Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

In the USA today sports section I read about the lawsuit against the Bengals. Apparently Cincy believes the Bengals lied about their profitability in getting them to build a new stadium. The court ruled (anti trust) that the NFL has 30 days to hand over audited financial statements for the last 15 years for every NFL team. If this stands up in the appeal maybe New Orleans can get the Saints financial information from Benson

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Problem is, when a municipality hits, the team hits back. We'll see if the NFL is actually required to disclose the earnings information. I sure hope so. I can't imagine how all the Benson-lovers will react when it comes out that he's been in the top 10 in the league in earnings for years, but crying poor none the less. :)

'The Jungle' a mess, Bengals say in lawsuit


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stadium concrete is crumbling, escalator not working

By Cindi Andrews
Enquirer staff reporter



Raul Puga of DC Byers works on the concrete Thursday around a drain on the Canopy Level at Paul Brown Stadium.
The Enquirer/TONY JONES
Paul Brown Stadium really is a jungle, to hear the Cincinnati Bengals describe their home in a lawsuit against Hamilton County commissioners.

The team says the riverfront stadium's club lounges are inadequately heated, the sound system is spotty, concrete is crumbling - one section of seating might even be unsafe - and one reversible escalator isn't usable at the end of games.

The bill to taxpayers to fix these and other conditions: about $15 million.

That's a different picture than the team paints in brochures and media guides of a home field the Bengals like to call The Jungle. Sales materials tout the Bengals' $455 million home as award-winning architecture and "the best setting for pro football in the country."

"We don't think there's an inherent contradiction between us being proud of the stadium and pointing up the issues that need to be addressed," team spokesman Jack Brennan said.

County officials say the team is making a federal case out of a few maintenance problems that are being fixed. The team raised its concerns about the condition of the stadium as part of its response to the county's $600 million federal lawsuit against the Bengals and the National Football League. County commissioners say team owners illegally used their monopoly power to get a new stadium out of Hamilton County in the mid-1990s.

The team denied the allegations and counterpunched that the county has failed to live up to its duties as the builder of the stadium. The Bengals said they had hoped to work out the problems but were forced to make legal claims because they were sued.

The team's most serious allegation about the stadium is that faulty construction of support columns for the seats in the north end zone led to water damage that "compromised the structural integrity."

Contractors didn't build and test the supports as they were supposed to, according to the Bengals, and the county has withheld the results of recent testing on the supports.

Assistant County Administrator Eric Stuckey flatly denied any safety risk. Some water damage to one support was fixed about a year ago at no cost to the county and an additional column was added as insurance, said Joe Feldkamp, the county's director of stadium operations.

"There is absolutely no way any of this is a structural issue," Stuckey said.

Other concerns are being addressed or already have been, county officials say. Concrete has been a problem since the stadium opened in 2000. The Bengals' lawsuit criticizes the county for taking a piecemeal approach to concrete and joint repairs, estimating that almost $5.9 million worth of work is needed now.

The county counters that its five-year, $3.5 million maintenance plan - including $500,000 worth of work that's under way - will keep the floor of the concourses and seating bowl in good shape.

Problems with the sound system - dead spots, big swings in the volume and garble - also date to the stadium's opening, the Bengals say. They would cost $400,000 to fix, according to the team.

"The sound system's terrible," agreed fan Deb Price of Mount Washington, a season-ticket holder. "You can't hear the announcer."

Price's biggest gripe is with the escalator. Paul Brown Stadium has five escalators. The long escalator on the northwest side of the stadium couldn't be used last year to carry fans down at the end of games because the small space at the bottom between the landing and the exit gates was a safety hazard.

It wasn't a big deal when the team was playing badly, Feldkamp said, because fans started trickling out long before the end of the game. The design flaw was exposed last year when the new and improved team drew larger crowds that caused a bottleneck at the end of games, Feldkamp said.

Said Price: "It is kind of annoying that we spent all that money and you can't get out of the stadium easily. It is an accident waiting to happen."

