Sorry for the early post, wanted this group to know about it though. My local news in the bay area is reporting that the Oakland A's have been sold, and are able to move by the 2004 season. Not sure how accurate this is, I will keep you posted tonight and early tomorrow. If this is true, does that mean that the A's are out of the running for a Portland move. I sure hope not, this is who I wanted to move up there.

Just wanted to add a quick update. I am quoting Gary Radnich..a local news reporter on KRON news. Mandalay Bay Entertainment has made an offer for the Oakland A's, it is pending approval by the MLB Commisioners office. At this time Steve Schott (A's Owner) has denied this. Sorry for the premature post, but just wanted to let you know about it.

From the Oakland Tribune (8-1-2001):

quote:

---

Oakland A's sold?

By Robert Gammon and Dave Newhouse

STAFF WRITERS


The owners of the Oakland A's are close to selling the team, and may have already reached a deal in principle with a group of investors with strong ties to Las Vegas, according to several high-ranking sources.

Although top A's officials including General Manager Billy Beane denied the reports, sources said late Tuesday that A's co-owners Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann are close to taking the proposed sale to Major League Baseball for approval.

"I have been told there is a possible buyer for the Oakland A's," said Scott Haggerty, president of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and chairman of the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority, which oversees the Coliseum Complex and its relationship to local professional sports teams. "And I welcome the news because I think it puts the city and county in a position of negotiating with new owners."

The reported selling price of the team is $150 million to $200 million -- more than double the amount Schott and Hofmann paid for it in 1995.

Sources also said Tuesday the proposed new ownership group includes Mandalay Entertainment, a subsidiary of Mandalay Resorts Group, a giant hotel-casino chain that owns such famous casinos as the Luxor, Mandalay Bay and Circus Circus.

According to filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Mandalay reported revenues of $2.5 billion and assets of $4.2 billion last year.

Any deal involving the sale of the team would need the approval of Major League Baseball, and an agreement with Mandalay is sure to raise concerns throughout the league about the company's vast gambling empire.

Schott and Hofmann, unhappy for some time with Network Associates Coliseum in Oakland, have been talking in recent months with the city of Santa Clara about possibly relocating there.

The team's lease expires at the Coliseum at the end of this season, and after that the A's have an option of extending the lease year to year through 2004.

Now with a possible new team owner in the wings, it's unclear whether the A's will continue to push for a move to the South Bay, remain in Oakland or relocate to Las Vegas, which does not have a major league-sized stadium.

Neither Schott, Hofmann nor A's President Mike Crowley was available for comment late Tuesday. Crowley told KTVU, Channel 2, there was no pending sale of the team, and General Manager Beane told The Tribune flatly he had not heard of any serious talks involving the sale of the team.

"I'm not aware of any," Beane said. When asked whether Schott and Hofmann could be working behind the scenes to sell the team without his knowledge, Beane added, "I don't believe so. I'm pretty privy to that kind of information."

Schott and Hofmann purchased the A's from the Haas Family six years ago for a reported discounted price of $72 million on the condition that the team remain in Oakland. But the new owners became unhappy almost immediately, saying they felt the expansion of the Coliseum for the Oakland Raiders had ruined the facility for baseball.

In fact, that expansion -- named Mount Davis after Raiders owner Al Davis -- caused the delay of the A's 1996 season, and as a result the team ended up playing its first few games at a minor league stadium in Las Vegas.

Schott and Hofmann later decided they wanted to sell the team and exercised a lease option that allowed the city and county to find a buyer. In December 1998, a sale price was set at $122.4 million, supposedly 90 percent of fair market value at the time.

Two ownership groups stepped forward, including one led by former A's marketing executive Andy Dolich and Save Mart Foods chairman Robert Piccinini of Modesto.

The city eventually chose that group and forwarded the proposed deal to the league, which promptly tabled the agreement, effectively killing the sale.

Oakland City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente, who is a veteran of sports deals and a longtime member of the Coliseum Authority, said Tuesday the proposed sale of the team added just another wild card to a situation already rife with uncertainty.

"Obviously, we were talking to the A's about a possible extension for the contract and plans to increase the number of fans at the Coliseum," he said. "Now we would be interested in talking to the (proposed new owners) as soon as possible. Maybe this new group is interested in staying in a city that really loves its A's."

