News

Goldman Sachs No Salve For Oakland Raiders Sheldon Adelson Issues In Las Vegas

Published

7 years ago

January 14, 2017

The Oakland Raiders Owner Mark Davis has reportedly told the members of the finance and stadium committees of the NFL Owners Group that the organization has a plan to finance the construction of a new stadium with or without Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson. That’s a tall order that, when one starts to think about it, doesn’t really pass the stadium financing smell test. Take a look at why with me (and see the video at Zennie62 on YouTube by Zennie Abraham).

Oakland Raiders: $500 million
Nevada Subsidy $750 million
Stadium Cost Gap 1 $350 million

Total Stadium Cost $1.6 billion

The problem is that without Sheldon Adelson’s help, there’s still a $350 million stadium cost gap that would have to be filled if the total cost was $1.6 billion and not $1.9 billion. Its not enough for the Raiders to say that Goldman Sachs will finance the stadium without Adelson, and because they’re not investors – they’re investment bankers.

Goldman Sachs’s speciality is in bonds and loans for, in this case, the construction of NFL stadiums. If they were to give the $350 million to fill the gap, it would have to be matched by some stadium-related revenue stream that would throw off $350 million over some period of time. Think about this.

Goldman is not going to just say, “Hey Raiders! Here’s $350 million, and don’t worry because you will not have to pay us back!” You believe that’s the case, you’re a fool. What Goldman would want is what Sheldon Adelson wants, and that means a percentage of stadium revenues necessary to raise $350 million.

Where would that come from?

Well, the Raiders have already pledged $500 million from stadium-related revenues and NFL loans. But really that’s just $200 million from the sale of personal seat licenses. So, right off the bat, the Raiders have to shave off $550 million in stadium revenue to help pay for it’s construction. Chances are, naming rights will be about $150 million at best, which gets The Raiders less than halfway to the mark. The remaining gap would have to be filled by luxury box revenue, but when you start to run those numbers, the remaining answer means the Raiders would wind up using all of their luxury box revenue for stadium construction, and nothing would be left over for the team’s use.

Think about it.

Let’s say the proposed Oakland Raiders Las Vegas NFL stadium has 137 luxury boxes, each costing an average of $80,000. Assuming a 100 percent sales rate – all 137 suites – that comes to $10,960,000 a year. Over a 30 year period (the length of the bond issue tied to the Nevada Subsidy of $750 million) that comes to $328 million. So we could use luxury box revenue to fill most of the $350 million gap, or we would wind up using $178 million of that if the Raiders landed a naming rights agreement of $150 million.

That still means The Raiders would use 54 percent of luxury box revenues for stadium construction. And that’s if the stadium manages to cost $1.6 billion – if it went to $1.75 billion or higher, then both naming rights revenues and luxury suite revenues would be entirely used to pay for the stadium’s construction. The Raiders would use 100 percent of both sources – no money for the team.

Mark Davis can’t be happy with that prospect. Moreover, I can’t see how his meeting with the NFL Owners, who know this as well as I do, went so well at all. Davis can’t do this without Adelson or another investor. That group or person is going to want their cut – there’s no avoiding it.

Davis’ only way is by having development around the stadium – but that calls for a new developer and investor. Kind of like Majestic Realty. Remember them? The ones who brought $150 million? Bet Davis wishes he had them back in about now.

Davis should stay in Oakland.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

S.F. Black Leaders Rally to Protest, Discuss ‘Epidemic’ of Racial Slurs Against Black Students in SF Public School System

Parents at the meeting spoke of their children as no longer feeling safe in school because of bullying and discrimination. Parents also said that reported incidents such as racial slurs and intimidation are not dealt with to their satisfaction and feel ignored.

Published

1 day ago

May 4, 2024

Oakland Post

Rev. Amos C. Brown, president of the San Francisco NAACP and pastor of Third Baptist Church. Photo courtesy Third Baptist Church.

By Carla Thomas

San Francisco’s Third Baptist Church hosted a rally and meeting Sunday to discuss hatred toward African American students of the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD).

Rev. Amos C. Brown, president of the San Francisco NAACP and pastor of Third Baptist Church, along with leadership from local civil rights groups, the city’s faith-based community and Black community leadership convened at the church.

“There has been an epidemic of racial slurs and mistreatment of Black children in our public schools in the city,” said Brown. “This will not be tolerated.”

According to civil rights advocate Mattie Scott, students from elementary to high school have reported an extraordinary amount of racial slurs directed at them.

“There is a surge of overt racism in the schools, and our children should not be subjected to this,” said Scott. “Students are in school to learn, develop, and grow, not be hated on,” said Scott. “The parents of the children feel they have not received the support necessary to protect their children.”

Attendees were briefed last Friday in a meeting with SFUSD Superintendent Dr. Matt Wayne.

SFUSD states that their policies protect children and they are not at liberty to publicly discuss the issues to protect the children’s privacy.

Some parents said they have removed their students from school while other parents and community leaders called on the removal of the SFUSD superintendent, the firing of certain school principals and the need for more supportive school board members.

Community advocates discussed boycotting the schools and creating Freedom Schools led by Black leaders and educators, reassuring parents that their child’s wellbeing and education are the highest priority and youth are not to be disrupted by racism or policies that don’t support them.

Virginia Marshall, chair of the San Francisco NAACP’s education committee, offered encouragement to the parents and students in attendance while also announcing an upcoming May 14 school board meeting to demand accountability over their mistreatment.

“I’m urging anyone that cares about our students to pack the May 14 school board meeting,” said Marshall.

This resource was supported in whole or in part by funding provided by the State of California, administered by the California State Library via California Black Media as part of the Stop the Hate Program. The program is supported by partnership with California Department of Social Services and the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs as part of the Stop the Hate program. To report a hate incident or hate crime and get support, go to CA vs Hate.