Key Coliseum City deadline passes with no Raiders letter of interest

Added 2:43 PM: Now dead Piers 30/32 development schedule.

About two-thirds of the bubbles in this chart are no longer needed

About two-thirds of the bubbles in this chart are no longer needed

Important documents for the Coliseum City project were due Monday. While some needed reports were apparently submitted just before the deadline, a signed letter of intent interest from Raiders ownership did not, according to CSN’s Scott Bair. The letter of interest was a requirement for development group BayIG, though it’s not known what will happen now that the deadline has passed. Important informational documents from BayIG were received, which could include the long-awaited funding and revenue sources analyses. Those will be important for determining the feasibility of the project.

Given the paucity of information available at the moment, it would behoove Raiders owner Mark Davis to proceed cautiously. But the bar for commitment was set extremely low, as BayIG was not required to get a Letter of Intent from the Raiders. Instead, BayIG only needed to get a Letter of Interest. While a Letter of Intent is generally non-binding in matters such as these, at least it lays out basic terms for a deal. A Letter of Interest is an entirely speculative document, only promising future discussions (sort of like an ENA without the “E”). If Davis hasn’t even provided a response for a much lesser requirement, you have to wonder what he really thinks about the project. 

Then again, the Letter of Interest is so weak that it can’t really make or break Coliseum City anyway. If there are consequences for BayIG not delivering, we certainly have no idea what they are. And it seems highly unlikely that BayIG and the JPA won’t move forward because of this. They’ve already engaged the Raiders in preliminary discussions and submitted several reports, so halting the project now would be tantamount to throwing in the towel. That wouldn’t go over well considering some $3 million was previously approved for studies.

For now, we’ll await any documents that are made available. Raiders fans can hope that Davis was simply too preoccupied the Terrelle Pryor trade or with the Warriors-Clippers series to respond. If the week ends without the LoI from the Raiders, there will be a lot of questions about that subject at Thursday’s and Saturday’s community meetings. People will be wondering how committed to Oakland Davis really is. Meanwhile, Lew Wolff will be sitting back, watching everyone involved with Coliseum City twist in the wind.

17 thoughts on “Key Coliseum City deadline passes with no Raiders letter of interest

  1. This whole process seems to have become a comedy of errors.

  2. Mark Davis has nothing to gain by submitting a letter of interest. The Raiders do have options other than Oakland, so why should they give up any leverage in their negotiations with CC? Right now, Mark Davis is playing it as if the Raiders are in the driver’s seat, and rightfully that is his best strategy. As for Oakland, they will have to decide on putting all their effort to keeping only one team(Raiders or A’s), otherwise they will lose all their teams.

  3. THe wheels are coming off of CC – Warriors gone, Raiders frustrated, A’s still looking to leave.

  4. So a littler off thread- Lacob continued promotion of a viable site in Oakland for the A’s is a PR move intended to keep the optics off of the fact that he is fleeing Oakland. Knauss, Boxer, and Lacob have all been instrumental in the exodus of either employees or the W’s from Oakland yet advocate the A’s should be forced to stay. And of course none of the media questions the double standard as to why Oakland wasn’t good enough for them but it is for the A’s- seems like such a simple question-

  5. The fat lady is warming up and the hand writing on the wall does not look good for Oakland to retain any of it’s teams. If it’s smart it works out a drug deal with the A’s and give L.W. whatever he wants to keep the team in Oakland.

  6. Well with the Warriors moving to S.F soon..it does give Oakland clarity. ..now hopefully they can focus on one or 2 teams for C.C…maybe with Oracle vacant…the Raiders (1st priority) and A’s (2nd priority) can figure out either to demolish Oracle for extra space needed to spilt the Coliseum land for development or buy oracle and make money off it..

  7. @harry:

    You need to get off the meds, man. MD will never give up 30-40% of the Raiders for a place at CC. Never. MD can backup the trucks and drive them down HW101 to Levi’s Stadium.

    As for the A’s, JQ is still waiting for commitment from the Crown Princes! JQ has been told that the Crown Princes are coming to Oakland soon. Although the princes can’t locate the EB or Oakland on the maps, they are very exited to invest billions of dollars in development. Just incredible niceness.

  8. Now that the Warriors are gone for sure by 2018 that removes one moving part that was pretty big.

    The issue now is if the Raiders stay in Oakland after this whole CC dream falls through.

    Mark Davis only option short term is Levi’s Stadium down the 880 but he would rather play in a dump instead and has stated that.