Oakland City Manager Robert Bobb has been the biggest backer of a proposal to build a new ballpark for the A's in downtown Oakland. But his ideas have suffered setbacks in recent months, first when the Peralta Community College District shot down his plan for a new stadium at Laney College, and next when two development teams of a proposed waterfront site revealed they're not interested in a new ballpark along the Embarcadero.

Bobb said Tuesday that the city and county are "bringing in" HOK Architects of Kansas City, a leading builder of modern retro-fit baseball stadiums "to show us how a stadium will be built."

Bobb added he's not giving up on the waterfront Ninth Avenue Terminal site despite the lack of interest by the Port of Oakland, which owns the land, and the developers who want to take over the property.

---

If this is true, it would be a major departure from previous MLB policy. It wasn't that long ago that former players like Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle were "banned" from baseball because they were doing PR work for casinos. Now a casino conglomerate wants to buy a team?

Good scoop, Randy...and welcome to the board. :0

--------------------------------------------------
"Nobody ever said, 'Work ball!' They say, 'Play ball!' To me, that means having fun."
–Willie "Pops" Stargell 1940-2001

Portland in the National League!

Yes, welcome!

It's only a departure from MLB policy if they allow it, which would greatly surprise me.

Remember, Bing Crosby wanted in on a frnachise. He was turned away by Landis because of his racetrack holdings.

And I think the Pete Rose affair is tied into the gambling issue. If Selig softens on letting gaming companies own teams, then he's going to hear from all the Rose supporters. Which is whuy I don't think this deal will be approved.


-New Yorker
Did you really think that Hoboken was the birthplace of Base Ball?

And so it continues. Apparently not quite "a done deal" yet. This from SF Gate...

quote:

---

Oakland Athletics deny reports that team is being sold

(08-01) 11:52 PDT OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) --

The owners of the Oakland Athletics are considering selling the team to an investor group run by former Hollywood producer Peter Guber, according to local political leaders who cited sources within the A's organization. But A's officials deny the team is being sold.

Several Oakland city officials said team owners Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann received an offer of more than $150 million from Guber's Mandalay Sports Entertainment, which also owns minor league baseball teams including the Las Vegas 51s.

Oakland Councilman Ignacio de la Fuente, who oversees the city's relationships with its sports franchises, told The Associated Press that "a reliable source" within the A's organization told him Tuesday afternoon that the sale was "a done deal."

The Oakland Tribune, San Jose Mercury News and San Francisco Chronicle, among other media, also reported Wednesday that the A's owners were considering the bid from Mandalay, citing unidentified sources as well as Oakland city officials.

A's spokesman Jim Young refused to comment on the specifics, but issued a blanket denial Wednesday.

"We have not been sold," he said. "The team is not for sale and not on the open market."

Young added that it's not uncommon for teams to receive offers for business deals and purchase proposals, but if the team's owners decide to sell, "we would release that information in a responsible manner," he said.

Major League Baseball must approve ownership changes involving its teams.

A's President Mike Crowley and general manager Billy Beane also denied Tuesday night that a sale was pending, although they acknowledged that they hadn't talked with Schott or Hofmann about Tuesday night's developments.

Young said the owners would release a statement later Wednesday.

Guber, the chairman and CEO of Mandalay, was formerly the CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment. He and movie producer Paul Schaeffer expressed interest in buying the A's two years ago. Requests for comment from Guber and Mandalay were not immediately returned.

Crowley and Young scolded de la Fuente for generating the initial reports by appearing live Tuesday night on KTVU, a Fox TV affiliate.

"For an Oakland city official to take it upon himself to make those statements was totally irresponsible and shows a bad lack of judgment," Young said.

The A's owners have made no secret of their unhappiness with Oakland's Network Associates Coliseum. Schott wants a new baseball-only location to replace the multipurpose stadium. The A's lease expires after the 2001 season, and after that they can extend it through 2004, a possibility they recently discussed with Oakland city officials.

The city of Santa Clara, about 35 miles to the south, has lobbied heavily to become the next home of the A's, and the city council there voted last week to continue discussions about a new ballpark.

"Our responsibility is to sit down with the new owners as soon as possible and work with them on keeping the team in Oakland," De La Fuente said. "The A's have a history in the city, they identify with the city, it's a very good marketing tool for the city. It's the only live sport that working families can take their kids to because the Raiders and Warriors are out of the reach of the average family."

