Baseball
Steve Fainaru
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 29, 2004; 1:00 p.m ET
Sometime after the July 13 All-Star Game in Houston, baseball Commissioner Bud Selig plans to decide whether the Montreal Expos will be moved to Washington D.C., Northern Virginia or one of five other cities competing for the team. The decision will be the culmination of a process shrouded in secrecy and entirely consistent with Selig's highly personal management of Major League Baseball, a style sanctioned by the sport's unique exemption from the nation's anti-trust laws.
Post Staff Writer Steve Fainaru will be online Tuesday, June 29 at 1 p.m. ET to answer your questions about bringing baseball to the Washington area.
Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Steve Fainaru: Good afternoon. I'm here to try to answer any and all questions related to Major League Baseball's efforts to relocate the Montreal Expos to Washington D.C., Northern Virginia, or any of the five other North American cities competing for the team. And also to address any questions or comments on our just-completed series on how Major League Baseball operates. Many thanks to all in advance.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Great reporting. Let's get to the bottom line -- after researching and reporting all of this background, what is your educated guess about where the Expos end up?
Steve Fainaru: Thank you. The bottom line is I really have no idea, but since you asked for an educated guess, I would say Northern Virginia. That guess -- and it is purely a guess -- has less to do with the relative merits of the sites and the financing proposals than the internal politics now in play. Virginia might be perceived inside baseball -- and in particular by Commissioner Bud Selig -- as posing less of a threat to the Baltimore Orioles and his close ally, Peter Angelos. It's the path of least resistance, which is what Selig usually prefers. That said, I would not be shocked at all if they go to D.C. or Vegas. I think Portland, Monterrey and San Juan are less likely.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Steve, for years we've heard that baseball likes to keep the DC option open as leverage for any team that needs a new stadium. With both DC and NoVa declaring that this is their last attempt, do you think Selig, in the end, realizes that he would be nuts not to have a team in the 5th largest market and that it's now or never to get this done?
Steve Fainaru: I think Selig is caught in a classic dilemma. The D.C./NoVa market is clearly superior, in and of itself, to the other options. I've not heard one person inside baseball declare otherwise. But he clearly views the situation as 1) an economic threat to a loyal owner (Angelos) who helped him put together what the owners regard as their most successful collective bargaining agreement ever; and 2) a potential repeat of the San Francisco Bay Area where two teams have struggled periodically. I disagree strongly with his assessment of the Bay Area and what it shows, but I think he legitimately fears that the D.C./NoVa market might not be able to handle two teams.
_______________________
Charlotesville, Va.:
What would it take to get the federal courts, and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court, to re-visit the anti-trust exemption? Who would be able to bring such a suit? That old court decision now seems very vulnerable.
Steve Fainaru: The Supreme Court has essentially disavowed its 1922 decision in the Federal Baseball case, but it turned over responsibility for addressing this "aberration" to Congress. Congress has considered something on the order of 100 bills modifying or revoking the exemption; the only change has been the 1998 Curt Flood act, which was drawn so narrowly in many ways it actually strengthened the law. The courts are basically split on the exemption; sports economist Andy Zimbalist calls it a "presumed" exemption, but I think it could go to the Supreme Court again if a team, for example, tried to move to a market like D.C. and MLB blocked, using the exemption. A D.C. entity could then bring a suit. Of course that would take years.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Mr. Fainaru,
Thank you for your wonderful series of articles. Fantastic writing and wonderfully researched.
Do you think there is any way to limit the power that Selig has amassed for himself? Are there any sort of checks to the decisions made by the executive council, or as Selig's hand-chosen round table do they pretty much adhere to his vision?
Thanks again for your wonderful reporting.
Steve Fainaru: Thank you for your kind words. The short answer is no. Selig consolidated this power with the owners' consent. I think they realized that to be more effective as a business -- and in particular in collective bargaining -- the individual franchises needed to be unified. Selig's new authority helps them accomplish that. It gives him the power to limit dissent. The only real check on this power as it relates to franchise relocation is Congress' authority over the antitrust exemption, but for many reasons the law has not been changed.
_______________________
New York, NY:
I haven't worked my way through the whole series yet, but the first article is excellent. I'm wondering if you're a baseball fan yourself, Mr. Fainaru, and if so, whether doing these stories has changed your view of the game. Knowing what you know about the economics of baseball, can you still enjoy the game itself?
