|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
Daman...really?
As a business owner?...One question... Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
Yup,, really!
In case you haven't noticed, These franchises go up no matter if the team is winning or losing..
It's still stupid to give it away... If Holmgren, Newsome or Parcells want ownership,, agree to let them buy in.... That's thier incentive....
Daman...you still did not answer the question...damn man, stop doing a dance and a simple yes or no will do?
Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
Daman...you still did not answer the question...damn man, stop doing a dance and a simple yes or no will do?
Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
What part of this didn't you understand Mac... I said:
Quote:
In case you haven't noticed, These franchises go up no matter if the team is winning or losing..
But to be more specific,, Yeah, I would think a winning franchise would be worth more than a losing franchise..
Still doesn't make sense for an owner to give up 40 million..
You sited examples of the Dolphins.. and as I said about that, none of those minority owners were GIVEN thier piece of the pie.. NONE OF THEM.. They all bought in.. paid cash.. (Except Hizinga (sp), he merely retained some of his ownership)
Same thing with the Ravens.. Modell still owns a small piece of the Ravens (I forgot what percentage) he didn't buy in, he merely retained some ownership.
I'm sure there are minority owners all over Pro Sports,, but I'm betting that NONE of them got thier percentage of ownership for FREE...
Mac, I want a winner as badly as anyone, but this isn't the way to get it. Pittsburgh was awful until they hired Noll... the man won 4 SB's,, did he get ownership.....NOPE.
Joe Gibbs was considered to be a savior to the Redskins... as wacky as Snyder is, did he give Gibbs ownership? NO.... And so on and so on.
Why do you think that is? You aren't the first to bring this up. there was a thread on here a while back,,, same issue, the difference is that someone was talking about giving a new Czar 20% of the team.. ($160 million) that's just nuts...
Paying someone 40 million to do a job is a lot different than handing them 40 million worth of ownership in a business.
If Randy wants to give one of these guys an incentive to come on board,, then allow them to buy in. I'm sure, as you said somewhere along the line that if that person doesn't work out as VP/GM/Football Czar, there can be a buy out legally arranged..
By they way, I'm not sure that any of those three have 40 million to toss into the ring.. So if Lerner wanted to offer them a loan to buy in,, that's another way to do it. But in the end, they still gotta pay or relinquish thier percentage at some point..
NO WAY would any owner of any NFL Franchise give up that much.... But they might be wiling to sell that much to someone and maybe even act as the bank.....
That I think is possible, but still, unlikely.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Daman...yes or no...
Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
Daman...yes or no...
Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
and people accuse me of not "getting it"
I answered this already,, but you seem to want me to hit you over the head with the answer..
I would think YES...
I just can't wait for your next response...., 
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
Daman...yes or no...
Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
and people accuse me of not "getting it"
I answered this already,, but you seem to want me to hit you over the head with the answer..
I would think YES...
I just can't wait for your next response....,
Daman...Thank you...
I agree, a successful Browns team would be more valuable than the team is today, therefore, using minority ownership as an incentive to lure the top management people available might not be such a crazy business move, after all.
Lerner "could get" everything he wants as owner of the Browns...
...the best available talent to run his team
...a winning football team
...while increasing the value of his franchise
I'm not saying there are not "possible" pitfalls in such a strategy, just that it is a way to possibly acquire the management talent this franchise needs to be successful.
Sometimes, you have to stop following the crowd and doing what other people (nfll owners) do. This is just one idea and as we have seen in this thread, others have their own ideas.
I'm not here to try to belittle anyone for their ideas on how to fix this franchise. Folks want to take shots at me..fine...but don't claim my idea does not have some merit, when it comes to being another way...a different approach...that does have some logic behind it.
Lerner could just get into a bidding war with Paul Allen, if the Seahawks want Holmgren to run their franchise. But Lerner could offer the same money or more and still not get Holmgren due to the fact that Holmgren's hometown is SF, CA.
JMHO, but the Browns might have to give Holmgren something other than top salary to get him to call Cleveland his hometown for the next 10 yrs or so. The Browns might have to offer Holmgren something that Paul Allen is not willing to offer.
But my idea is just one approach to securing Holmgren for the Browns...I would love to hear other ideas, other than "he won't come to Cleveland".
