.
whoa
Whoa is right! That is a lot of political and economic muscle. It dwarfs the Doug Boxer letter!
I’ll tell you one thing: there’s a heck of a lot more power, money and influence at the bottom of that letter than at the top. Selig must realize this.
Hasn’t Oakland just been pummeled by San Jose this past month? San Jose’s stolen the limelight with no intention of giving it back.
the momentum def is on sj’s side.
city and business community making their case be it with the ballot measure and now this letter cosigned by so many ceos of large companies based in the south bay. a’s org no matter how you feel about them has clearly made it clear they prefer moving to sj.
as an oaklander for all my life, it’ll sting having the a’s leave but i do feel them moving down to sj is the best fit for them financially long term.
LMAO…You guys crack me up. That letter don’t mean squat–I’m not impressed at all. Sounds like SJ is a little worried there and had to up one from Oakland’s corporation letter. Have to get around that sticky issue of TR’s, folks. Maybe if these 75 Tech Giants chip in to pay the SF Giant’s off of the tune of 200 mill, or 2.65 million each, you may have something there, but in the meantime the waiting game continues and it favors Oakland the longer it goes.
Signed:Pollyanna Luddite
jk-uisa – Move to Oakland yet? You can’t be advocating that Oakland spend $$ on a stadium that you yourself won’t have to pay for.
Like I said in another thread: Selig has to ask himself if pacifying the crybaby Giants is worth it to lose Cisco to the NFL. Turn Cisco from an MLB naming rights sponsor to an NFL naming rights sponsor. Your move, Bud.
I suppose a Facebook account is much more impressive than this letter, right jk? LMAO !!!!! Lol
Jk-USA: I have no idea what news feeds you are following but you are as off base and wrong as can be. Nothing, and I mean not a thing, favors Oakland in keeping the A’s longterm. MLB is lukewarm to disinterested, and the team won’t talk to the city anymore. Your comments sound like someone who wants them to be true but has not a single fact to back up your view.
On to reality…… Letters like this from some of the leading businesses on the planet are how you influence decisions. It’s not a lock of course but continues to show the real foundation that is there and the future that can be gained. I really was born in Oakland and I wish they would stay but I know that’s a pipedream. It’s all about money of course and nothing else when it comes to TR and the Giants. My guess is that MLB will pay off a short term hassle to gain the longterm benefits in all that San Jose offers. I expect a green light for San Jose from MLB in a couple of months after the World Series. After that it is up to San Jose.
Yes, $500,000 “pledged” from East Bay companies certainly is better than Cisco’s signed contract for $4 mill a year for 30 years. Can anybody fill me in on the news of which East Bay company has pledged tens of millions to be the naming rights sponsor for an Oakland ballpark? I must have missed that one.
I’m pretty sure Cisco’s budget for employee birthday cakes exceeds $500,00.
@pjk: Hard to say, maybe Thomas Guide or Cost Plus World Market. Either way, some biggies. :P
200 million dollars? You should at least try to say something based in reality.
Just want to say…that my CEO rocks! Going to email him thanks for signing that letter! ;)
Our company has had an A’s box suite for almost a decade, that is until the recent recession. With the economy still in bit of a limbo, I don’t think we’ll renew the contract until there is a new venue, especially if it is in SJ (we still own Sharks/HP Pavilion suites interestingly enough).
@jk-usa, The mistake the City of Oakland (and its supporters) are making is pinning their hopes on the Giants TR issue. Instead, they ought to be more active in getting their act together. Has the City done anything to over the past 6 months to further their cause? Have they met with any of the property owners of the two sites?
.
No one knows how MLB will rule on the TR issue. My concern is that MLB will rule infavor of Oakland, and we will have to wait another 5-10 years before getting a new ballpark. I have said it before, if the City of Oakland is not serious about building a ballpark, they ought to quit the BS and step aside.
