Well this is interesting…
If you’ve been reading long enough, you know that the purpose of this site is not primarily to advocate for any one ballpark location or site, it’s to see how the situation progresses, analyze it, and try to look one or two steps ahead. Sometimes I get things wrong. Sometimes they’re right. When I wrote about Fremont, it was with the notion that Fremont was a compromise location that could bridge a gap in the A’s fanbase without infringing territorial rights. When I wrote about San Jose, the idea was that it was the best possible revenue situation if they could resolve those T-rights (they did not). And when I pulled for the Coliseum over Howard Terminal, my argument was that it was the fastest, easiest path to getting a new ballpark even if the revenue potential there was lower. If the comment above actually came from the MLB commissioner, In this case, it may be curtains for Oakland. I wish that wasn’t the case.
How does this map out over the next six months? I expect the A’s to officially apply for relocation sometime next January in keeping with their lease and contractual obligations. They’re putting together a presentation that will go to the rest of the owners probably after the World Series. In the meantime, Oakland has a chance to get Manfred’s attention and put its best foot forward. At the same time, Manfred and Fisher know that with Vegas in their back pocket, they can squeeze Oakland. It really comes down to how badly Oakland wants to keep the A’s. Maybe if an Oakland fan hung out at the Coliseum every day like Greta Thunberg it might get attention. Though in the end, it comes down to making a deal. Is Oakland willing to make more compromises to get it done? That’s the real test for Oakland’s pro sports viability now and into the future. Because if they lose the A’s, it’s hard to imagine any expansion franchise or relocation candidate coming to the Eastshore. Oakland will have to get in line with every other hungry fanbase with limited resources.
–
P.S. – The current mayor and three former mayors of San Jose sent a letter to MLB asking for an expansion franchise if the A’s leave for Vegas. All I can say to that is: That’s cute.
P.P.S. – Dennis Shanahan from KTXL in Sacramento continued his dialogue with Commissioner Manfred, which I found interesting mostly because it shows that Manfred is not ignoring the reports he gets on the ground from Oakland.
newballpark.org 
Your many years of analysis ends with this original thought: capitulate to extortion or move along. Wasn’t this clear from the beginning? What nuance have you brought to this 25 year meditation on capitalism.
Another person who can’t parse the meaning of “public-private partnership,” eh? You have the choice not to partake in MLB in any way. That’s what makes this country great.
“Public-private partnerships” that almost never pencil out financially for the public entities involved. I’m not going to deny that there’s surely a political angle to Thao telling Fisher to go pound sand, especially if she’s got her eyes on higher office long-term (taking Barbara Lee’s seat eventually?). I’m also willing to agree with you that Oakland politicians bear some share of the blame for dragging this mess out, especially for continually entertaining unaffiliated third parties barging into the negotiations. But there’s also no denying that the gargantuan, faintly ridiculous HT/Coliseum deal is about diversifying Fisher’s investment portfolio, backed up by a hefty chunk of public change. At no point has he ever demonstrated that he deserves or is really capable of holding up his end of such a partnership. The haphazard stumble-bumming from Laney to HT to Red Rock to finally the Tropicana is not evidence of strategic long-term business planning. If this is the kind of ownership MLB’s willing to have within their ranks, MLB is not a credible public partner.
Given that, too, it’s quite clear that Fisher will continue to operate the team as a cashflow asset in Vegas, especially if he can continue to claim revenue sharing. Steady cashflow has to be a top priority in the Fisher empire, it’s not that long ago that Gap suffered a dividend cut. That’s one big reason why I’ll be happy to cease partaking in MLB if this move goes through. Fisher, and by proxy the other 29 owners of MLB, have made clear to me what they think of me as a customer in Oakland. The experience in Vegas is unlikely to improve in quality, but will certainly be more extractive, both given the team owner’s imperatives and the, ahem, spending-oriented nature of the locale. Plus the city may well start running up against hard population limits before the 30-year terms on the stadium financing are up. The team is not a growth asset for the owner nor the league in Vegas, but the owner at least seems to be just fine with that.
I’m still looking forward to your book when this is all done, if you decide to follow through with it. But when the more broadly focused history books are written, I can’t help but think that this whole saga will often be contrasted with the recent rule changes to illustrate how the league ultimately mismanaged the relative decline of the sport. By the time that becomes clear, though, most of the people involved will either be dead or divested.
Lew Wolff liked you too. Now you just need to get Fisher and the mayor of Oakland to read you.
Not only “cute” RM, but 8 years ago! Wonder what else might be going on behind closed $J doors.. ?
I wish your twitter bar was fixed; it was nice to see your tweets. Now it wants me to create an account to see anything from you, and I don’t want to do that just to read tweets. Twitter is pretty much dead anyway, so I wonder if switching to Threads is viable.