Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Oakland Athletics Will Be Granted Permission To Move To San Jose, According To Report

Rosicrucian

l Park!

The Oakland Athletics may not be in Oakland for much longer, if new reports about the prove true: USA Today writer Bob Nightengale reports that sources say the Athletics will be granted permission to move to San Jose by February.

This move has been a possibility simmering on a back burner for some time now; Rob Neyer wrote about the potential of the San Jose A’s in September. But while it has been a possibility for many years, with the A’s looking to improve their accommodations from the outdated O.co Coliseum to a new ballpark and/or get out from under the shadow of the successful San Francisco Giants, this new approval may accelerate a timeline to get the A’s out of the city they have called home since 1968.

Repoz Posted: December 24, 2011 at 06:39 PM | 106 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: athletics, business, giants

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag) Posted: December 26, 2011 at 08:24 PM (#4023623)
I can't find it yet....by rules of the internet it doesn;t exist until I do....so until I do....;-)
   102. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 26, 2011 at 08:33 PM (#4023629)
I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here, but if any type of legal action had been filed by Santa Clara and/or San Jose against SFG and/or MLB, it wouldn't take more than 3 seconds to find it. You're the only person in the thread claiming to have any recollection of such an action.

Are you sure you didn't conflate the SFG/OAK issue with this recent trademark case?

(BTW, I posted an old analysis by Doug Pappas back in #100, just in case you missed it now that we're on page 2.)
   103. GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag) Posted: December 26, 2011 at 08:48 PM (#4023637)
No, nor the San Jose residents suing to keep Oakland A's out. I know about those two. The more I keep searching, the more I keep thinking it was a threat as opposed to an actual action. You may be right there. I even browsed through all filings in Santa Clara for the last 3 years...nothing. But it isn't the Gogo (?) trademark thing nor the San Jose Anti-Ballpark thing....I keep wanting to say it was either in the Merc or one of the local "Times" from that area. Also, the search function blows. You're dead on there, too. I will keep searching until I can prove one of two things: I was right or I was wrong. I'll be happy when I find that article, just to put my own mind to rest. I tend to obsess over things that I am not 100% on.
   104. valuearbitrageur Posted: December 26, 2011 at 11:40 PM (#4023693)
Then that was dumb of OAK and/or OAK's lawyers, but it doesn't change much of anything on the SFG side of the fence. If a rich guy gives a million dollars to charity and then goes broke two weeks later, it might be nice to return the money, but the charity is under no legal obligation to do so. This doesn't seem much (if at all) different.


Joe, you've done a great job documenting SFG's rights to this territory as provided in the MLB constitution this thread, but you are off a bit with this analogy.

This is not two disparate parties with their own separate interests. A charity has zero interest in the future economic welfare of a beneficiary, except where it leads to more contributions. In fact, the officers running the charity have an obligation to maximize the charities fund raising as much as is legally and ethically possible.

The MLB is an organization of shared interests. One owner did a favor for another owner, a favor that involved giving up something of tangible monetary value to Team #1, and now the 2nd owner legally controls a territory of great value to the Team #1, and the team wants it back. It's in the MLB's best interests that owners cooperate and work together to help each other, which is what the As clearly did for the Giants. It's not in the MLB's best interests for owners to subvert each other, and to block the greater economic good for another team and for the league as a whole.

In this case, the Giants will still draw fans from the peninsula, and they've created a hard core group that will still prefer them to the As. Their monetary losses from the As move are likely to be minor, the As monetary gain is likely to be great, and the benefit for the league is likely to be significant. If the lesson that comes out of this is to never give another owner a break, because they will later screw you over something important to you, but not so important to them, that's a very bad lesson and will make it harder to manage the MLB as a whole. The MLB and other owners should be very motivated to see the As treated fairly here, not strictly by the legal definition of current ownership of that territory.