After sleeping on this, I’m curious how Selig will receive it. Is he the type that will be motivated by the weight of those names? Or will he react negatively to the pressure, especially since it’s been done in the public eye? It all boils down to what kind of man he is. Like most, I have a pretty low opinion of him as commissioner, but I have no idea what kind of person he really is inside. Hopefully, he’s the type to feel empowered by this, not threatened.
Jesuit power! LOL. Fr. Engh was one of my teachers at LMU before moving on to Santa Clara
Outstanding letter! The “Coup De Grace” IMHO. I do agree with RM in that we shouldn’t expect the entire Bay Area to become a shared territory; just Santa Clara County.
Also interesting about the letter is the suggestion (and truth) that SVLG members will continue to support the Giants. Now that’s huge because it strikes down the bull crap that always comes out of Neukom’s, Baer’s, and Slaughter’s mouth.
Again, the “Coup De Grace!”
I agree with Tony. The biggest gut punch to the Giant’s position is that the SVLG has basically just gutted their argument that they’d lose their base if the A’s move. These 75 heavy hitters have all just stated that won’t be the case that they’d support both teams.
That’s a lot of power. I think it will happen. Plus Selig is Wolff’s frat brother. I would love to see Downtown SJ with the A’s and Sharks there. Downtown has gotten much better since my SJSU college days in the mid 90′s.
@ fc
My concerns as well. If MLB uphold the current TRights, what prevents Oakland/Alameda County not making any progress on a new ballpark? I understand their strained financial situation and it’s an unfortunate situation for the city, its citizens, the A’s and local A’s fans. However, unless there’s a mandate from MLB, isn’t it possible (and likely) that the A’s could remain at the Coliseum well past 2020?’
thats impressive. tell you what i’m a skeptic, i didnt know BB in SJ had support like that. I bet this post won’t be deleted.
This is unreal as the combined revenue of those companies listed is how they say “on another level” and these executives signed it themselves and put their names on paper. This shows extreme credibility from a support stand point for a team.
Smart move by SVLG as it shows they are serious about supporting the A’s and the key here is as Tony D points “continued support of the Giants” as well.
It is funny to me how Bill Neukom says he will sue when he knows as a lawyer himself it is against all anti-trust law to restrict a competitor by geography.
Dell, Apple, and HP can set up shop right next door to each other if they want and baseball is no different…Of course it doesn’t make sense to have 2 teams right next door but that is irrelevant as free trade and restriction of it is against anti-trust law as the Raiders and Clippers proved years ago.
If Neukom sues he will erode the very anti-trust exemption that secures Santa Clara County for his team right now. He is bluffing and playing his hand hard but at the end of the day the Giants are going to lose Santa Clara County for the betterment of MLB.
He is better off negotiating a settlement while getting is good so the MLB doesn’t determine it for him. Otherwise he can sue and get nothing in return once the anti-trust exemption gets pulled.
Also to ML’s comment on the shared territory. They have to change it to a “shared market” in order to keep the Giants team value from dropping.
Right now evaluations are done based on market and that includes SC county for the Giants. If they give SC County to the A’s then the Giants evaluation will drop automatically.
But if they make it a shared market both teams values will go up since they will each get extra territories added that will add $$ to their valuations…Especially for the A’s.
Baltimore-Washington is different since a team was moved into the area from out of the market plus the market is split up amongst different states.
The A’s and Giants have been in the Bay Area market for 42 years and that has to be taken into account here. So it makes sense to consider the Bay Area much like LA, NY, and CHI who have had shared markets for almost the same amount of time or longer rather than BAL-WAS as they just started to be neighbors again.
Neukom is forbidden from suing MLB. If he starts in with shenanigans such as getting others to sue by proxy, maybe MLB can just take away the whole franchise. Would be nice. The Giants have a chance to show some class but opt for amazing selfishness instead. Not to mention imposing their will on the people of San Jose and eliminating San Jose’s voice in the matter. Disgusting.