Melody washingtonpost.com:
Selig Plays Hardball on Stadium Deals (Post, June 27)
Steve Fainaru: Thanks. Baseball, in fact, is by far my favorite sport and remains so. I think I'm like a lot of people, though. I see a disconnect between the game I see on the field and what I know about the sport as a business. It doesn't diminish my love for the game, though. On the contrary, I only enjoy it more as I get older.
_______________________
Silver Spring:
As a long-time (20 some years) DC resident I question whether a team in DC would draw enough fans to realistically support a team long term. I could see it being a hit for a few years, but then the novelty would die off quickly leavng a largely empty stadium. I really think there just aren't enough true locals with the time and/or money to support 80+ games a season.
Steve Fainaru: This of course is the issue that everyone around this decision is weighing. And you would get myriad views talking to Peter Angelos, the people from Northern Virginia, D.C. officials, etc. My own view is that the region could support two teams. I actually agree with Bud Selig's comparison of the San Francisco Bay Area to Washington/Baltimore. I don't agree with his conclusions. I live in the Bay Area and the competition between the two teams is healthy, is it is in most enterprises. Both teams are dynamic and innovative, both draw well, the rivalry is heated, and they co-exist about 15 miles from each other. The Giants and A's drew over 150,000 fans for a three-game interleague series in Oakland this past weekend. Like Washington/NoVa, household income levels in the Bay Area are high. And the Bay Area has a smaller population than the consolidated Baltimore/Washington area.
_______________________
San Francisco, CA:
Steve,
Your investigative piece on Selig, MLB, the Expos, and Brewers is impressive. Unfortunately, so much of this information is excluded from national (or international, for that matter) media reporting on related issues. The sordid story of the Brewers stadium negotiation never made it beyond the Wisconsin state border.
I attend San Francisco Giants games weekly, and have come to really respect Peter Magowan and his organization for their sound financial decisions. Fans paid $11M (3%) of the SBC Park costs. Aside from debt service of around $15-$20M per year, they pump the money back into the park. They also minmize risk of monster, long-term contracts. This excludes the rather safe bet that is Barry Bonds. No bloated Shawn Green or Carlos Delgado contracts on the roster.
My question is, why is there not a bigger effort to install someone like Sandy Alderson as MLB Commissioner? I understand that owners, just as they always have, prefer to have "one of their own" in the commissioner's office. But beyond Reinsdorf, Hicks, Loria and Angelos, does Selig really have many allies? Why don't the remaining owners simply stage a coup d-etat and get Selig out?
Steve Fainaru: Thanks. The only thing I can conclude is that owners think Selig is doing a good job; several have told me so. He has accomplished a lot: inter-league play, Wild Card playoff system, enhanced revenue sharing, etc. I think there's a feeling inside the sport that because he's lived the plight of a small-market franchise and has worked in the sport so long he is well-qualified for the job. Of course, there's another school of thought. Once I remarked to someone in Wisconsin that for all the problems with Miller Park it was remarkable that a Ford dealer could rise to the position of Commissioner of Baseball. And his response was: "No it's not. They own him."
_______________________
Weston Conn:
Baseball in Washington has failed to be successful in the past. What makes Bud Selig or anyone else think this time will be different ?
Steve Fainaru: I'm not sure they do. I think there's a realization in baseball that D.C./NoVa is not the same place it was in 1971, when the American League owners voted to let the Senators leave (Selig, of course, was one of those owners). But it comes up a lot in conversations with baseball people: the area failed twice to keep teams, why should this be any different?
_______________________
Washington DC:
After the Milwaukee stadium experience, do you think that a baseball stadium is a worthwhile use of $200-300 million of public money?
I am increasingly skeptical that providing enormous subsidies for baseball is an appropriate role for government.
Steve Fainaru: I think the subsidy can be justified. Could anyone argue that life in the Washington area would not be enriched by having a major-league team there. Many economists believe there's no economic benefit, but that to me seems like an overly academic argument. Anyone who has been to Baltimore or Cleveland knows those cities have been enhanced by their baseball stadiums. I do think cities should take a hard look at San Francisco, where the Giants built their own ballpark. Everyone in baseball will tell it was anomoly, that it couldn't happen anywhere else. I'm not so sure.