Again, how does Lerner convince Holmgren that Cleveland is the place for him?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
therefore, using minority ownership as an incentive to lure the top management people available might not be such a crazy business move, after all.
No it is still a stupid move...This is not like offering stock options....Stock options are public and anyone can buy them including the person trying to be hired. This is handing over partial ownership of the one and only PRIVATE entity you have...and once done you CANNOT take it back...no amount of legalese will give the ownership back if the people fail to turn it around. because any such clause would be instantly be negated by agents and attorneys of the signing management. And regardless of what happens that person and their subsequent title holders will have input into the workings of the Cleveland Browns Organization from that time forward. Yes it will be minority status...BUT they have to be considered legally on every move made, etc.
It is stupid...especially in these days where the working relationships between ownership and management rarely reaches a decade.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Pete...would the Browns be worth more as a winning football franchise or as they are today?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
This is handing over partial ownership of the one and only PRIVATE entity you have...and once done you CANNOT take it back...no amount of legalese will give the ownership back if the people fail to turn it around. because any such clause would be instantly be negated by agents and attorneys of the signing management.
Pete...do you write contracts for NFL owners?
As I pointed out, there are minority owners in the NFL and I'm sure the NFL's majority owners have protected their interests. It's not like such contracts have not been done before now.
Many on this board are so quick to poopoo an idea and pretend to know things they have no clue about...such as contracts written for majority owners to protect their interests.
It is so easy for some to say, "you can't do something"...then those same people complain about the state of the Browns franchise.
Last edited by mac; 12/02/09 10:56 AM.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Pete...would the Browns be worth more as a winning football franchise or as they are today?
Would you hand over part ownership of your house to maids so you could get the best maids available???
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
Pete...would the Browns be worth more as a winning football franchise or as they are today?
Would you hand over part ownership of your house to maids so you could get the best maids available???
Pete...you did not answer the question...
...Would the Browns be worth more as a winning football franchise or as they are today?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
I didn't answer because your answer is irrellevant...
Would your house not be worth more properly maintained?
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
I didn't answer because your answer is irrellevant...
Would your house not be worth more properly maintained?
Pete...you won't answer my question because the answer is obvious...some just hate to admit they could be wrong.
As for my house...it's not a business and in now way, shape or form is an example of the Browns situation.
Stick to the Browns...Would a successful Browns franchise be worth more than the franchise is today?
It's not a hard question to answer...really!
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
As for my house...it's not a business and in now way, shape or form is an example of the Browns situation.
Bull Pucky!!!!
Your house is an investment just as any business is. You have an interest to have it maintained and run as best as possible for both your investment's sake as well as your living shelter's sake.
Just as a Business is an investment. you have an interest in having it mantained and run as best as possible for both your invetment's sake as well as your living wages sake...
You wouldn't even THINK of giving partial ownership of your estate or house to maids and maintence crew to have your estate in as best possible shape....and the same goes for your business...
People have minority owners and partners ALL THE time...BUT NEVER as incentive to manage unless they plan on selling the company outright eventually.
It would be STUPID business to offer partial ownership as an incentive.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
cmon mac.....I answered it way above....
the question isn't simply "would the Browns be worth more if they were successful"
the question is "would the Browns increase in value enough over the lifetime of the Lerner's family ownership to offset a 5% gift ownership package"?
as Daman and I showed above.....the Browns are already one of the more valuable commodities in the NFL and that is despite our recent track record of "success".
also, even if in the short-term, the Browns recovered and became a successful team and the value increased more than the 5%......the longterm (the Lerner's seem to be in for the long-run as in multiple generations of Lerner ownership) is almost guaranteed to not increase enough because of this one decision as a GMs lifespan is at the very most going to be 15-20 years. And that is if the hire is a smashing success and rectifies the team's troubles, which is by no means guaranteed.
so, the real answer to your question is:
yes, the value of the Browns would increase (shortterm). but, Lerner's piece of that value would decrease (longterm), which I think he might care about.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
just clicking...boy I should brain fart more often 
There are a few possibles that it might take just that to lure them in....Holmgren definitely one of them - Parcells also.