    You wonder why Oakland sits on their asses?

    Davis could have used Levi’s as leverage and Oakland knows full well he will not out of sheer stupidity.

    Nor will Davis sell a big chunk of the team for a new stadium.

    LA has nothing to offer as the current setup is way better than the Rose Bowl…Oakland knows this. So why move at Davis’ pace?

    This screws the A’s over as if Davis was smart and leveraged Oakland it would create the opening for the A’s they want.

    If the Raiders leave then Wolff has all the leverage in the world on Oakland and for all the mistreatment the organization has gotten he can step on their throats big time.

    Wolff could force Oakland to pay for all the infrastructure costs for a new ballpark at the Coliseum and demand full development rights around the area with no revenue sharing with the city/county.

    Of course dumbass spoiled rich kid Mark Davis sits there like a jackass at the Coliseum thinking he has all the leverage….SMH!

    Screwing over the A’s as the Oakland has done for years now.

  9. @Sid, I’m starting to think that you are right about Mark Davis. He would much rather have his Raiders remain at the current Coliseum, sewage and all, than have to share state-of-the-art Levi’s Stadium with the 49ers. I believe that the reluctance of Mark Davis to give serious consideration to sharing the new Santa Clara stadium as tenants of the 49ers was a primary reason why Amy Trask had left the Raiders. Thanks to Mark Davis, I can see both the Raiders and A’s signing ten year lease extension at the current Coliseum. The City of Oakland and the Giants will be thrilled with this outcome, While MLB will be privately bickering among themselves for being primarily responsible for this end result.

  10. Well one thing to remember IIpec, there’s no sewage at the Coliseum as far as the Raiders are concerned. It’s limited to the A’s portions of the venue unfortunately.

  11. I initially read this sentence in the last paragraph as “If the week ends without the lol from the Raiders…” and I lol’d myself.

  12. It’s almost as if the Raiders never believed in CC and were just putting on a public face to strengthen their local fan position as well as keep their position stronger on other stadium fronts. Nah, that couldn’t be it.

    On a side note, I felt strongly — and said so in post from a while ago — that the waterfront Warriors stadium in SF was far from reality and Oakland had a chance to keep them (if they put together a good deal). It looks like that hope is dashed. The new site appears much much more likely. I don’t know if Oakland’s dysfunction of Pol leadership made retaining the Warriors an impossibility or the Warriors simply wanted to leave (probably both). But Oakland’s reaction to the news is telling…..it comes down to, IMHO, the only shot for Oakland to retain a pro franchise is the A’s (based ENTIRELY on the AT dysfunction MLB’s leadership base their thinking on).

  13. Let’s see: Established fan base, two ideal sites for a stadium, willing and able investors ready to buy and invest. Oakland? NO!!! Los Angeles! 2nd largest media market in the US… 12 million people in the metro area…..millions of advertising dollars.

    You tell me….. LA or Coliseum City?

    Oakland: 700 million dollar stadium for at most 10 NFL games? (8 regular season-2 playoff). Yeah….good luck finding the money for that project.

  14. Davis and his legal team are not stupid, they are holding their cards to the vest. However, there are a lot of things going on that will be determined at the end of 2014, any of which can weaken his position when dealing with Quan. Including the fact that the Raiders have only one more year left on their lease, Quan (assuming she is reelected) will be in a stronger bargaining position (when dealing with the A’s & Raiders), Selig will be out (which can only help the A’s) and the Lawsuit involving San Jose could be adjudicated. Right after that, is the end of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (I am sure the owners are tired of paying Wolff essentially “Corporate Welfare”, and the end of the A’s lease. Gut feeling is that Davis and Wolff will both be leaving town, the only question is where? I hope for the Bay Area fans that does NOT mean LA & Montreal.

  15. dipshit new w’s owners didn’t want to keep the w’s in oakland anyways the moment they bought the team. they always had visions moving the team anywhere in the west side of the bay. i think it’s been telling almost all their official news conference or big announcements have come in frisco and not in oakland.

    to hell with them.

  16. ^ Probably because Oakland has become a god-awful place to conduct business.

  17. That has to be the first really negative thing I’ve read regarding the W’s move to SF. Was it that the few east bay fans actually mad about the W’s move didn’t actually believe they’d pull it off until now (with the far more likely to happen location change?)

    If so I wonder how many people there are like “letsgoas” out there and if they’ll be as vociferous about the W’s as they’ve all been about the A’s.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s