The Bengals say it would cost $4.2 million to fix the design.

The county agrees that the one escalator is a problem. But it disagrees about some other things. For example, the county says it fixed the heating problem in the lounges by adding more electricity so portable heaters can be used when needed. "It's fixed. That's done," Feldkamp said.

The biggest head-scratcher for the county is $100,000 for a "blimp chase'' that the Bengals say the county agreed to provide before construction began.

"I've been here for four years - since we opened - and nobody's ever mentioned a blimp chase," Feldkamp said.

What's a blimp chase? It's a communications setup that allows people in a blimp to talk with people on the ground. Blimps show up at some big games and take aerial pictures for TV.

The county might have to provide such a feature, Feldkamp said, "but let's use common sense. Do we really need it?"

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/200...alssuit29.html

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

The Bengals look to be in some trouble. Are there any wild cats out in LA?

A class action lawsuit has been filed against the Cincinnati Bengals on behalf of 5,000 Bengals club-seat license holders. The suit claims that when Paul Brown Stadium opened in 2000, fans paid $150 apiece for club-seat licenses and signed a form that gave them the right to buy season tickets for up to 10 years. The form stated that if the fans did not buy the tickets, they would lose their license. According to the suit, the team then sent out a second contract, which was not signed by the license-holders, requiring them to keep buying tickets until their agreement expires. The plaintiffs are seeking the right to give up these seats and avoid paying up to $2,150 per seat annually for football tickets they no longer want.

https://www.lawyersandsettlements.co...otball_tickets

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

FYI - any action in LA would have to come via the government... is there any doubt as to where it would come from? :)

A copycat lawsuit that was filed in Pittsburgh against the Steelers and the other 31 NFL teams on the heels of an identical taxpayer lawsuit against the Bengals and the league has been dismissed this week by a federal judge.

As in the suit in Cincinnati, Robert C. Warnock cited anti-trust violations in the building of Heinz Field and wanted damages (more than $200 million) and the nullification of the lease.

But U.S. District Judge Joy Flowers Conti compared Warnock's status as a taxpayer to a fan unable to challenge a referee’s call. She also said she disagreed with U.S. District Judge S. Arthur Spiegel’s ruling in Cincinnati that a taxpayer could bring a suit. In Pittsburgh, Allegheny County and the Sports & Exhibition Authority refused to join the suit. In Cincinnati, Hamilton County subsequently joined and then replaced the taxpayer in the suit.

“The taxpayer is entitled to bring suit for an injunction against a local government entity to challenge unlawful municipal expenditures,� Conti said in her ruling. “That relationship does not extend to permit municipal taxpayers to sue private defendants that receive government funds and to challenge the allegedly illegal actions of those private defendants.�

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Thus... the state has nothing to sue Benson over. I do think thought the state itself has access to state tax records so I am sure they know what he brings in as far as the Saints go.

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Well there are a number of potential causes of action that I can think of. I'm sure Scotty could add a few more.

First, if the Benson is lying on his taxes, that's accounting fraud and a whole slew of related charges. That's probably not happening.

Second, even if the State knows what the Saints make, they have no way of knowing what any other team makes. This is an important fact to note, b/c Tom Benson claims that the Saints are amongst the bottom of the league, and have been for a number of years. If this is, in fact, not the case, then it is at least a misrepresentation. If the State can show that Benson's claims that the Saints weren't profitable compared to other teams in the league was material to their decision to give the team subsidies, presently or previously, then the State could sue to recover the subsidies paid to the team, on the grounds that Benson's statements amount to material misrepresentations. Further, if the state could show that Benson knew his statements were false (he's the head of the NFL finance committee mind you), then it's a fraudulent misrepresentation. Fraud carries heavier penalties (potentially - e.g. administrative fines, punative damage awards, etc.), and possibly even criminal charges for defrauding State taxpayers.