As far as the - can't fire the owner thing...just like marriage, there would be a Pre-nuptial. And agreed upon buy out price if things didn't work out. I do think btw Carmen cashed his in.
JMHO and really all I was doing was thinking out loud...Possible yes, Probable nah...actually I'm prepared to be disappointed and we will end up hiring a project like Gettleman from the Giants - who knows that might work out best...according to Accorsi it would.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
Daman...Thank you...
It's a damn shame I had to say that three times in three different ways,,,
and still you persist that it's an idea that is worth discussion.. JMO, but this would be the dumbest, most stupid move Lerner could make. It has no merit what so ever. No owner in his right mind would consider giving away any percentage of his team.. no matter the disparate condition of the franchise..
Offering up some to the new Czar for purchase,, yeah,, I see that.. Giving it away... Not in a million years...
I know you are going to take offense to that Mac.. I mean you no harm or foul,, and I appriciate "Outside the box" thinking.. This just isn't an idea who's time has come....... yet. Maybe as the landscape changes (as it always does) there will come a time.. Not now however..
Quote:
Again, how does Lerner convince Holmgren that Cleveland is the place for him?
I believe there isn't any convincing Holmgren of anything. He either sees the potential or he doesn't. Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't change it from being a pig. So he either gets it, or he doesn't.
But if you want to look at the positives,,, let me give you a few that I believe would entice a guy like Holmgren or Parcells..
1. A fanbase that is Loyal beyond all reason.. you can't buy that kinda loyalty, it's either there or it isn't.. This team has loyal fans no matter the W/L record...
2. Top shelf facilities.. both training and stadium
3. Tradition.... the browns are steeped in tradition and a glorious history of success that reaches back to the 1940's.
4. An owner that stays out of the limelight.. doesn't want to be seen or heard. And he appears to be willing to part with whatever amount of money needed to make this team a success.. I don't want to say blank check, but it is kinda like that in a way. Or so it appears. (everyone has thier limits however)
5. I personally believe that they NFL WANTS a winner here in Cleveland so I get the feeling that Holmgren or Parcells, would get cooperation from the league that guys like Savage, Kokinis or Mangini can't get and pretty much don't deserve anyway.
6. Freedom to run the show.. no intervention.. Total control of who to hire, who to fire, who to draft, who to trade and for what. For those that are capable of doing this job, that has to be an irrisistable challenge to dismiss. Given the size of the egos... I'd say impossible to resist... JMO...
Just a general thought.. there is another reason to think The Browns would be a good choice. But it's a little off the wall..
If a guy (say someone like Holmgren) comes here and turns this franchise around,,, he'd get hailed as a hero... this town would open thier hearts to him.. Streets would be named after him, Children would be named after him..
Talk about an ego stroking... WOW..
This is going to be a tough job for whoever takes it.. only someone with the ego the size of a planet would dare consider it.
Yet, the downside, IMO, isn't nearly as harsh. It could be said that this team and organization is so bad that nobody could fix it.. hardly anyone would notice if he failed...
In other words, the risk is worth the reward...
But that's JMO....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,175
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,175 |
Giving part ownership is a stupid premise and Toad stated the most glaringly obvious reason: If the person doesn't work out, you can't get that ownership back without buying it back.
The counter argument is that you can write in that ownership reverts if it doesn't work out.... well, then... what the hell is the point of giving up part ownership?
It's utterly stupid and pointless..... it is nothing more than a rdiculously long way to go to hand them a large paycheck for the duration of their time here.
Nobody with a sane mind would bother with such a venture to bring in an employee. It's just ridiculous and bad business.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"JMO, but this would be the dumbest, most stupid move Lerner could make. It has no merit what so ever. No owner in his right mind would consider giving away any percentage of his team.. no matter the disparate condition of the franchise."
Of course tell that to the Late Al Lerner as I thought he did just that with Carmen...unless Carmen put up his own money???
JMH? - I really don't see how it is dumb or stupid when Winning would increase the worth of his 95% to very large numbers...business wise. And then there is the satisfaction of just bringing a winner here which I know most of you are convinced Randy has no motivation to do that.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Eo,, read purps post above your last one.. that kinda explains as well as any I've seen on here.
