Kim Pegula suffered a Cardiac Arrest;Has residual Aphasia and Memory Issues

[Porous Five Hole]

22 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Sure there is - sure there are. I’ve identified several. I think the disagreement is over whether those reasons could justify a requested intrusion on a public figure’s privacy.

Mind you: I’m not suggesting there should be a shady HIPAA-violating investigation. I’m suggesting that questions could be posed directly, openly, and respectfully.

Can you point to some legal rationale for this? Your reasoning is just people being curious.

Do you really believe the Pegula family doesn’t have a contingency if they both passed away suddenly???

Like, it’s not anyone’s business, least of all NYS.  

5 minutes ago, Mr. Allen said:

And that is the reason why the people paying for the new stadium should know.  Am I going to be paying for this only for them to move the team? 

And if “you” do, you’ll be reimbursed your money via the poison pill in the lease. 

[That Aud Smell]

1 minute ago, Porous Five Hole said:

Can you point to some legal rationale for this? Your reasoning is just people being curious.

Do you really believe the Pegula family doesn’t have a contingency if they both passed away suddenly???

Like, it’s not anyone’s business, least of all NYS.  

It’s not a legal contention. Nutshell: Public figures who own the most important private institution in WNY and who are the recipients of $850M in public money should provide the affected public with some information about the prognosis of the presumed surviving owner after she suffers a life threatening medical event.

Private citizens have a fairly ironclad interest in the privacy of their health information. Public figures not as much.

[That Aud Smell]

Also: Many people here disagree with my view of the matter.

[LabattBlue]

25 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

It’s really really really F***ing obvious what her GD condition is. (Not you per say) You don’t need a pretty little press release from the Pegulas to feel satisfied. Too bad so sad. Move on.  

Wow…consider some anger management.  I didn’t know it was so obvious what her condition/prognosis is. 
 

Have a good night 

[That Aud Smell]

46 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

It’s really really really F***ing obvious what her GD condition is. (Not you per say) You don’t need a pretty little press release from the Pegulas to feel satisfied. Too bad so sad. Move on.  

Ha - it’s okay - you can mother eff me - I can take it. 

There are some good theories on what happened to her. It would be good to have a very basic understanding of her prognosis.

42 minutes ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

These last few pages are terrible.

It's no ones business what her health condition is.

Whoever is starting  to suggest this nonsense better think twice about it.  It could cost the city the Bills and the Sabres.

Whomstsoever? I think that’s me. I’ve thought about this more than twice. Probably 50 times.

[That Aud Smell]

38 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

And if “you” do, you’ll be reimbursed your money via the poison pill in the lease. 

I reckon this is true - give or take a couple hundred million in amortization as well as unrecoverable lost opportunity costs.

[Zamboni]

40 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Wow…consider some anger management.  I didn’t know it was so obvious what her condition/prognosis is. 
 

Have a good night 

Hey I’m not singling any one person out. At all.

 

Im just very very very …. Did I mention very …. passionate about protecting a persons personal health history. Almost NO exceptions. And what she is and what her condition is …. Isn’t an exception to release it to the public. It really isn’t. No matter what nosey “fans” reasons might be. It’s not truly and absolutely necessary.

 

 

[LabattBlue]

23 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Hey I’m not singling any one person out. At all.

 

Im just very very very …. Did I mention very …. passionate about protecting a persons personal health history. Almost NO exceptions. And what she is and what her condition is …. Isn’t an exception to release it to the public. It really isn’t. No matter what nosey “fans” reasons might be. It’s not truly and absolutely necessary.

 

 

Then why quote me?  nvm.  Carry on. 

[Second Line Center]

The author asks:

 

Are there examples of real ironclad leases from around the league that should be considered for our stadium here?

How is the Bills ownership structured? Do Terry and Kim own the team 50-50? Are the kids involved?

Do the Pegulas have a succession plan in place and, if so, what is it?

What kind of shape are Terry – and especially, Kim – really in and what is their prognosis for the long term? 

 

 

I truly believe the kids are in the long term plans.  This is what happened to the Chargers when Alex Spanos died.  

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/10/09/spanos-family-wont-need-to-sell-due-to-estate-taxes/amp/

 

Now, will the kids move the team?  Why in the world would you build the stadium we are and in say 15 years, move?  Just no way.  The new stadium was what the owners wanted.  They wanted the Bills to stay.  
 

There are other options to handle the estate tax - which I’m sure have been addressed by the Pegula’s.  

After 30 years, we can have this conversation.  

They aren’t going anywhere.  
 

And - with the league now going to streaming - how important are local ratings/TV Market going to be especially when you have fans all over the country.  
 

This is truly all ridiculous.  Sounds like a guy that just wants to know things he doesn’t need to know - if there were glitches or problems this stadium would be put on hold or something.  We see no indication of that.   