Finally, it seems that the County in Ohio bringing this suit is arguing anti-trust considerations. L.A. could do the same, suggesting that the NFL is a monopoly that is "price-fixing" and/or extorting local governments by using it's power as a monopoly. Honestly, that is a potentially persuasive argument that could be very very damaging for the NFL and its owners.

RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Yeah I don't think Benson is defruading the state as for as taxes got that would would be real stupid on his part. I don't have a problem with him imbelishing certain facts/truths ect. I mean its done everyday, even by the 'government'. Its buisness. I can't blame a buiness person for trying to make a buck and if you can get someone to hand you money for nothing really then more power to you. I am not a taxpayer in Louisiana anymore but if I was I would be pressuring the state to work out a deal with him to keep from making those payments which will include a new stadium. I love the Dome... but seems that will be the victim in all this. I do not want nameing rights going to the SuperDome but I have no promplem with naming rights to the new one... generate some cash...

Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

I think WhoDat's antitrust argument is the one to go with -- after all they are witholding superbowl consideration until a new stadium is built -- are trying to influence the Saints to move to LA -- all for the goal of either getting more concessions or a stadium or both. Seems to me since the Bengals won based on the fact that they built a new stadium under misrepresnetation the Saints could win the same for the monetary subsidies they paid Benson to date. Also -- who dat is exactly correct in the fact that Louisiana would be able to see not only what the Saints made each year but what the other teams made -- and where he fit into the equation. One last point --- on the tax issue -- Benson has a lot of income besides the Saints -- plus the categories must be very complicated -- To find out how profitable the Saints were by looking at his taxes would take a team of accountants a long time Im sure

RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

.. unfortunately, nothing is going to help New Orleans...

... I keep posting this in the form of a question, and people keep ignoring it...
.. it doesn't matter what happens today; the State may be able to come up with the 15,000,000 this year, maybe next year, maybe even 3 years for now, heck it may be able to come up with the money for the duration of the agreement... but guess what, in 3-4 years from now those 15,000,000 are just not going to cut it, even a new stadium is not going to cut it...

... in 3-4 years from now, unless the Saints win a couple of Super Bowls and get a lot of those country-wide bandwagon fans and Saints players start doing Chunky Soup commercials, Benson is going to need much more than 15,000,000 and a new stadium to keep up with the rest of the NFL, because the only source of revenue the Saints have (other than the NFL's revenue sharing ) is the same ol' fans who have followed their sorry behinds for decades... no new fans, no new money... simple as that...

Believe me, I don't want the Saints to leave N.O., but the reality is that even if the State agrees to whatever demands Benson has now, that is in no way any form of guarantee that the team will stay in N.O. for decades to come... it is just a stop-gap measure until the next meeting of the NFL's financial committee when the rest of the owners tell Benson he's not contributing his fair share to the revenue sharing plan...

RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Maybe why its being ignored is that there is a HUGE whole in your theroy... 1. The Saints are a profitable team. 2. The Saints survived 38-39 years without winning a Super Bowl and without a new stadium aside from the Super Dome itself. 3. New Saints fans are born everyday... I don't think you would find many who will argue that most Saints fan are born into this family of fans. 4. I can also argue Benson has turned this team around to a degree all you have to do is compare the win/lose record before and during Benson regin. 5. Revenue sharing is designed to have teams in smaller markets... you can't penalize a team being in say AZ and compete with teams like NY and Dallas. NFL is the product and the teams are just apart of it... and to keep these teams competitve you come up with revenue sharing. 6. I don't think you will find many owners who does not want a team in New Orleans... its a fun place and they like having the Super Bowl there. I seriously don't think you'll find a vote to move the Saints, I don't buy that at all. Saints are not moving, Benson is keeping them there and turning the team over to his grand-daughter. The NFL will step in and solve things soon enough or Benson waits and gets his own govenor elected, lol.

RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

Speaking of lost revenue ......

Wonder what the estimated total of lost revenue would be from the N.F.L. banned Ron Mexico jersey ????