Sid, MLB has an Antitrust exemption and is allowed to restrict competition by geography. If it didn’t, the A’s would already be moving to San Jose.
hit “submit” on accident. Sorry Sid
MLB has an anti trust exemption, as you pointed out, so why “restricting by geography” is even relevant I have no idea. In reality, Baseball teams can’t set up shop like Apple, Google, Dell, whoever without the league saying it is okay.
The more likely scenario is Neukom would file suit against MLB for letting the A’s move. Which would probably be tossed because of the MLB constitution, which all owners have signed an agreement to adhere to, states that all disputes between the league and/or the clubs will be arbitrated by the Commissioner and his say is final. Basically, they aren’t allowed to sue.
But we will all have to watch and see how this plays out.
Jeffrey – I think Sid understands the AE, but is saying what i had previously posted on AN: if Neukom is stupid enough to sue MLB and wipe away the AE, the only precedent for MLB to assign geographical territories, it would open up SJ automatically. Hence, in essence, shooting himself in the foot.
Sid – great post about “shared territory” and team evaluation. The only win-win situation is to open up the bay area as a 2 team market altogether which would then open up the East bay to the Giants balancing any negative effects of a shared south bay.
Saw a post that suggested that Neukom’s latest strategy is to undermine the efforts via the ATT land acquisition….suggesting to ATT that their $50M naming rights deal with the gints would lose value if this is allowed to go forward….and yes…I understand that SJ can use ED to get the land…but it muddies the waters and causes potential delay….Nothing suprises me at the level in which the gints are willing to stoop—-isn’t there an understanding albeit a gentleman’s agreement that suggests owners do whats in the best interests of baseball first and than work their personal gain…somebody needs to inform Neukom and the gints of this–
Great comment thread. Can’t really add anything other than the San Jose’s greatest asset as a suitor for the A’s is its market-revenue potential and that pretty much alone will determine how MLB resolves this matter. As is the case with open letters like this, this probably isn’t the first time the SVLG is contacting MLB/Selig’s office just like Lew Wolff didn’t actually just hire 360 Architecture this week. It’s a message to San Jose’s voters, local businesses and potential investors. Just from a fan’s perspective, I appreciate such a strong gesture in support of my team.
A lot of us have already been asked to renew season tickets, etc. Isn’t proverbial carrot an authentic uniform of any player? Thanks, but no thanks. I’m definitely still going to as many games as I can next season, but I’m not throwing down my money until they bring in some offense. Of course no one can guarantee that big bat will be the difference maker, but it’s a gesture to us the fans. San Jose votes just got their incentive to approval the RDF’s for a Diridon Ballpark and it’s more than a free jersey.
San Jose can condemn the ATT land. That strategy is akin to trying to hold up the waves by standing on the beach with your arms stretched out.
By strategy, I mean using ATT to stop the ballpark.
@all – There’s a point that’s being missed here. Sure, MLB could make the Bay Area shared just like NYC/LA/CHI, but there’s problem with it. Namely, San Francisco becomes up for grabs. As much grousing as the Giants make about the South Bay, the real money has always been in SF proper, Marin and San Mateo Counties. If the Bay Area is shared, what is to stop the A’s from declaring that they want to move to SF instead? It sounds ludicrous, but we’re talking about MLB here – ludicrous is part of the game. Even if the A’s don’t attempt to move there, they could just as easily try to appropriate the San Francisco name, which frankly has more marketing juice than San Jose and Oakland combined. When it gets down to brass tacks, that’s the property that the Giants want to protect the most.
What makes the most sense politically is to allow the Giants to keep SF/San Mateo/Marin, give the Santa Clara to the A’s, and make the East Bay either a free territory or at worst claimed by both teams (since both market there). I doubt Wolff would even mind if the East Bay were given to the Giants outright, as long as he got the South Bay for cheap/free.