---

-New Yorker
Did you really think that Hoboken was the birthplace of Base Ball?

This could be a ploy like the Twins/North Carolina deal a few years ago, to scare Oakland and or Santa Clara into building a new park. I just cant see MLB allowing a casino to buy a team and maybe move it to Las Vegas with its gambling issues, not to mention no acceptable temporary stadium in Vegas or money for a MLB sized park in the future either.

From the Sacramento Bee:

quote:

---

A's insist team hasn't been sold: But Oakland officials say a California group has a 'done deal.'
By Gregg Bell and Jim Van Vliet
Bee Staff Writers
(Published Aug. 2, 2001)

The A's are saying "No way," and Oakland city officials are saying it's a "done deal."
Either way, the fallout from Tuesday night's A's-for-sale bombshell spread quickly from California to Cleveland, where the A's were playing the Indians.

Not wanting to fuel a distraction to a playoff run, A's officials spent Wednesday remaining adamant that the team has not been sold. Meanwhile, Oakland city manager Robert Bobb and City Council president Ignacio De La Fuente spent the day saying just the opposite.

And the A's soap opera continues.

According to published and broadcast reports, the A's have been sold to Southern California-based Mandalay Sports Entertainment. Successful Hollywood producers Peter Guber and Paul Schaeffer reportedly have offered A's owners Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann $150 million to $200 million.

Mandalay officials did not return phone calls from The Bee but told the Associated Press that they had no comment.

Mandalay -- which owns the Las Vegas 51s, the Los Angeles Dodgers' Triple-A franchise; and the Shreveport Swamp Dragons, the Giants' Double-A affiliate -- reportedly is considering moving the team to Las Vegas.

While Hofmann enjoyed a Canadian fishing vacation, Schott denied those reports Wednesday. The pair bought the A's for the bargain-basement price of $72 million from the Haas family in 1995.

Scott Haggerty, president of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and chairman of the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority, said he was informed by A's officials as early as Monday of a "possible applicant" that the team would propose to Major League Baseball as a new owner of the club.

Bobb said he has "been told" the A's have been sold.

Meanwhile, the A's just keep shaking their heads.

"They have not been sold," A's general manager Billy Beane said, using a curious pronoun. "They are not moving to Las Vegas."

Wednesday did bring some clarification on some key issues surrounding the rumored sale:

The timing of a sale stems from the fact that the A's window to exercise their first of three consecutive one-year lease options at the Coliseum through the 2004 season begins Aug. 15.

Guber and Schaeffer are not affiliated with the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, dispelling fears that Major League Baseball would balk at the sale.

Major League Baseball knows nothing about any proposed sale.

"Nothing has been submitted to the league," said Richard Levin, a baseball senior vice president.

And, if the A's are indeed sold, it doesn't necessarily mean they will leave Oakland.

"All the speculation is premature," insisted Haggerty. "New owners might desire to stay in the Bay Area."

And, as Levin reminded, "No one has moved a team in 30 years."

With that in mind, De La Fuente said he already planning to sit down with the new owners.

"We need to do that as soon as possible and work with them to keep the team in Oakland," he said. "The A's have a history here."

As for A's players, they are far from worried about it. In fact, they seemed almost giddy about the prospects of the fresh financial slate that new ownership would bring.

Schott and Hofmann run the second-lowest payroll in the major leagues at $33.8 million. They also have made no secret of wanting to move the A's to Santa Clara. And they have already nixed a $91 million contract for franchise cornerstone Jason Giambi, who can become a free agent in October.

"These guys are smart businessmen," Giambi said. "They are going to have a lot of options. They are not going to put all of their eggs in one basket. If one thing (a South Bay move) doesn't work out, they'll do this. It wouldn't surprise me at all."

Giambi, who owns an offseason home in Las Vegas with his brother Jeremy, did allow himself to dream of a Las Vegas possibility.

"That might be a nice home-field advantage," he said. "It'd be first-class. That's how that city's run. But I'm sure league security would have a field day."

Or, as pitcher Tim Hudson said of the young, carefree A's: "That's all we need. We'd all go broke."

Potential free agent Johnny Damon has already lived through an ownership change in Kansas City in 1999, when David Glass bought the Royals from the Kauffman family.

He said he suffered through the Royals being gutted in order to make the sale easier. Kansas City's payroll dropped from $40 million to $18 million before Glass signed the deal.

