PDA

View Full Version : Fan Sues NFL in attempt to Block Lockout



UnderArmour
03-25-2011, 10:17 AM
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Businessman Ken Lanci sued the NFL, the Cleveland Browns and the league's 31 other teams on Thursday, aiming to save the upcoming football season.

Lanci says in the suit that the lockout violates his private seat license contract with the Browns and jeopardizes his right to watch a full season of home games...
Full Article
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/printing_mogul_ken_lanci_suing.html
Also on ESPN: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6257263

I think he might have a case, but the issue is proving to the court that his right to watch a full season of games is being violated by the current lockout. If the lockout were to say extend into August, he would have better odds of winning. I wish him good luck though, maybe he can score a victory in the city of losers.

LTC Pain
03-25-2011, 10:57 AM
One good point out of the article was the idea that since taxpayer money has been used to finance football stadiums then the fans may have a right to be involved in the sharing of NFL profits to reimburse those taxpayers. Now that's a crazy thought. Maybe States or Cities should be part of the formulation of the CBA?

NameUsedBefore
03-25-2011, 11:50 AM
Never quite understood why that aspect is never thrown in there. I mean they were demolishing people's homes to build the Jerry Jones Mahal in Arlington. Actually kind of wondering what Green Bay's position is in all this, since it's a community ownership there.

Ravage!!!
03-25-2011, 12:21 PM
One good point out of the article was the idea that since taxpayer money has been used to finance football stadiums then the fans may have a right to be involved in the sharing of NFL profits to reimburse those taxpayers. Now that's a crazy thought. Maybe States or Cities should be part of the formulation of the CBA?

Sure. But I guess the NFL players and owners get a piece of the profit from the hotels, restaurants, bars, clothing stores, and any other kind of business that profits from having an NFL team/stadium nearby. After all they are profiting and gaining for having the stadium in the city. Not to mention all the other functions (concerts, conventions, etc.) that are held in these places.

The city is gaining a ton of money from having the stadium. Not to mention that the stadium provides employment as well. We see cities all over the country help pay for factories so that the factories are built there, giving a place of local economy and employment.

zbeg
03-25-2011, 02:36 PM
Sure. But I guess the NFL players and owners get a piece of the profit from the hotels, restaurants, bars, clothing stores, and any other kind of business that profits from having an NFL team/stadium nearby. After all they are profiting and gaining for having the stadium in the city. Not to mention all the other functions (concerts, conventions, etc.) that are held in these places.

The city is gaining a ton of money from having the stadium. Not to mention that the stadium provides employment as well. We see cities all over the country help pay for factories so that the factories are built there, giving a place of local economy and employment.

A bunch of studies have been done on the economic impact of building a taxpayer funded sports stadium, which is basically zero, believe it or not.

http://www.freakonomics.com/2009/01/09/questions-for-sports-economist-andrew-zimbalist/

I've seen other people say the same thing; that's just the first google hit I found. Even if it's a slight advantage for the city (depending on the extent of the taxpayer funding), I don't think it's enough of a stake for to warrant an injunction against the lockout on behalf of a season ticket holder.

Also, presumably the Browns would not charge this season for the seat license? Or is that still the case regardless of us having games or not? The "you get to pay money for the right to buy seats" thing is pretty awful IMO, but I guess if people are willing to pay...

OrangeHoof
03-25-2011, 05:34 PM
What I read is that he is claiming the NFL is intentionally killing the value of his PSL - which has a distinct monetary value, unlike past fan lawsuits that were based more on emotional distress. He's saying, in effect, "I paid good money for this PSL with the understanding that you would provide professional football and the Browns (and the NFL's) willing failure to provide professional football thus represents FRAUD.

I think he makes an excellent point. The difference between this and the season ticket argument is that the season ticket always has an out that the game may be cancelled due to weather or other extreme events but the PSLs probably do not since you are buying the PSL for the value of the seat, not for the value of the event.

Superchop 7
03-25-2011, 09:55 PM
Where the hell is Cugel ????