Re: RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

\


... well, you lost me there..

you are telling me the Saints are profitable... so why exactly are they demanding 15,000,000 dlls cash a year from the State???? Isn't Benson's argument that the team is not profitable and therefore demands he's given by the State what he calls "guaranteed profits" or else he'd leave?????

... many businesses survive for many years without change, until change bites them in the behind and they go under...
..the NFL was a very different conglomerate 38 years ago... 38 years ago they were preempting games for Heidi reruns...

... and speaking of fans being born into families of fans: as far as I know no one is born with a paying job, so whatever those fans get, the Saints bib or the Saints onesy, still comes out from the same pocket that has been supporting the team already... sure, fans are born every day, but fans die every day too...

..and revenue sharing is NOT designed to keep small market teams.. revenue sharing is designed to keep the league profitable.

... and I don't think owners of other teams like New Orleans because it is a fun place to have a Bowl... owners get much more cash when the SB is played in their stadium.. same thing with the TV deal: adding L.A. to the mix, the T.V. deal could easily go up by 2-3 billion dollars over what it would be without it...

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

There's a difference b/w "spin" and misrepresenting facts. Saying you're amongst the bottom of the league in profitability, and that you cannot keep up with other teams, when in fact you're in the top 10 in the league in Operating Income is not spin. It's a misrepresentation. The U.C.C. even accounts for the difference b/w "puffing" (or salesmenship) and misrepresenting facts.

I disagree, in part, TR. While I agree that the Saints will one day leave, it won't be in the next 3-4 years. The Saints are in a small market, but they are similarly situated with about 10 other teams, and they are very profitable - more profitable than NE (Boston) and both NY teams on a regular basis. The Bears made 1/3 of what the Saints made in 2003, so I guess that goes to show that being in an 8 million person market doesn't guarantee success.

The plan that the State offered the Saints was for 20 years and did not have an out clause for either party. I think that the State and Saints will agree within the next few years b/c L.A. is not a realistic option for Benson. That will keep the team in New Orleans for the next two decades. After that, who knows?

Yes. As I illustrated above, the Saints are very profitable. 6th in Operating Income according to Forbes in 2002. 8th in 2003. Benson is demanding money b/c the State will give it to him, or that's been the case in the past. His saying that the team is not profitable goes to my statements about a potential lawsuit if the Ohio ruling stands. I think Benson is lying when he claims that the team can't keep up with other teams. He could be in real trouble if this Ohio suit goes agaisnt the NFL.

But ask yourself one question - would the NFL, the only truly profitable professional league, an organization that makes Billions of dollars a year - allow a guy who couldn't make his team profitable to CHAIR THEIR FINANCE COMMITTEE??

Add to Whodat's comments the old vikings owner's. He basically said that the stadium deal Benson got was the best in the league -- Like it or not Benson is playing the cards he has to perfection -- New Orleans, already hurting economically, already with the perception of being a dying city cannot afford to let the Saints go -- And one can say that regardless of the economics of the Saints -- From a perception point of view -- if New Orleans ever wants to start attracting business back (which is the only way the city will ever grow) they cannot afford to let the Saints go.

If the Ohio ruling stands I think you will see Benson quickly accepting the last state deal and shutting up about a new stadium for now

Benson never claimed to be poor, the team with its contracts are profitable and different media outlets report that, its not a secret. However the Saints don't generate the hundreds of millions like teams such as Dallas, New York, and Washington. What makes the Saints profitable is that they don't have huge overhead to operate... I don't think this has anything to do with the Saints, will have no effect at all. Benson can sit tight and get a govenor elected that wants to bring in Super Bowls and work with the Saints and all is well. But the Saints are playing with a gun to there head this year. Saints are in a position to make a run... lets say they make the NFC championship game, do you think the Saints will be able to get whatever they want? You better beileve it... some in Baton Rouge feel they want a different management to run the Saints.. if Benson shows he knows what he's doing then state legilation will run Blanco out of there as quickly as she rode in on her broom stick.