"It'd be great to have new owners who could keep Jason here, No. 1, and then the rest of us around him," Damon said. "I think everyone knows that if this team stays together, we have a chance to have a dynasty. The next three or four years we have the chance to be in the playoffs every year, maybe even the World Series."

It marks the second time in three years the A's apparently have been sold. In 1998, Schott and Hofmann agreed to accept a $122 million offer from a group that included Modesto's Robert Piccinini, who owns the Save Mart chain.

Major League Baseball, however, turned down the ownership group, leading to speculation that it doesn't want two teams sharing the Bay Area.

Las Vegas, however, has no stadium to house a major-league club. Its Triple-A ballpark is 18-year-old Cashman Field, where attendance lags in the bottom third of the Pacific Coast League.

"They (the A's) still have no place to go," De La Fuente said. "Las Vegas has no stadium. But they've got lots of money to build one."

---

A local angle, from the Bee's Mark Kreidler:

quote:

---

Mark Kreidler: It's difficult to believe what A's owners say

(Published Aug. 2, 2001)

The propaganda arm of the A's cranked into hyperdrive Wednesday to deny reports of a sale that sound a little too solid not to believe, and it was quite a sight. There were telephone denials here and faxed denials there, lots of furious cross-chatter and such. At some point, you half-expected to see Kevin Bacon pop up in his "Animal House" ROTC garb but with an A's cap tugged across his brow, his palms raised in the air, squealing, "Remain calm! All is well!"
But if the events of the past 24 hours have demonstrated anything, it is that all is not well, not well at all. And the overarching theme here is a simple one: Owners Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann have managed, in fewer than six years, to exhaust every iota of baseball goodwill that ever accrued to them.

If you're keeping statistics at home, that's a dandy little destruction job.

It's hard to paint a smiley face across this one: These men are not to be believed. If they tell you that they aren't anywhere close to selling the A's to a Las Vegas group headed by former Sony Pictures chairman Peter Guber, you may reasonably assume, as two Oakland City Council members acknowledge, the deal is all but done.

If they tell you that the Jason Giambi contract is hung up on a no-trade clause, you are utterly in the right to wonder what the real story is. If they say the Coliseum is lousy for baseball, you are right to ask why the owners would so publicly (and repeatedly) trash the place to which they ostensibly desire to draw paying customers.

If they bring your mother into the room for a surprise visit, ask the nice lady for some ID. With the Hofmann-Schott axis, the only rule that ought to apply is, Distrust and Verify.

Most conspiracy theories we've heard were good for a cocktail-party laugh and not much more, but in the case of the A's owners, we're willing to consider the exception. From the start, in November 1995, Hofmann and Schott came across as people genuinely unsuited to running a baseball team and not at all committed to keeping the franchise in Oakland. They haven't done much since then to alter the perception.

They are, however, very shrewd businessmen. Or didn't you know that during those lean, last-place years in the mid-1990s, after the two purchased the A's from the Haas family at the deep local-owner discount price of something like $25 million below market value -- didn't you know that Hofmann and Schott managed to make a profit in those desultory years?

They constructed a winner almost by accident, stumbling onto the excellence of Billy Beane as an organization builder four years ago only after their player-payroll slash convinced then-president Sandy Alderson to bolt. Beane pieced together a market-defying contender on a shoestring budget; Schott and Hofmann promptly threatened the core of it, refusing to sign Giambi to a long-term deal over the bogus no-trade issue.

Hofmann and Schott had a legitimate beef with Coliseum officials over the facility's baseball-hostile remake, undertaken to convince the NFL's Raiders to return. But the owners' subsequent behavior -- flirting with Santa Clara and other sites, downgrading the Coliseum in public -- raised the question of whether they had any long-term interest in seeing the thing work.

Last season's march to the playoffs was an absolute gift; the shocking lack of momentum that it lent the A's is a direct measure of how this ownership group has systematically turned off its fans. You can argue all day the question of whether the Bay Area can support two major-league teams, but you can't do it honestly unless you provide the context: On one side, the Giants built a new ballpark quite basically on their own dime; on the other, Hofmann and Schott constantly bemoaned their situation while looking for public money to alleviate it.

Now, and the Oakland denials duly considered, that situation may be about to change. Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann, the men who kept baseball at the Coliseum with their A's purchase, once might have been considered local heroes. Their legacy instead is something quite literally not to be believed.