_______________________
Alexandria, VA:
Has anyone in MLB taken a serious look at how few people in NoVA are actually attending O's games? There's no way I could attend games at Camden Yards on a regular basis (certainly not on weeknights) unless I took leave from work. Last time I had to head up to Baltimore on a weeknight, it took me 1 hour just to go from Crystal City to College Park during evening rush! Dulles would be no better for me. The team should be in DC.
Steve Fainaru: I am unaware of any independent market analysis by MLB on this subject, although baseball official will tell you it exists. NoVa, D.C. and the Orioles all have their own numbers, of course, suggesting that the impact of a Washington area team would be anywhere from negligible to, according to the O's 25 percent of their attendance.
_______________________
Fairfax, VA:
Given that the baseball owners all own a piece of the Expos and are losing money on them, do you believe the owners will pressure Selig to accept the highest bid (which would likely be from DC/No. Va.)? Would that be enough to force Selig to tell Angelos, "Sorry, we're putting at team in DC"?
Steve Fainaru: I think this is likely scenario. There is no appetite among owners to keep pouring money into the Expos and supporting the team in its current dysfunctional state. The relative merits of the markets aside, baseball is likely to get a higher price for Montreal in the Washington area. Of course, some of that would have to be used to compensate Angelos, so in the end it could be a wash.
_______________________
Foggy Bottom:
I know little about sports, but if the region can support two football teams, why not two baseball teams? I recognize that football is more popular than baseball, but it seems commonsense to me that evidence exists proving two teams of the same sport can survive in this region.
Steve Fainaru: I think baseball people would argue that it's much more difficult to support a baseball team over an 81-game schedule than it is to support a professional football team for eight games. It's a totally different animal as a business proposition.
_______________________
Steven JB, Olney, MD:
Good afternoon Steve!
When is Jack Evans going to start enacting DC's stadium financing or do you think that MLB will bend and proceed with a conditional award as Evans has adamantly insisted on?
Steve Fainaru: I think if baseball gets to the point where it wants to put the team in D.C., it will work out an arrangment with city officials, including Evans, to get the financing in place by a certain date. They'll put a deadline on the process. And I think there would be some kind of joint announcement with MLB/D.C. officials, announcing the award of the team and the city's commitment to get the financing in place for the stadium.
_______________________
DC:
How serious a contender is Vegas? Who are the major investors, and how stable is the financing? Does Vegas have a temporary stadium the team could play at (like RFK in DC)? If not, is that a negative for them?
Steve Fainaru: You get different answers to this question. The bid has been all over the map. It started as a publicly financed endeavor near downtown, and since has become a plan for a privately financed ballpark/hotel/casino behind the Bally's and Paris hotels off the Vegas strip. Baseball has an aversion to associating itself with gambling that dates back to the 1919 Black Sox scandal. I would think that would be a significant hurdle to overcome, not to mention that some people say the money simply is not there.
_______________________
Kansas City, MO:
Steve, great series.
Do you suspect this series will hurt Selig much? When I read the first one, I thought it was devastating to him.
Do you guess that this will have any impact on his status as Commissioner?
Michael
Steve Fainaru: Thank you. I really don't think so. Remember that it was Selig who announced the cancellation of the World Series in 1994, the result of a labor strategy that cost the owners something like $500 million and got them essentially nothing. If Selig can survive that I doubt that three newspaper articles are going to affect him much. And, again, he is well regarded by many of the owners.
_______________________
Milwaukee, Wis.:
How would you assess how the Milwaukee media covered the fight over the construction of Miller stadium? I see you make mention of the newspaper publisher's ties to Selig, but I would be interested in your opinion after reading through the old stories. Thanks.
Steve Fainaru: I think people in the Milwaukee media would acknowledge that the coverage was somewhat compromised. The governor, Tommy Thompson, made a tactical move to appoint the publisher of the state's largest newspaper to a stadium committee. The publisher also lobbied on behalf of the bill. Editorial writers inside the paper said they felt constrained. It put the media in a really difficult position. One writer called it the most shameful episode for the paper in the past 30 years.
_______________________
Steve Fainaru: Thanks so much to everyone who wrote in. I'm sorry I didn't get to all the questions. This will be playing out over the next several weeks and, needless to say, it will be extremely interesting to see how MLB resolves it. Thanks!
_______________________
| 