So legally I see where you are 100% right. But I think this deal gets done because it's good for every team but the Giants, and it ain't even so bad for them.
   105. TerpNats Posted: December 27, 2011 at 12:49 AM (#4023715)
So legally I see where you are 100% right. But I think this deal gets done because it's good for every team but the Giants, and it ain't even so bad for them.
And there is no other option for the Athletics that would stand to benefit MLB as a whole. There's no realistically available market without baseball that the A's can move to (I emphasize "without baseball" because as much as some people here yearn for a third team in metro NYC or metro LA, it's not going to happen). Charlotte would take a lot of work to market a franchise north into the Triad and south to Greenville/Spartanburg; it might work for weekend series, but Charlotte itself may not have enough population for weekday games to be viable. Nashville, Portland and Sacramento would have the same problem, perhaps more so. Montreal is big enough, but still has problems relating to paying off Olympic Stadium, and many Quebecois would be reluctant to welcome MLB back (though if it could economically afford a new outdoor ballpark, I think old wounds would quickly heal). Whether the Giants like it or not, San Jose is the only realistic solution.
   106. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 27, 2011 at 03:12 AM (#4023755)
104 — I agree with your analysis. As mentioned earlier in the thread, there's essentially two different arguments in play here: A legal argument and a sort of moral argument. I disagree with the people who claim SFG's rights to Santa Clara are, or might be, illusory in a legal sense, but in terms of what's right and wrong in this particular situation, I agree that SFG should simply yield it back for the good of the game, especially since it was gifted to them by OAK and then not used.

So legally I see where you are 100% right. But I think this deal gets done because it's good for every team but the Giants, and it ain't even so bad for them.

I agree completely. As I said a few comments ago, I don't believe there's movement on this issue because of any legal wrangling. If OAK's move to San Jose is approved in early 2012, I believe it will happen because MLB's internal politics (coupled with a lousy national economy) made it happen.

------

And there is no other option for the Athletics that would stand to benefit MLB as a whole. There's no realistically available market without baseball that the A's can move to (I emphasize "without baseball" because as much as some people here yearn for a third team in metro NYC or metro LA, it's not going to happen).

A third team in the NYC area definitely isn't going to happen, but it's interesting applying the concepts debated in this thread to such a hypothetical. E.g., what if SFG offered to give AT&T Park to OAK and then said it wanted to move back to New York? An argument could be made that doing so would be even better for baseball than SFG simply allowing OAK into San Jose. I'm curious how such an argument would go within MLB and even among fans.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Darren
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 September 17: How Brett Kavanaugh explains his baseball ticket debt
(867 - 9:14pm, Sep 18)
Last: Cleveland (need new name) fan

NewsblogSherman - Statistical Revolution Is Killing The Next Generation Of MLB Fans
(28 - 9:12pm, Sep 18)
Last: Howie Menckel

Gonfalon CubsThe Final Push
(102 - 9:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Meatwad

NewsblogGoin' to Carolina in OMNICHATTER's mind, for September 18, 2018
(25 - 9:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Jay Seaver

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2018)
(341 - 9:00pm, Sep 18)
Last: Cowboy Popup

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Thread (Pre-Season Edition)
(337 - 8:47pm, Sep 18)
Last: maccoach57

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-18-2018
(51 - 8:42pm, Sep 18)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogHow to fix baseball? Two ways MLB can improve its product without changing the game on the field
(52 - 8:37pm, Sep 18)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogWho’s in and who’s out of the MLB postseason?
(13 - 8:35pm, Sep 18)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOrioles match club record with 107th loss, 5-0 to Blue Jays before tiny home crowd
(31 - 8:05pm, Sep 18)
Last: donlock

NewsblogHeard the song of a poet who died in the OMNICHATTER! for Sept. 17, 2018
(123 - 7:56pm, Sep 18)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(781 - 7:42pm, Sep 18)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

NewsblogNashville Divorces Athletics
(21 - 4:34pm, Sep 18)
Last: Bote Man the walk-off king

NewsblogChristian Yelich makes baseball history with second cycle of season
(17 - 4:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Batman

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Los Angeles Dodgers
(17 - 3:38pm, Sep 18)
Last: QLE

Page rendered in 0.2568 seconds
46 querie(s) executed