---

I find the Mark Kreidler article interesting. My perception of the Schott/Hoffman is deteriorating. Of course, Billy Beane IS the reason the A's have done so well the last couple years. I almost wonder why Schott/Hoffman didn't do the Loria/Felipe Alou number on him to eliminate the one thing standing in their way of ballpark arm-twisting. They probably didn't realize he was so good.

I don't have much else to add to this current discussion. The underlying story, for the moment, eludes me. I believe Schott/Hoffman are looking for a nice return on their investment and do not want to retain ownership for much longer, but I don't think they intend to sell the team to somebody who will move it Las Vegas; and I don't believe MLB will ALLOW such a move. But what this PR storm is designed to produce is beyond me.

I can't tell how this script is going to develop yet. But I'll have more to say as the next actors deliver their lines.

Portland in the National League.

I still think this may be an effort to force someone in the bay area to build them a new park rather than sell them to someone who will move them, I do however believe they will sell to someone if they do not get a new park soon. As for Vegas I cant believe any of the big league sports will allow a team in Vegas with all the possibilities for disaster or even allow owners with even remote gambling ties to own a team even outside Vegas, if either happens I will be shocked. As for a facility I dont believe cashman is acceptable as an interim facility and as of yet there is no money I know of appropriated for a permanent park, this is an issue.

This is just about the most authoritative article about the current A's situation I've seen. Keep reading - there's a nice surprise halfway down.

quote:

---

Published Thursday, Aug. 2, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News

Schott: No sale, but we're listening
A's co-owner stands by his plan, ensuring team retains value
BY MARK PURDY
Mercury News Staff Columnist

The first thing you need to know about Steve Schott is, he loves baseball -- but he frequently doesn't love the baseball business. That explains just about everything he does.

Or, more often, doesn't do.

In other words, Schott is not selling the A's this week. Or next week, either. And probably not next month. After that? You never know.

Schott, co-owner of the team along with Ken Hofmann, said Wednesday that he has not put the team on the open market because, for the moment, business is pretty decent. But the uncertainties of tomorrow -- mostly, the daunting payroll prospects of keeping his young and talented team together -- mean there are no guarantees.

``We're not actually looking to sell the team,'' Schott said from his Citation Homes office in Santa Clara. ``It's not for sale and isn't being marketed for sale. But if the right proposal and the right buyer for the Bay Area comes along, we owe it to ourselves to listen.''

That tricky ``listening'' part is what has led to this week's hoo-ha. The Mandalay Sports Entertainment group of Los Angeles recently made a proposal to buy the A's. However, Schott and Hofmann have not accepted the prop osal. They cannot accept it until baseball pre-approves the new ownership group. Mandalay now even denies interest in a deal.

And in that regard, no official paperwork has even been submitted to baseball by the Mandalay group. Schott won't say why. But a good guess would be that the Mandalay front men have not or will not disclose their complete monetary wherewithal or their entire list of financial backers. Until that occurs, you can forget about the A's changing hands.

Meanwhile, Schott intends to en joy the element of baseball he most enjoys -- the way his team is playing. With the A's making a push toward the wild-card playoff spot, that's going fairly well.

``My take on it has always been that the A's are a 100-year-old team that was founded by Connie Mack,'' Schott said. ``Ken Hofmann and I are really the caretakers of something that will exist long beyond us. We're just here to make sure the asset retains its value. Ken and I really don't want to be in it for the long pull, unless we get a new stadium in the Bay Area.''

You might say, then, that nothing is truly new with the A's, in spite of the heat and smoke emitting from the Mandalay story. This particular offer for the team -- if the offer still exists -- is not solid enough to take seriously, for now. If it is not altered significantly, it will either collapse of its own non-integrity, or be rejected by baseball for other reasons. But eventually, there will be other offers. And the Schott-Hofmann ownership might well accept one of them.


Playing it straight

It's funny how so many people believe Schott and Hofmann are deceptive and insincere owners. It's just the opposite. Schott and Hofmann have been consistent in saying they have no intention of losing their shirts by owning the A's. T hey've been consistent in saying they cannot compete in the long term without a new ballpark, whether the ballpark is in Oakland or Santa Clara or anywhere else. And if they don't get a new ballpark, they will sell the team.

