The following was in the Oakland Tribune, Sunday Aug. 4, 2002. Interesting to note that MLB does not want an AL West team to relocate to the East Coast.

A's flirted with sale offer last month
D.C. tycoon talked with team during 'Uptown' Oakland ballpark dispute
By FROM STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS

While Oakland ballpark proponents were fighting for a downtown stadium for the Oakland A's, team owners were in serious negotiations to sell the franchise to a Washington, D.C., investor.

A's co-owner Steve Schott had reached terms to sell the team to Washington entrepreneur Jonathan Ledecky for about $170 million, according to sources and to documents seen by the Washington Post.

But the deal collapsed when Ledecky missed a mid-July deadline to pay the A's $12 million in nonrefundable deposits. Ledecky, who formerly owned an interest in the Washington Capitals hockey team, had been seeking additional investors in the Washington area.

Ballpark supporters in Oakland were not surprised Saturday at the news of the near-sale of the team, saying it may shed light on why the A's had not made a strong commitment to a downtown Oakland stadium.

"If this sale was in the wings, obviously they were not going to be enthusiastic about a downtown stadium until the issue was resolved," said Oakland City Councilmember #### Spees (Montclair-Laurel). "We kept thinking, 'If they were really interested in a downtown ballpark, why don't they come forward?' But that never happened."

Ballpark supporters cited the team's absence during the debate over a new stadium as a significant reason for why the Oakland City Council voted in July to move forward with a large housing development instead of the ballpark proposal. The housing project is to be built on the same site identified as the best spot for a baseball-only stadium in the East Bay.

A's President Mike Crowley said after the council's vote the team was waiting on the results of a city-sponsored study for how a downtown ballpark would be financed before throwing its weight behind the stadium plan.

On Saturday, A's spokesman Jim Young said "the team is not for sale," adding, "Mr. Schott looks forward to entering the process of securing a new baseball-only facility for the A's in the East Bay."

Ledecky, meanwhile, had told potential investors he planned to keep the A's in Oakland but could possibly relocate them to Washington if financing for a new ballpark did not materialize in the East Bay.

Double team's revenue

Ledecky implied his group therefore potentially could beat three other potential investment groups vying to establish a Major League Baseball in the Washington market and be in a win-win situation no matter what happened. He told potential investors a new stadium in Oakland could double the team's revenue, while a move to Washington could double its value.

But a high-ranking Major League Baseball official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said MLB made no #### to the Ledecky group that it eventually would be able to relocate in Washington. In fact, the official said MLB does not want to relocate a West Coast team to the East Coast for logistical reasons.

Also, putting a baseball team in Washington likely would anger the Baltimore Orioles who believe they own the territorial rights to the area. Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig also frowns on investment groups buying a team to relocate it.

'Using Ledecky' speculation

Some team watchers have speculated Schott and MLB might have used Ledecky to extract better lease terms from the city of Oakland and Alameda County and to put pressure on city and county officials to revive political interest in keeping the team.

But Oakland officials said the A's never used the threat of leaving or selling the team as a way of getting a better lease deal. However, the team's threat to move to Santa Clara last year helped spur the drive for a new ballpark in Oakland.

$500,000 a year in rent

The A's last month signed a new five-year lease extension at Network #### Coliseum. The deal calls for the A's to pay about $500,000 a year in rent.

A's spokesman Young added Saturday that "both Mr. Schott and (co-owner) Mr. Ken Hofmann are excited about extending the lease at the Coliseum through 2007."

Selig, Ledecky and Schott did not respond to messages on this topic during the past week. Schott said at the All-Star break a month ago that he had discussions with Ledecky but the team was not for sale.

It was the second time in the past year that a potential sale of the A's fell through. In August 2001, a deal to sell the team to a group of Hollywood investors with ties to Las Vegas collapsed just as news of the potential sale became public.