Getting an opportunity to buy an NFL Franchise is a dream I'm sure many former players share..(remember Walter payton,, he tried) Probably some coaches well..
But they don't get that opportunity because they basically don't have the money it takes to buy..
So, if,, and only if the current owner will front the cash to purchase the percentage, would it ever work out.
As for the Al Lerner and Carman Policy thing,, you need to check your facts.. Carman Bought into the team... I have little doubt he put up some money, but I also bet that Lerner was his bank for the rest of it.
either way, when Carman left, he got a chunk of change and moved back to california..
Last edited by Damanshot; 12/02/09 01:58 PM.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Of course tell that to the Late Al Lerner as I thought he did just that with Carmen...unless Carmen put up his own money???
There's a very basic and fundamental difference between what Al did and what some would suggest Randy should do:
Al formed a partnership out of necessity. Randy already owns the whole enchilada.
It's one thing to bring in capital when starting a business. It's quite another to voluntarily start handing out control of the business when the need isn't there.
Another thing................just because minority ownerships exist does NOT mean that proves Lerner would be willing to do it 
Here's a few notes from the Dolphins, since that's become the source of "See! It is done!"
Quote:
Ross, 69, purchased 95% of the team for $1.1 billion Jan. 20. Previous owner H. Wayne Huizenga, one of six limited partners, retained 5% of an investment that initially cost him $138 million in 1994.
In adding limited partners who bring celebrity and cultural appeal —Marc Anthony, Venus and Serena Williams and Gloria and Emilio Estefan — he is not only reaching out to the Hispanic, African-American and Cuban-American communities but attempting to give the Dolphins the cachet they need to sell tickets in a market filled with sun-splashed diversions.
Now people...............read this VERY carefully, and try to understand what it means.
Ross isn't handing out limited ownership in order to acquire FO leadership. He's doing it because of the need for more REVENUE. Quote:
78. Miami Dolphins (NFL)
Score: 45.15 points
Rank in sport: 27 (of 32 NFL teams)
On-field performance: 11-5-0 record, average margin of 1.75 points per game
Business performance: 65,490 attendance per home game, 86.7% of capacity, gain of 11% in franchise value
75. Cleveland Browns (NFL)
Score: 45.45 points
Rank in sport: 25 (of 32 NFL teams)
On-field performance: 4-12-0 record, average margin of minus-7.38 points per game
Business performance: 72,779 attendance per home game, 99.4% of capacity, gain of 7% in franchise value
That is per bizjournals.com
Ross is giving minor stakes to minority owners to try and sell tickets and merchandise.
Note that in spite of an 11-5 season, the fish only drew 86%.
Note that in spite of a 4-12 record, the Browns essentially sold out the stadium.
The Browns don't have to compete with all the "fun in the sun" joys that compete with the Dolphins in Miami.
In short, Ross is doing it out of a financial need. Lerner has no such need.
And just in case someone wants to come along and say "But...........but...........if we keep losing, we won't sell seats!! So Lerner MUST try and give up part ownership in order to get a proven winner in here!"
Horsecrap. No fool is going to give up a HUGE stake in the team, and thus give up control, just to hand it over to some team President or GM.
You only split up the business when you have no choice. Lerner controls EVERYTHING and doesn't have a financial need.
Apples and oranges between what Ross is forced to do and what Lerner is NOT forced to do.
Besides people. Use your heads. If Lerner is willing to pony up $40 million to one person (excuse me a moment.... ....) he isn't going to do it by forever losing FULL control of the team. He's just going to write that amount of money into the contract as compensation. 
I'm having a really difficult time accepting that we're actually having this conversation...............
Actually, I'm not. People are desperate............DESPERATE.............for a winner, and they are grasping at every available straw to try and land Ozzie Newsome. That's what this is really about, afterall. It's about going after Newsome...........bringing him home to turn the Browns into a winner. It's an understandable sentiment, but business always comes first, and Lerner has no need to break up full control of the team, none whatsoever.