Under the current setup, the Giants get to hold onto San Jose as an “asset,” ensuring San Jose never gets major league baseball anytime in the next 30 years.
@ GoA’s: The whole issue of T-rights isn’t personal. It’s business. Its Neukom’s job to protect the interests of the Giants. If the tables were turned and the A’s occupied the desired area and the Giants wanted to set up shop there, how would you feel? One step further; you are the A’s team president and it is your sole duty to ensure the long-term economic longevity of the A’s, what would you do?
@ML – Wolff has been a SJ man for a long time. If it was “sign away the SF name” to get this done, I’m betting he does it. It’s a little different than in LA where Anaheim is a no-name city that no one goes to for anything but Disney. That made a lot of sense for the Angels, but diminishing returns here.
@GoAs – A name is a name; it would be one thing if Cisco Field were going to be Verizon Park, but it’s not. Either way, AT&T’s size drawfs the Giants. If they were concerned about that value, they would be better off asking for a premium on their maintenance yard on the stadium site.
@ ML: Good point and that’s why I think San Jose was ever granted to the Giants without resistance in the first place.
I’m sure a huge % of the LetsGoOakland people e-mailed BS stating their support for the A’s to stay in Oakland, and throw in Dellums and Barbara Lee’s beautiful letters, and that all is pretty impressive and should be considered. The big money guys in Silicon Valley really don’t care about community, or baseball for that matter. FYI, Safeway, Kaiser and Clorox on the average, based on earnings, give way more to charities than the average Silicon Valley company does (Look it up).Outside of MicroSoft up in Seattle, tech companies are pretty damn cheap. Hey, these tech giants with all their billions can do more for the SJ area by hiring again. Profits are up, but they still ship jobs overseas (ala Carly F, aka wicked witch of the South Bay.). Leave Oakland’s team alone and take care of your community in a more positive way!!
Haha, so not only are corporations more philanthropic in Oakland, but letters from angry fans carry as much weight as those from CEOs…
@Namturk–can’t forget the Haas legacy with the A’s. They did so much for the community, it was amazing. Their employees loved Walter so much, they all committed to doing community service in the area. Won’t see LW’s employees doing that for him, especially after he displaces most of them if they move to SJ. All the 100′s of stadium workers will lose their jobs too. Guys who’ve been there for years, mostly from the Coli area, can’t afford to go down to SJ to hawk peanuts, working for peanuts.
jtk-usa: You haven’t answered my question on whether you have moved to Oakland yet. Surely, if you advocate a new ballpark for Oakland, you want to help foot the bill for it, no?
@ jk-usa: Should the A’s move beyond Oakland’s city limits, can you still attend their games? I’ve never lived in Contra Costa or Alameda Counties, but I’ve supported the A’s for years. The drive and/or BART trip is totally worth it. I’ve chanted, “Let’s go Oakland” more times than I can count, but is it really about Oakland or the team? For sentimental reasons, I’d like to see the A’s stay in Oakland. For practical reasons I’d like to see the A’s move in San Jose (I don’t live in the South Bay either). Unfortunately, there’s not much compromise between the two at the moment. If you want the A’s to stick around in Oakland, organize something. Lead the charge. Now is the time to take action. Don’t just flame on the internet. It’s a privilege for any city of host a MLB team. The A’s have played in Philly and KC prior? Can they claim ownership over them?
@Briggs– i would do what Walter Haas did in 1992—provide access to the territory—lets be honest–its ok to build in Fremont…but 4 miles away in San Jose is not ok—Neukom is an ass—he is not looking out for the best interests of baseball in his ridiculous postering—
So help me out with why ATT is driving a hard bargain in SJ…..this is a mega corporation that would be made whole by the city of SJ to relocate to another area….if they are out for money all they have to say is when SJ provides the right price we will move and than they sit down to the negotiating table—makes no sense what they are doing–
“If the tables were turned and the A’s occupied the desired area and the Giants wanted to set up shop there, how would you feel? One step further; you are the A’s team president and it is your sole duty to ensure the long-term economic longevity of the A’s, what would you do?”
