Vegas's Tropicana Hotel to be demolished

[Kevin Prather]

/Fingers crossed for an NBA franchise in Vegas next…

Seattle’s getting the next team, count on it. Vegas is prolly next.

I don't follow the NBA, but weren't we supposed to get a team ten years ago, and the NBA nixed it? Or something like that?

[BrandonFG]

The Sacramento Kings. The Maloof brothers - assholes that they are - first used Virginia Beach and then Seattle as leverage in order to get a new arena. I believe they’ve since sold the team and of course the Kings stayed in Cali.

[Sodboy13]

The Sacramento Kings. The Maloof brothers - assholes that they are - first used Virginia Beach and then Seattle as leverage in order to get a new arena. I believe they’ve since sold the team and of course the Kings stayed in Cali.

They also attempted a sale to Anaheim that got scuttled last-minute.

[clemon79]

Seattle’s getting the next team, count on it. Vegas is prolly next.

If Vegas wants cuts, that's fine. Really.

[calliaume]

There's a long article in this year's Baseball Prospectus (which I think is online, but it's behind a paywall) that explains neither Oakland nor Las Vegas wants to shell out the money for a new stadium for the Athletics under current ownership. They've undoubtedly seen what's happened in Pittsburgh and Miami, where cities paid for new stadiums under the assumption ownership would then go wild spending money to attract high-quality ballplayers to bring championships to those locales, only to discover the owners had no such intentions.

EDIT: Here it is.
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/81465/as-fans-are-still-dreaming-of-the-end-of-moneyball/

There's also been a strengthening movement among taxpayers in the last decade to vote "no" on any public funding for sports stadiums in general. When the decision is made by local governments or the legislature (Tennessee's new NFL stadium) they're still going through, but left to the voters the word is no fairly often - it's entirely possible that the Coyotes are about to lose a vote for a new NHL stadium in Tempe. (which would likely cost the market the team)

I surely hope so. Over the last three days, the Chicago Bears, who have been assumed to be headed toward the suburb Arlington Heights for over a year, have seemingly pivoted (after being told the tax assessment on the property they want has dramatically increased) toward Naperville -- which is where I live. (Although I live a 20-minute drive from the property presumed to be in question, I don't know anybody that particularly wants the Bears here.)

https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/the-chicago-bears-battle-over-arlington-heights-property-taxes-explained/3154133/

[Sodboy13]

It is hilarious that the Bears think they've uncovered some great leverage by paying $200 million for land in one suburb, then saying they'll buy land in a different suburb and build a stadium there if the tax environment proves more favorable. As if no one who lives in the seven-county area is wholly familiar with how the Bears spend money.

[BrandonFG]

So it appears Vegas's mayor isn't exactly all-in on the A's moving to Sin City, at least not on the Strip.

“I’ve lived in this town this year 60 years, and so I know the town like the back of my hand,” Goodman said of Las Vegas. “I personally think they’ve got to figure out a way to stay in Oakland and make their dream come true.”

https://sports.yahoo.com/las-vegas-mayor-on-as-planned-relocation-to-desert-theyve-got-to-figure-out-a-way-to-stay-in-oakland-002242471.html

[Dbacksfan12]

The Strip isn’t in Las Vegas proper, so she doesn’t get much benefit from the team moving.

[Jeremy Nelson]

The Strip isn’t in Las Vegas proper, so she doesn’t get much benefit from the team moving.

Actually, Paradise NV, where the Strip is located, is governed by the Clark County Commission, which means some of that revenue is making its way back to Las Vegas proper. Even if she didn't get any benefit, a good number of her constituents work on the strip. If she's hearing grumblings about this stadium from them, she could curry favor by making a comment like this. 

[Strikerz04]

It is hilarious that the Bears think they've uncovered some great leverage by paying $200 million for land in one suburb, then saying they'll buy land in a different suburb and build a stadium there if the tax environment proves more favorable. As if no one who lives in the seven-county area is wholly familiar with how the Bears spend money.

The same team that lived and died by the "run and shoop" offense...nevermind the smoke of moving to Comiskey.

[Strikerz04]

There's a long article in this year's Baseball Prospectus (which I think is online, but it's behind a paywall) that explains neither Oakland nor Las Vegas wants to shell out the money for a new stadium for the Athletics under current ownership. They've undoubtedly seen what's happened in Pittsburgh and Miami, where cities paid for new stadiums under the assumption ownership would then go wild spending money to attract high-quality ballplayers to bring championships to those locales, only to discover the owners had no such intentions.

EDIT: Here it is.
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/81465/as-fans-are-still-dreaming-of-the-end-of-moneyball/

As incompetent in governance that Oakland is/has, what they got right was to accommodate Howard Terminal as the optimal option and Fisher led them on. The whole charade is not the city (or Alameda County's for that matter) fault.