Conservancy Puts Case Forward

Published on December 18, 2011 12:13 PM by dbo.

The factum outlines their argument that OSEG is legally obligated to field a team at any stadium, therefore their plan should be considered since single-sourcing isn’t a requirement to acquire the franchise.

From the Mark Cohon’s March 26, 2008 message announcing the conditional franchise:

The franchise has been awarded on the condition that any Ottawa franchise has a first class stadium to play in.

Obviously, a stadium is a huge part of of a franchise’s business model. Who builds the stadium is not a requirement of the owners, but with their plan they have expressed that for football to work long term, they believe the stadium and park need to be improved and have presented their plan. It does reason that not just anyone can produce a plan, the city build it and the owners must suffer losses until the franchise folds. The ownership group are obligated to look after their own interests and not sign a lease that doesn’t make sense economically. A stadium without amenities, $1 million a game rent or no surrounding draws are all valid reasons they could walk away from the deal.

Conversation

Comments are closed. Continue the conversation on Twitter.

Meta

Conservancy Puts Case Forward was published on December 18, 2011 12:13 PM by dbo.

187 words.

This article is categorized under Stadiums and tagged with lansdowne-park.