The Browns aren't some desperate team about to fold into bankruptcy. Because of that and that alone, the chances of Lerner selling some of the team just to get Ozzie in here are 0%.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Yup,, thanks Toad,.., that explains it better than I did, but mostly, if you check, I've been saying the same thing..
can we stop this nonsense now?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Not until you finally do something you've refused to do:
Answer the question:
Is the Browns franchise worth more as a winner than it is as a loser?
ANSWER THE FREAKIN' QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
that was pretty funny.. I was wondering how many times, in how many ways I would have to answer that before he started in with the whole thing again....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
ANSWER THE FREAKIN' QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!
You want the TRUTH???? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!! 
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
that was pretty funny.. I was wondering how many times, in how many ways I would have to answer that before he started in with the whole thing again....
daman...what was more fun to watch was the dance you did each time I asked, just so you did not have to give the only correct answer the question...LOL...  .. ..
It is not a dumb business move any way you want to cut it. It might be more profitable for Lerner to give up 5% now and allow the top manager to build the Browns into a winning franchise again.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Can you give me a precedent where a sole-owner has given up a stake in ownership in order to land a FO guy, or are you believing that Ozzie is so amazing that he's worth doing something for the first time in history?
I will agree it's not a dumb business move...............it's an insane one.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Can you give me a precedent where a sole-owner has given up a stake in ownership in order to land a FO guy, or are you believing that Ozzie is so amazing that he's worth doing something for the first time in history?
I will agree it's not a dumb business move...............it's an insane one.
Toad...let's see if you dance with Daman...
Would the Browns franchise be more valuable if they were turned into a winning franchise or if they remained as the are today, the worst team in the NFL?
BTW, Ozzie?
Where you get that from?
I said he would not come, regardless of the offer.
Now...dance away... ... ...  ...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Can you give me a precedent where a sole-owner has given up a stake in ownership in order to land a FO guy, or are you believing that Ozzie is so amazing that he's worth doing something for the first time in history?
I will agree it's not a dumb business move...............it's an insane one.
Toad...let's see if you dance with Daman...
Would the Browns franchise be more valuable if they were turned into a winning franchise or if they remained as the are today, the worst team in the NFL?
BTW, Ozzie?
Where you get that from?
I said he would not come, regardless of the offer.
Now...dance away... ... ... ...
Probably
Now, what happens if you have to fire the guy you gave minority ownership?
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
He answered your question...............repeatedly.
Now it's your turn to answer a question:
Can you give a precedent, or are you advocating that for the first time in history a sole-owner give up that sole-ownership just for the sake of bringing in a FO person?
Let's go one step further...........what happens if that person fails?
You want to base your entire side of the debate on what happens IF the Browns franchise increases in value.
Guess what? It's going to increase no matter what. That's happened over and over again throughout history.
So what you're REALLY saying is that it's worth giving up control of an empire for a slightly MORE valuable franchise.
Horsepucky.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Your initial question was: Quote:
As a business owner?...One question... Would a successful Browns franchise be more valuable than the franchise is now?
My first attempt to answer was:
Quote:
In case you haven't noticed, These franchises go up no matter if the team is winning or losing..
I hate to have to explain it to you, but what the heck, this has moved to the absurd anyway, what's another step or two in direction..
My answer simply meant, TEAMS VALUES SEEM TO GO UP NO MATTER WHAT THIER W/L RECORD....... You can try if you want, but you can't dispute that... so, no matter what, the value of teams go up..
Sorry you didn't get that.. but it's not my fault if you can't read..it's yours.
My second attempt to answer:
Quote:
But to be more specific,, Yeah, I would think a winning franchise would be worth more than a losing franchise..
Ok, I admit that was clearer.. but still, it answers the question and in fact gives you the answer you were groping for...
AHH,,, But that's not good enough for you is it... you can't read, so everyone must
SPEAK...... SLOWLY......SO......AS.......NOT......TO.........CONFUSE........YOU
and my third and final response:
Quote:
and people accuse me of not "getting it"
I answered this already,, but you seem to want me to hit you over the head with the answer..
I would think YES...
and you said:
Quote:
Daman...Thank you...
and you know what,, nothing changed,, it was still an idiotic IDEA..... so give it up...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478 |
Quote:
Can you give me a precedent where a sole-owner has given up a stake in ownership in order to land a FO guy, or are you believing that Ozzie is so amazing that he's worth doing something for the first time in history?