Staff Writer Robert Gammon and the Washington Post contributed to this report.

quote:

---

A major question lingers: Commissioner Bud Selig frowns on investment groups
buying a team to relocate it. So, did Schott and MLB use Ledecky to extract
better lease terms on a recently completed five-year extension and to put
pressure on the city of Oakland and Alameda County officials to revive
political interest in keeping the team?

---

You know this kind of doubt about the true value, and meaning of contaction and relocation really is disturbing. This kind of "playing-one-side-to-benifit-the-other" could really impact us here in Portland in the near-future. Maybe the reason Angelos isn't worried all of the sudden about a team in D.C. is that MLB really has no desire to relocate there, and are simply using the D.C., and NoVa groups to get better deals for Angelos.

Maybe Portland is being used to get Oakland to build a new Stadium. They sure got the city to jump, even though the prime downtown location is looking like it's going to housing instead now.

It comes back to Selig no longer being (if he ever was) effective. No one believes him. There are so many deals that simply look bad that we all jump to the conclusion that they have to be dirty.

A man has to have goals- for a day, for a lifetime- that was mine, to have people say, "There goes Ted Williams, the greatest hitter who ever lived."
- Ted Williams

quote:

---

Some team watchers have speculated Schott and MLB might have used Ledecky to extract better lease terms from the city of Oakland and Alameda County and to put pressure on city and county officials to revive political interest in keeping the team.

But Oakland officials said the A's never used the threat of leaving or selling the team as a way of getting a better lease deal. However, the team's threat to move to Santa Clara last year helped spur the drive for a new ballpark in Oakland.

---

NO! I am SHOCKED! SHOCKED, I tell you! To think that a Major League Baseball team owner would purposely LIE about selling a team in order to PUT PRESSURE ON A CITY TO BUILD A NEW BALLPARK--it's UNTHINKABLE! How could anyone, even such a low life form as an MLB owner, be so DECEITFUL?!

I'm writing a letter to BS to alert him that there may be underhanded dealings going on with the owners. I'm sure if he knew about it, he would lay down the law on these unethical billionaires, the same as all of his honorable predecessors did when they were commissioners.

Portland in the National League.

You go Matt!

Thanks for the good laugh, yet again!

A man has to have goals- for a day, for a lifetime- that was mine, to have people say, "There goes Ted Williams, the greatest hitter who ever lived."
- Ted Williams

I find it interesting that the owner of the A's would play one city against the other, since it was the Raiders' Al Davis that made such manuevers into a form of art.

Now I know DM wasn't serious. He used the terms "BS" and "alert" in the same sentence!

quote:

---

Originally posted by daddabom:
I find it interesting that the owner of the A's would play one city against the other, since it was the Raiders' Al Davis that made such manuevers into a form of art.

Now I know DM wasn't serious. He used the terms _"BS"_ and _"alert"_ in the same sentence!

---

Just ran BS Tracker® on the article above and got an "alerting" message.

o

Portland in the National League.

Yes owners constantly use this tactic but in this case I dont think so, I think the A's owners really do want to sell, preferably to a local investor after a new park drastically increases the teams value or if that cant be done then to an outside group that will move the team, either way they make big $. I also believe the article was correct in saying baseball is using DC as leverage and really does not want a team there since it would adversely effect the Orioles. Within 5 years both Oakland and Montreal will lose their teams I believe. The A's owners will deny sale rumors so they dont effect attendence until a sale is final.

I'll admit, I'm not an MLB schedule-maker, but this quote is rather odd...

quote:

---

Originally posted by dcandrsn:
But a high-ranking Major League Baseball official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said MLB made no #### to the Ledecky group that it eventually would be able to relocate in Washington. In fact, the official said MLB does not want to relocate a West Coast team to the East Coast for logistical reasons.

---

Someone care to explain this to me?? If the Pilots could relocate to Milwaukee, what's the big deal with the A's going to DC?? There's something more here than meets the eye.

Numbers don't lie. People do.
Beware of the Silver & Black attack