Rob Manfred: A’s had no ‘viable path forward’ in Oakland, John Fisher has been ‘a good owner’
Shortly after MLB owners unanimously approved the relocation of the Oakland A’s franchise to Las Vegas on Thursday morning, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred shared some insight into the process and what’s next for the A’s.
Among the topics discussed were the A’s temporary home until their new ballpark is expected to be ready in 2028, MLB’s relationship with the city of Oakland and whether or not it would be a viable location for an expansion team.
“I know this is a terrible day for fans in Oakland,” Manfred told reporters at the owners’ meetings in Arlington, Texas. “I understand that. That’s why we always had a policy of doing everything humanly possible to avoid a relocation, and I truly believe that in this case.”
He added, “I think it’s beyond debate that the status quo in Oakland was untenable … I am absolutely convinced there was not a viable path forward.”
Here’s the remaining portion of the press conference as it relates to the A’s:
Q: Talk about the excitement of Vegas and why Vegas fits in with MLB and the A’s.
Manfred: Vegas is a unique market in many ways. Not only is it a great community with the people who live there, but the tourism traffic is a huge advantage for the market. They’ve had two major professional sports go there and they’ve been wildly successful with respect to both. We think there are a ton of fans in Las Vegas, a ton of baseball fans, and we think over the long haul Las Vegas will be a huge asset to Major League Baseball.
Q: I’m wondering if, because there will be a gap between when the Las Vegas ballpark will be ready, if there have been contingencies about where Oakland will play from 2025-’27.
Manfred: Oakland has a lease the A’s have a lease with the Coliseum in Oakland so they will be there in 2024. We’re exploring a variety of alternatives, including staying at the Coliseum for the remaining years in the interim.
Q: Rob, did you waive the relocation fee and if so, why did you make that decision?
Manfred: Yes I did waive the relocation fees for the A’s. As a process matter, what really happens is I recommend that the relocation fee be waived and it was then endorsed by the relocation committee, the executive council and the owners, ultimately. We felt that a relocation fee in this particular situation was inappropriate. There was significant expenditure by John Fisher and his family to get this stadium built. It’s a $1.5 billion project. That was really important. We also felt that in terms of the public support that was available, the waving of a relocation fee made that support stronger. And we wanted to go into the market in a way that the people in the market felt like we were making an investment in them and were going to grow the game. That’s the best I can do for you on that one.
Q: Rob, could you detail or explain some of what the report was that your group put together? Were there any hesitations or concerns about the media market size, the reliance on tourism, the ability to sustain a team?
Manfred: Yeah, no, I think the report covers a mandatory set of topics that are laid out in the relocation guidelines in terms of what’s the operating territory, what’s the television territory? In terms of the Las Vegas market itself, the relocation committee was unanimous in the view that Las Vegas was a strong market, probably the strongest, one of the two strongest open markets in the United States. And that it had more than enough capacity to support a major league team. The A’s’ analysis of the market was consistent with that view. And we actually used an outside consultant hta did a market analysis as well and was consistent with the relocation committee’s view as well as the projectison the A’s had prepared.
Q: You mentioned you’re open to extending the Coliseum in ‘25 and maybe beyond. Do you plan to extend an olive branch to the city of Oakland, including the mayor? There’s a relationship between you and the city and the team and the city that is not really good. The fans are already talking about boycotting the 2024 season.
Manfred: I have no issue with the city of Oakland or the mayor. We tried very hard to make a deal in Oakland. We did that out of respect for the fans in Oakland. I hope they understand that at some point a facility deteriorates to the level it’s just not a major league facility. If you look at the situation objectively we really had no choice to move on.
Q: And you’re giving all of Northern California to the Giants, is that a concern?
Manfred: The Giants territory was not changed.
Q: Would you be open to expansion in the Bay Area, even in Oakland, down the road?
Manfred: When and if we have an expansion process, every city that’s interested in having an expansion franchise will have an opportunity to participate.
Q: What’s the territory right now? How is that divided with the A’s leaving? After they leave, how are you going to divide it? Is it all Giants territory or how is it going to work?
Manfred: The Giants territory remains unchanged. The Oakland territory will become an open territory.
Q: The Oakland mayor has said she is receptive to a short-term lease at the Coliseum through 2027 but she would like the A’s name to stay in Oakland and would like the promise of an expansion team. Are either of those things possible or are those non-starters?
Manfred: It’s certainly possible to have a lease extension where the A’s would play in Oakland beyond 2024. In the first instance, that’s an issue for John in terms of making a recommendation that we’ll present to the clubs. We don’t even know if we’re going to have an expansion process. So I’m not in a position to bargain about where the expansion teams are going to go.
Q: If the A’s have to do what the Blue Jays did a few years ago during the pandemic and play in a few different sites, does that have to get approval from the union?
Manfred: Yes. Our preference always is to find a home for 81 games. You point to one situation and we were flexible on that. My hope is we find an 81 game home for the A’s.
Q: What steps from here need to be taken with this move? Are there financing agreements in place? Stadium construction? What plans are outstanding?
Manfred: I think that there’s a binding construction agreement in place. Exactly what the steps are going to be is a question for John, not for me.
Q: Rob, certainly the A’s fans have been outspoken in their opinion and John Fisher. Do you believe he’s been a good owner for MLB?
Manfred: It’s interesting, one of the things that you have to do in the relocation committee is you look at the history of the franchise. I think from 2000 to 2022, that franchise won the sixth most games in MLB, I think they made the playoffs 11 times. You can look around and there are a lot of teams that didn’t achieve those kinds of numbers. I understand the fans’ reaction to what happened in 2022 in terms of the moves that were made. I also understand that when you play in a substandard facility, a facility with fan support that is not as strong as what we have in some other markets, that it affects your economics and what you can afford to do. So my answer is over the long haul, yes, I think he’s been a good owner.