Those teams do NOT generate hundreds of millions of dollars in Income. Period. The problem is that people aren't educated on the issue and they believe Benson when he says this stuff. For example, you just said that Dallas, New York and Washington make hundreds of millions.

In 2003, Washington led the league in profitability making $87.8 million. New England was secong at $67.3 Million. After those two, no one was significantly more profitable than the Saints.

3rd - Dallas - $52.3
4th - Denver - $48.8
5th - Houston - $47.6
6th - Tampa Bay - $45.5
7th - Carolina - $44.9
8th - New Orleans - $43.1
9th - Baltimore - $42.6
10th - Tennessee - $42.3

So the Saints were more profitable than 24 teams in the league. But b/c Washington or Dallas make more money the Saints therefore have a bad deal? That's just a totally crap argument. The Saints made more than both New York teams, and teams in much larger markets, like Chicago, San Francisco, Miami, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Baltimore... etc. And where does New Orleans rank as a market? In the bottom 5 in the league. If you have a team in one of the five smallest markets in the league and you're consistently in the top 10 in income, you're very profitable. Your margins must be destroying the competition.

You are right in saying that Benson has low overhead. Know why that is? He doesn't pay rent on his stadium. He doesn't pay rent at his practice facility or corporate offices. He gets concessions that most other teams do not. That's why his margins are so high. In 2003, the same year as the numbers shown above, the Saints had margins of 29.5%. That ranked the team 3rd in the league behind New England and Washington. I think we all agree that Dan Snyder and Arthur Kraft are far better businessmen than Tom Benson, no?

Highly doubtful. Most of the State likes Blanco and how she's handled the Saints situation. Most in Baton Rouge don't like New Orleans, and so shafting the City and its team doesn't matter to most up-state legislators. Blanco has been praised in the media and amongst legislators for the great job she's done so far. While a good showing this season will definitely help Tom Benson in negotiations by softening public opinion about his team, I doubt Blanco will lose a ton of support from the vast majority of the state. She'll likely win re-election.

1. UHM... never said the Saints had a bad deal. I'd say they got a great deal/scam going. My point is I don't thing the Bengals situation will reflect on whats going on with the Benson/Blanco situation. If you tax Benson, take away concession deals, and charge him rent... the Saints drop bigtime as a formidable profitable teams. The deal was to make the Saints as profitable as possible to improve them as a competitve and a winning team, to a degree they have improved.
2. THe figures you quote are 'profit'? Then you have to say they 'generate' hundreds of millions when you take into account all the contracts for tv, merchandising, ect ect...
3. Well some can argue with you on the Snyder thing but other wise.
4. I do agree its more of a Baton Rouge vs. New Orleans thing going on than Saints and State.

OK, I agree that if you take all of that stuff away it hurts the Saints' ability to be profitable. But no one is proposing that. If NFL teams have to show how they compare to one another in terms of profit, and the Saints are in the top of the league in profit, it will make it real hard for them to reject the best sudsidy in the league (the deal the State offered already). I mean, what are they going to say? We're 8th in the league in profit and you just agreed to give us twice as much money over the next 20 years, but that's not good enough??? B/c that's what they're saying now basically.

Yes, teams generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. Most teams are between $140 or so million and $200 million in revenue. The vast majority are grouped in the $150 million to $160 million range. The Saints made $157 million in revenue last year if I remember correctly. Ultimately, though, revenue is irrelevant. PROFIT matters.

Profit means a lot without question and so does cash flow to a degree.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh
 

Just the same old crap

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Bengals lawsuit may help New Orleans
 

... so basically Benson just wants more.. the old ask and you shall receive...

.... if you are correct in your assessment, then we have nothing to worry about... :)

... I still think that the lure of the billions of dollars in TV money that adding the L.A. market wou;lld mean is cause for concern, though...