Well, GoA’s answered the question, but thats the thing that frustrates me the most – Walter Haas GAVE the T-rights to SJ/SantaClara to the Giants when they were trying to get a ball park in San Jose and Santa Clara.
Neukom’s contention that it has to do with ATT park and its revenue stream is ludicrous; its all about the Giants pushing the A’s out of the Bay Area and having it for themselves…
pjk : “San Jose never gets major league baseball anytime in the next 30 years.” Can you tell me where it is stipulated that SJ is off limits for a certain duration?
jk-usa : sorry, but i’d rather have a job then require community service to live. if it helps, the corporate tax amount paid by fortune 500 companies in Silicon valley would equals more than 50 billion dollars. that’s a lot of welfare money going back to your government and everyday needs, much less community service. and as far as outsourcing, i’m sorry, but that a huge fallacy to begin with. Modern macro-economics dictate that our society be more service based as opposed to mfg. If you really think it is bad, you should just move to Timbuktu somewhere because almost all the products in your house or on your back is made from a different country.
@ GoA’s & plrraz
When the A’s ownership group granted the Giants the rights to build a ballpark in San Jose, it was a business decision. It might be nice to think of it as a good-willed philanthropic gesture, but the reality of it was that the Giants were vacating San Francisco. I don’t claim to know the conditions upon granting the Giants San Jose, but to see it as a simple relinquishing of rights is greatly underestimating the situation then and now.
@GoA’s… It makes perfect sense for AT&T to hold out. They are driving to get the best price.
@Jeffrey–a monster corporation who buy and large wants the public to like it (of course anyone with an i-phone hates it)–publically posturing for the highest price—and who benefits if they get $20M v. $15M? come on—companies like ATT work with their communities behind the scenes to make things happen realizing at the end of the day holding out for another 20% has more negative public will than benefit to the bottom line–something smells fishy here
@Briggs- Walter Haas may have realized the business benefit of gaining access to the SF market (does SF really have sports fans–not alot of them in all honesty) but he also could have driven a hard line like Neukom is doing in SF and charged some fee for these rights—even Sandy Aldersen who was running the A’s at this point said it was a mistake to not make the granting of those rights conditional on the gints actually building in SJ–
Also–not sure if I agree with ML that being located in SF far outweighs SJ/Oakland combined—SF is highly recognized nationally but its not what drives the revenue streams–hence the ’9ers preferring to located in the valley–and frankly as I understand—nothing prohibits the A’s from using either the San Jose or San Francisco name—they market freely in these areas—they just aren’t allowed to build a ballpark there
@GoA’s – You’re overdramatizing things. AT&T’s stance is officially “Land isn’t for sale” and “We’re not getting in the middle of the T-rights issue.” If they were to do Neukom’s bidding, they would in fact be violating their second principle. Once MLB makes its decision, and if it is in favor of San Jose, that friction will go away. Why? AT&T is an A’s broadcast sponsor. Do you honestly think they’d want to jeopardize a potential future partnership in what will be the most technologically advanced ballpark in the country? Of course not. Break that off and suddenly Verizon or Comcast gets an advantage. But while San Jose doesn’t have the relocation part figured out, AT&T doesn’t have to budge. City has said that it won’t attempt further acquisitions until after MLB renders it’s decision. If/when that first domino falls, the others will as well. Not everything is some nefarious plot.
BTW, when Dennis Korabiak was asked about this, he didn’t stress about it. He said that companies would rather deal when the time comes than pay a bunch of lawyers, and the compensation SJ has provided is quite handsome. I haven’t heard about other landowners in the area feeling ripped off by the City, have you?
Re: value of city names, put it this way. San Francisco is the only city here that never will have to worry about contractually obligating teams to take on its name. The others do.