Inside The As

A's, no longer of Oakland, not yet of Las Vegas, have plenty of questions to answer

Jason Burke

Sep 29, 2024; Seattle, Washington, USA; An Oakland Athletics fan holds a sign after the game between the Seattle Mariners and the Oakland Athletics at T-Mobile Park. Mandatory Credit: Steven Bisig-Imagn Images
Sep 29, 2024; Seattle, Washington, USA; An Oakland Athletics fan holds a sign after the game between the Seattle Mariners and the Oakland Athletics at T-Mobile Park. Mandatory Credit: Steven Bisig-Imagn Images / Steven Bisig-Imagn Images
In this story:

Yesterday we witnessed what is supposed to be the end of the Oakland Athletics. Yet, for some reason, I feel more optimistic now than I have in quite awhile. Maybe it's just a way of delaying the sadness and grief that is consuming the fan base, and those feelings will come for me in due time. Yet, there have been some developments of late that is seems hard to call coincidental.

Everything starts off with a tweet from Buster Olney, a national media figure that spent a decent amount of time on Thursday tweeting about the A's.

The use of "McCourt territory" is an interesting choice of phrasing there, since McCourt was forced to sell the Dodgers. Olney is also someone that is plugged in with owners around the league, so he wouldn't say something like this unless he's heard some rumblings.

We also have the quotes from agent Scott Boras that forced MLB to release an official statement a couple of weeks ago, and if Boras is speaking up, things behind the scenes are not going perfectly.

Then, there was the tweet from Vital Vegas that said that the A's met with the owners of the Rio last week, which was quickly corrected by the Rio, because nobody wants to be associated with the A's in Las Vegas.

Now, none of this necessarily means anything all separated, but together, it looks as though the A's plan in Las Vegas may be hitting a snag, at least as currently formulated. The thing is, Fisher and company have already made MLB look pretty foolish to this point, so if they were to focus on a different site, or another city altogether, that could be where Olney's analysis comes into play. It would make sense if the Tropicana site is Fisher's last stand at getting a ballpark done at all. Fisher told them that Oakland wasn't viable, and A's fans have continuously proven that incorrect.

If he fails there, could be finally be forced to sell? Why would he fail there after Jeremy Aguero assured everyone that his data was super good?

The simple reason could be that the ballpark is only nine acres, and if the projected cost is more than the $1.5 billion Fisher was planning on, then the ballpark plan at that site may not be feasible anymore. There is also the fact that we have yet to see any financing plan for how this proposed ballpark will be funded.

Painting trouble is the easy part. Predicting what happens next could be difficult.

It has been an open secret that Golden State Warriors owner Joe Lacob has a standing offer to buy the A's, though the amount he is offering is unknown. The A's, to this point, have also not been for sale.

One thing we do know is that Fisher is a big fan of spending as little money as possible, so if there were a way for him to come out ahead by selling the team without even having to build a ballpark, then you'd have to think he'd consider it. Heck, the reason he's dragging the A's to Sacramento is because his friend offered him a rent-free place to crash.

We have speculated that the reason that funding has been difficult to come by in Vegas is because of the valuation Fisher is after is presumably too high. Forbes has the franchise valued at about $1.2 billion, so in order to receive $500 million towards the ballpark construction as an equity investment, Fisher would have to give up roughly 41.6% of the team to raise that capital.

However, if he's using a different valuation for the club, like what he thinks the team could be worth after the ballpark is built, then he could give up less of the franchise while still raising funds. The problem here is that he's basically double counting for himself. The franchise value goes up only if the ballpark is built, and the ballpark is only built if the equity investors line up.

So if Fisher is looking at doubling the valuation once the ballpark in complete, then we'd be looking at about $2.5 billion. $500 million, the lump of money Fisher needs for this project, on that valuation would be about 20% of the team, or about half of what they're currently worth. You can see why investors haven't lined up yet.

Now, it's hard to see someone like Lacob offering close to the $2.5 billion figure that Fisher is hoping for once the ballpark is constructed, being that anyone that would potentially purchase the club would have to also build a ballpark. Yet, the videos of the energy in the Coliseum for the final game could make someone think that investing in this club and keeping them in Oakland would be worthwhile.

Now, I'm not saying that this specific scenario is playing out, I'm just trying to connect some dots that may not even go together. Trying to ward off grief will make connections appear sometimes. At the same time, it does feel as though this will be another eventful offseason for John Fisher and the A's. They'll be in Sacramento next season, but will they still be Vegas bound by the time the first pitch is thrown?

Until we see some sort of financial plan, it's tough to be certain of anything.

Published
Jason Burke
JASON BURKE

Jason is the host of the Locked on A's podcast, and the managing editor of Inside the A's. He's a new father and can't wait to take his son to his first baseball game at the Coliseum. 

Home/News