Edited January 18, 2023 by Second Line Center

[That Aud Smell]

10 hours ago, Second Line Center said:

This is truly all ridiculous.  Sounds like a guy that just wants to know things he doesn’t need to know  

Loved this post - great stuff - and then was bummed out by this closing shot. "Truly ridiculous" is tantamount to "frivolous" which is tantamount to a position being taken in bad faith. I've been as open and transparent - and as rational - as I can be (on a message board) about why I think the Pegulas should offer their faithful public some insight into how Kim's doing and how she's apt to do in the coming years. (By way of example, an issue that I continue to worry about: How's her cognition? I should like to presume it's fine, intact. And yet.)

People disagree with me - some quite strenuously. And I get that. I see where they're coming from. They have every right to that opinion. There are good grounds for it. It's discouraging when people who disagree take the view that the position I'm taking is not a creditable one. That it's ill-conceived and based in nothing more than a sort of prurient interest in someone's private health information.

And with that, it seems like we're back to a meta-board debate of auld about whether it's kosher to deploy the word "silly" when describing another poster's take. 

[LGR4GM]

12 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Hey I’m not singling any one person out. At all.

 

Im just very very very …. Did I mention very …. passionate about protecting a persons personal health history. Almost NO exceptions. And what she is and what her condition is …. Isn’t an exception to release it to the public. It really isn’t. No matter what nosey “fans” reasons might be. It’s not truly and absolutely necessary.

What would the exceptions be?

[nfreeman]

This is a pretty complex issue.

Ultimately I think @That Aud Smell has valid concerns that are ultimately trumped by the cold realities of supply and demand.

I would guess that there is no such thing as an ironclad lease for an NFL team -- i.e. any NFL team negotiating for a new stadium in any city will have a buyout right that allows the team to leave, and that the buyout price will decline after some period of years.  If the city doesn't want to grant the buyout right in the lease?  Then the team won't sign and will find another city that will give the team what it wants.

Given that set of facts, it's still not unreasonable for WNY taxpayers to say "If the team can bail on us after 15 years, I'd at least like to know something about the current owners' health, so I can evaluate the risk of them not being around in 15 years and the team being sold to Jon Bon Jovi/other out of town grifter who would move the team" -- which I think is what @That Aud Smell and the writer of that article are saying.

But it's also not unreasonable for the Pegulas to say, in response, "we are going to have the buyout right either way, and no one knows what will happen over the next 15 years, and the buyout right is there to allow for the possibility of moving the team if that is what is best for the Pegula family in 15 or 20 years, either as continuing owners or as sellers, and that is the deal we are willing to agree to, which is pretty much the same as what every other NFL team would agree to, and those facts aren't changed by Kim's health status, and her status is a private matter, and we aren't going to disclose it, and WNY taxpayers can take it or leave it."

So I guess I think that if we want to keep the team, we have to write them a huge check for the stadium and hope that they don't want to leave in 15-20 years, and there's no way around it, and pushing for info on Kim's health is ultimately pointless.

[Brawndo]

For the Succession Plan. There is a reason for Matthew Pegula being in draft meetings and being the family representative at the draft 

[That Aud Smell]

45 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

This is a pretty complex issue.

What are you - like a mod, or something?

33 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

For the Succession Plan. There is a reason for Matthew Pegula being in draft meetings and being the family representative at the draft 

Hmm. Interesting.

Please no more j1zz hats, though.

[Second Line Center]

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

Loved this post - great stuff - and then was bummed out by this closing shot. "Truly ridiculous" is tantamount to "frivolous" which is tantamount to a position being taken in bad faith. I've been as open and transparent - and as rational - as I can be (on a message board) about why I think the Pegulas should offer their faithful public some insight into how Kim's doing and how she's apt to do in the coming years. (By way of example, an issue that I continue to worry about: How's her cognition? I should like to presume it's fine, intact. And yet.)

People disagree with me - some quite strenuously. And I get that. I see where they're coming from. They have every right to that opinion. There are good grounds for it. It's discouraging when people who disagree take the view that the position I'm taking is not a creditable one. That it's ill-conceived and based in nothing more than a sort of prurient interest in someone's private health information.

And with that, it seems like we're back to a meta-board debate of auld about whether it's kosher to deploy the word "silly" when describing another poster's take. 

When I said “truly ridiculous” I was talking about the idea of the Bills lease and potentially leaving within the next 15 years.  
 

I have no issue with anyone that would like to know what is going on with Kim - I mean for real we all just want to hear she is going to be ok and not hearing anything is discouraging but if we take her daughter’s word she is better - but the author to me is going to unnecessary lengths and reaches just to say “what’s going on with Kim and what’s the succession plan with team?”  
 

Which of course are things no one may know for quite some time.   
 

But he got his clicks.  

[That Aud Smell]

1 minute ago, Second Line Center said:

When I said “truly ridiculous” I was talking about the idea of the Bills lease and potentially leaving within the next 15 years.  