Of course, the new owners, w hoever they are, will face the same competitive issues. Reportedly, in discussions with the A's, the Mandalay group expressed interest in the current Santa Clara ballpark proposal. There are indications the Mandalay offer also may include a small ownershi p piece for A's General Manager Billy Beane, who may be serving as a liaison for the group with Schott and Hofmann. That would bode well for the A's staying in the Bay Area. But more likely, new owners will be more interested in moving elsewhere.

One sure guarantee: That won't be Las Vegas. There's no way baseball will give a thumbs-up to a franchise in the gambling capital of the free world. The city is a bad pro sports town, anyway. The Mandalay group formerly owned a minor league hockey franchise in Las Vegas but folded it because of red ink. A better bet for an A's relocation would be Portland, Ore., or some other city.

Some background here might be useful. Many people ask why Schott and Hofmann bought the A's in the first place, if they didn't exp ect to lose money. The answer is simple. They never wanted to buy the A's in the first place.


Change of plans

Schott's initial desire, in the early '90s, was to try to land an NFL expansion franchise for Oakland. When it became clear that would be impo ssible, Oakland and Alameda County civic leaders came up with an alternate plan. They tried to interest Schott and Hofmann in purchasing the A's from the Haas family, which was looking to sell the team to an owner who would keep it in Oakland.

Schott an d Hofmann kept saying no, they didn't want to buy the A's or own a baseball franchise. The civic leaders asked them to reconsider. The price on the team kept falling. Eventually, it fell enough to make the purchase attractive. Schott and Hofmann then thre w their efforts into the deal. They traveled the country to visit new baseball stadiums and see what features could be added to the Coliseum to make it more intimate and friendly.

Excited after their fact-finding mission, Schott and Hofmann then sat dow n with Oakland and Alameda County officials to outline their remodeling hopes. ``Sorry,'' the new A's owners were told in so many words. ``We've just decided to sign a deal with the Raiders. They're coming back and we're renovating the stadium for them, n ot you.''


Laying the blame

From that moment, it was all but certain the A's would not stay in Oakland forever. And if the A's eventually leave, East Bay officials have only themselves to blame -- which is no doubt why those officials, including Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, leaked the news about the Mandalay offer to the press earlier this week. They're trying to deflect the blame for the mess they helped create.

Schott, a former pitcher at Santa Clara University, has found it fulfilling to watch the team succeed on the field. But he has seldom found much joy in the nuts and bolts of player contracts and season-ticket sales. Schott's friends say he has joked to them that major league baseball is a fraternity -- and an odd one, because it seems harder to get out of than get into. The prediction here is, he'll be in the fraternity a while longer. The A's are going nowhere in the immediate future. Bank on it.

---

---

Added emphasis to make it easier for impatient readers to find the local interest. --Admin.g

[This message was edited by Dodger Matt on AUG-02-01 at 11:22 PM.]

I hope the Athletics don't leave Oakland. They have done very well there in the past and it would be a huge shame if they would leave the Bay Area.

Sorry, Ice, I know you're an A's fan, but with very few exceptions, the A's have had over 30 years of consistently-low draws at the gate in the East Bay. MLB should never have allowed Charlie Finley to move that team to an area that already had a team and yet was nowhere near as populated as New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago. The A's are a "stepchild" in the Bay to the Giants, always have been and always will be. They should be the FIRST (and maybe only) team to move, and as the article has suggested, I say bring 'em to Portland!

Mandalay has at least expressed interest in buying the A's. I wonder if a potential ownership coalition could be organized in Portland to make an offer to owners looking to sell, and if it looks serious, perhaps a special session could be called so the legislators could FINALLY address the "baseball bill". Wishful thinking, perhaps -- but why not?

BC you are absolutely right they have always been the uncared for stepchild to the Giants, even in years with a great record they have only drawn modestly decent crowds, in mediocre or bad years they cant draw flies, heck half the lifelong A's fans live up here anyway. The two teams that should relocate are the A's and the Expos(8000 per game shame!). Its unfortunate for us that the A's onfield success has pushed the price tag so high $150-200 million thats probably beyond some possible ownership groups here such as Mr.Pamphlin, only Phil Knight could probably buy them at that price, however if a group outside the area like Mandalay buys and cant get a decent stadium deal in the Bay area we may look pretty attractive if the Governor is willing to call a special session, and I bet he would if a team came to him and said we WILL come if you call a special session and the bill is approved, as expected with an assumed 2/3 majority.