I will agree it's not a dumb business move...............it's an insane one.
Except for the fact that almost every Fortune 500 company does this.
When a new CEO is hired they typically get a stock option.
The only difference is that we are talking a privately held company vs a publicly traded one.
Will it likely happen? No, but it is not unheard of to bring someone into an organization and give them a stake of that organization.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
The only difference is that we are talking a privately held company vs a publicly traded one.
That's a BIG difference.....
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
On a side note.. Lerner would be the most hated owner in NFL football by other owners if he established some precedent of giving ownership as part of a compensation package to a GM/Czar, whatever you want to call him... Even if it worked and this person turned the Browns into perennial playoff contenders in 2 years, other owners would absolutely despise him.....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
What happens if this guy doesn't succeed? What happens if he does succeed but in 5 years wants to retire? You can't take the ownership back... do you give the next guy 5%, further diluting your ownership?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
The only difference is that we are talking a privately held company vs a publicly traded one.
That's kinda like seeing a guy laying on the ground and demanding he get up. The only real difference is that instead of being alive, he's actually dead. 
The point: Because it's a sole-proprietorship the comparisons between a publicly held company company and a private one fail.
When you own the entire pie, you don't give up a piece just to bring in someone to work for you.
If we had a precedent in professional sports where the move wasn't done out of a desperate need to raise capital (such as the Dolphins situation), I could give the argument more than a 0% chance of being feasible..........
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
What happens if this guy doesn't succeed? What happens if he does succeed but in 5 years wants to retire? You can't take the ownership back... do you give the next guy 5%, further diluting your ownership?
That's what I was eluding to in a way DC..
If Lerner wants to entice someone to come aboard, he could offer something like, I'll finance you for X% of the team.. Meaning the new Czar doesn't take anything out of his pocket to pay for that %..
Lerner then pays the man let's say, 5 Mill a year.. some portion of that goes to pay down the note for the purchase of the minority ownership..
If the Czar succeeds, stays with the team long enough to pay off the debt then he either keeps it or he sells it back at it's increased value..
If the Czar fails, he gets what he's paid in back and the loan to purchase the % would then be satisfied leaving Lerner as the sole owner again..
Whew,, for crying out loud,,, Just pay the guy a ton of money and forget about it.. no wonder nobody does it
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Exactly *L*
If a guy is worth minority ownership, he's worth just paying him the rediculous lump-sum of $50 million dollars, right?
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
It looks to me like we have a few Browns fans..some who are the most critical of the way Lerner has run the franchise...who are most worried about the economics of a deal that would have Lerner giving a percent of ownership to hire his choice to fill the football Czar opening?
Your comments indicate that you are less concerned about the direction the franchise is headed.
OK, that's fair...every Browns fan has their priorities and it is a good thing to have your priorities and concerns on record.
The most economic move Lerner can make is keep Mangini and find someone willing to take the GM job to work with Mangini. This is what you folks are "on record" as supporting!
But those of you criticizing Lerner for the way he is handling the team...let's not be hypocritical now... 
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
It looks to me like we have a few Browns fans..some who are the most critical of the way Lerner has run the franchise...who are most worried about the economics of a deal that would have Lerner giving a percent of ownership to hire his choice to fill the football Czar opening?
I can't speak for Toad,, but I'll tell you this, I could care less about the economics of the team.. none of my business.... none at all
But I sure as hell don't think anyone that owns an NFL team is dumb enough to consider what you are proposing..
MAC, you've been given a host of reasons why it won't work.. why it's a dumb Idea.. why nobody in thier right minds would do it...
it's not my problem you can't accept it or grasp the concepts behind those reasons,, but you sure as hell shouldn't be making comments like that..
that's completely unreasonable on your part...
Quote:
But those of you criticizing Lerner for the way he is handling the team...let's not be hypocritical now...
What in THE hell are you talking about.. We weren't talking about anything other then your idea for Lerner to GIVE away 5% of his team,.,, and how crazy an idea it is...
If all you got as a retort is to twist what's being said, perhaps you should quit.....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Holmgren would be happy to
interview for Browns Job
|
|