I have no issue with anyone that would like to know what is going on with Kim - I mean for real we all just want to hear she is going to be ok and not hearing anything is discouraging but if we take her daughter’s word she is better

I gotchu.

[That Aud Smell]

11 hours ago, Second Line Center said:

This is what happened to the Chargers when Alex Spanos died.  

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/10/09/spanos-family-wont-need-to-sell-due-to-estate-taxes/amp/

 

TIL, btw. This strikes me as strongly indicative of what the Pegulas are presumably doing.

(And then again, Spanos moved the team to L.A. 🤪 I'll be forever grateful to have Bills' owners who would plan like Spanos did and who are committed to WNY like the Pegulas are.)

[That Aud Smell]

20 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I think being a small market is meaning less and less these days. The NFL in particular if very accessible wherever you live and it means less to TV revenue that Buffalo isn't a massive market if they still get massive rating across the country. 

Buffalo Bills are about 20th in TV viewership (will verify this more but that's what my initial scan says) so sure they might be the 32nd market but they perform nationally very well. 

11 hours ago, Second Line Center said:

And - with the league now going to streaming - how important are local ratings/TV Market going to be especially when you have fans all over the country.  

Posting about Spanos above prompted me to consider: I like this idea that the everywhere-ness of the NFL product will defray some of Buffalo's small market problems. 

But Spanos's recent relocation of the Chargers to L.A. seemed like a clear expression of the league's continued desire for franchises to be present in large, powerful TV markets. Imo, there is no franchise that's more irrelevant from an NFL brand standpoint than the L.A. Chargers. Does anyone actually give a sh1t about that team? Not as far as I can tell. But I suppose the league and the franchise are banking on that dynamic changing, and quickly. 

[Taro T]

8 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Posting about Spanos above prompted me to consider: I like this idea that the everywhere-ness of the NFL product will defray some of Buffalo's small market problems. 

But Spanos's recent relocation of the Chargers to L.A. seemed like a clear expression of the league's continued desire for franchises to be present in large, powerful TV markets. Imo, there is no franchise that's more irrelevant from an NFL brand standpoint than the L.A. Chargers. Does anyone actually give a sh1t about that team? Not as far as I can tell. But I suppose the league and the franchise are banking on that dynamic changing, and quickly. 

But, had San Diego built Spanos a new palace to play in, wasn't the plan to stay there?

[Second Line Center]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

Posting about Spanos above prompted me to consider: I like this idea that the everywhere-ness of the NFL product will defray some of Buffalo's small market problems. 

But Spanos's recent relocation of the Chargers to L.A. seemed like a clear expression of the league's continued desire for franchises to be present in large, powerful TV markets. Imo, there is no franchise that's more irrelevant from an NFL brand standpoint than the L.A. Chargers. Does anyone actually give a sh1t about that team? Not as far as I can tell. But I suppose the league and the franchise are banking on that dynamic changing, and quickly. 

The main incentive now is that the larger the market - the higher cost for your PSLs and tickets overall. 
 

You can analyze how much more successful the Raiders relocation to Vegas has been compared to the Chargers move to L.A here: 

https://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2022/8/23/23318966/value-of-chargers-move-to-la-2022-update

 

We can check how things have changed now that the 2022 article is published.

1. In 2022, the Chargers rank #20 with assessed value of $3.875B. So they have moved up 1 spot since 2016.

2. The average assessed value of NFL franchises in 2022 was $4.47B, an average increase of $2.13B (91%) since 2016. The Chargers value has increased by "just" $1.795B (86%). Continuing their trend of growing at a below average rate since the move.

3. Meanwhile, the Raiders value is up to $5.1B, which ranks #9. Since 2016, that franchise value has increased by $3B (143%). 

 

 

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

What would the exceptions be?

The public would have a right to know if the president of the US had a health issue that would prevent him from fulfilling his duties.  

[Goldseatsaud]

8 hours ago, Taro T said:

But, had San Diego built Spanos a new palace to play in, wasn't the plan to stay there?

In downtown San Diego or Chula Vista 

[PromoTheRobot]

14 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The public would have a right to know if the president of the US had a health issue that would prevent him from fulfilling his duties.  

Kim is not the POTUS.

[K-9]

22 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The public would have a right to know if the president of the US had a health issue that would prevent him from fulfilling his duties.  

This is simply not true. There is no codified right for the public to know one way or the other. Half the presidents in history had health issues that nobody knew about either at the time or not until after the fact. 

[JohnC]

30 minutes ago, K-9 said:

This is simply not true. There is no codified right for the public to know one way or the other. Half the presidents in history had health issues that nobody knew about either at the time or not until after the fact. 

There is no question that information has been withheld when it shouldn't have been. The results of a president's physical is usually made public. Whether it is codified or not doesn't mean that it shouldn't be made public because there is a public interest. 

 

44 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Kim is not the POTUS.

I didn't say she was. Why would you think that?