Reaction to the SVLG letter

Before we get started, our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of the San Bruno Crestmoor fire. I have relatives that live on the other side of the fire from 280, and they’re okay. Those affected were not so fortunate.

A few articles have come out in the last 24 hours since the soft pitch to Selig.

I’m in agreement with Ratto on the “MLB won’t be rushed” argument, but I’m not with him on how San Jose needs to show money and shovels. The City has already laid out its process for Selig. It acquired half the site, had the vote lined up for November, which would authorize eminent domain for the rest if negotiations got to that point. But Selig asked for a delay, which means that MLB is the party that needs to get its ducks in a row, not City.

Furthermore, Ratto is one of the few Bay Area writers who believes that the T-rights negotiation is a relatively trivial matter:

Oh, and whole you’re not wondering about that blue-ribbon committee, stop wondering about territorial rights, too. Territorial rights were, are, and will be a simple negotiation about how sizable a bribe the Giants will need to shut up. And if the Giants want to get cranky about it when the other owners are ready to move the A’s, they can be de-legged with a simple 29-1 vote. You know, the kind Bud specializes in at big moments like this.

While I think that a vote will probably come out 29-1 or 30-0, it’s getting to that point that’s the hard part. If, as Ratto argues, City and the A’s need to show more money and shovels, there’s a problem. A company like Cisco has already stated what it’s willing to do. Does Selig want to risk losing Cisco to the 49ers, who’d love to poach them for their own naming rights deal? By including the A’s in SVLG, they’ve created a sort of corporate solidarity. It’s up to Selig. The more he draws this out, the more he risks pissing off SVLG and its members. If he wants their business, it’s as much up to him as it is them, an argument from the letter that was made in an oh-so-subtle manner.

Update 9/13 11:00 PM: The CEO’s of SunPower and Brocade have reinforced the SVLG letter with their own opinion piece in the Merc.

13 thoughts on “Reaction to the SVLG letter

  1. It’s great to read Nav’s posts again. I had forgotten how completely nuts that guy was. Anyone who compares JK to him is really selling JK short. Speaking of JK, I think a different Tom Petty song sums Oakland’s public stance toward a potential A’s move.

  2. I’m also in agreement with the “MLB won’t be rushed” argument. Heck, if the A’s and SJRDA are now saying that the ballpark won’t open until 2015, WHAT IS THE RUSH!? (Can’t wait to read your post R.M. on the now “proposed” opening date).
    As for the T-Rights, I also agree with Ratto. It’s kind of along the lines of what Purdy has been saying; that Selig has the votes to overturn the T-Rights, but ONLY if a ballpark in San Jose happens for sure. With the Giants (again) in the thick of the pennant race, and a ballpark not opening until 2015, again, what’s the rush to make an announcement for San Jose? We’re probably looking between November and Opening Day 2011 for the committee to release its report. By the way, yesterday’s declaration by SVLG proves the A’s in San Jose won’t affect the Giants corporate/fan revenue streams.

  3. I feel so much dumber after reading the comments on SFGate.

  4. I’m hoping the reason Selig requested that SJ holdoff on its vote is because he wanted the matter of TR discussed and voted on at the winter meetings. This would then give Baseball San Jose enough time to educate the community before the March special elections.

  5. I refuse to read comments on sfgate.

  6. You know, after reading Ratto’s piece more thoroughly, I think I’ve got it:

    “Because Bud wants to se more actual money and shovels from the A’s and San Jose…”.

    “Money and shovels” might equate to what was expressed yesterday by the SVLG, in terms of corporate support, and San Jose acquiring ALL the land at Diridon (not just a portion). For the record, a vote isn’t needed to ED any of the Diridon plots, including AT&T. Get guaranteed sponsorships/monies from Silicon Valley and get all the land in hand will go a long way towards convincing Selig/MLB. I also think “no voter referendum” would help as well, since one isn’t technically necessary with the private financing scheme; but unfortunately that won’t happen.

  7. anybody else see that piccinini, the guy who wanted to buy the a’s nearly a dozen years ago, is gonna be part owner of the w’s with the new ownership group led by lacob/gruber.

  8. Awesome that Piccinini is going to be part-owner of the Warriors. He is decidely pro-Oakland.

    If only he would have been allowed to buy the A’s, there would have been a new, nice if not not spectacular stadium next to the Oakland Coliseum by now. (And yes,he and his partners did have the money).

    Where did you read that?

    68 A’s fan.

  9. Yet again, Piccinini is a minority shareholder. We have no idea if he would’ve been able to build a ballpark anywhere in Oakland. Would he have asked for public funds? We don’t know. Would he have been able to pull off a privately financed ballpark in Oakland? We don’t know. If he failed to do both? We don’t know. It’s much easier to talk about it than to actually pull it off (ownership and stadium building), as we can see from the last several years.

    BTW, I think Piccinini may eventually position for another sports property in the area. With Infineon being absorbed by Intel and Infineon’s naming rights deal at Sears Point expiring after 2011, it’s possible that he could go after the track. After all, there’s already a race there named after Save Mart.

  10. I’ve read that Piccinini has increased his wealth quite a bit since he got the shaft by MLB 11 years ago. I’m still fuming over what happened to his group. Things could of been much different right now, but like you said, ML, we may never know. I’m still hoping for a sale to him or someone of his class and caliber, but we’re stuck with Wolff/Fisher..Ughhh! They’re like Schottman, but with more money, that they don’t want to spend.

  11. jk-usa, one thing that annoys he hell out of me is my fellow A’s fans talking about spending other peoples money. It is Fischer and Wolff’s money, there perogative. They have shown they will spend whent hey have a real shot, like the $80M payroll in 2007.

  12. “I’m still fuming over what happened to this group.” Oh please! Give it a rest, will yah.
    You probably didn’t even care 11 years ago. Heck, you only started commenting here this year.
    And the only one “stuck” with Wolff/Fisher is you jk. I’m ecstatic that they’re our owners and that they’re trying to get us a new yard in San Jose.

  13. eve with piccinini as minority owner, i still think the w’s will move to sf within the next decade.

    although oracle itself is more than adequate, i’m sure the new w’s owners would actually like to see some life around the venue they play in 41 times a season and that’s why there’s been rumors not just recently but for a few year now that the w’s could move to a arena near by at&t.

    i think it would be a mistake because there’s something at oracle, a passion that we’ve seen in recent seasons even before the we believe playoff run that imo can’t be duplicated if you move them even a few miles to china basin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.