Chargers owner Dean Spanos and Rams owner Stan Kroenke were to begin formal negotiations Monday on a potential partnership in Inglewood.

Kroenke said two teams would own the planned stadium through a separate stadium company. The stadium entity, likely a limited liability company, would be responsible for the financing and construction of the stadium and related facilities.

How to pay for the $2.66-billion project?

Revenues from stadium naming rights, other sponsorships, the teams’ G-4 loans and personal seat licenses would be applied to the cost of the stadium. The teams’ share of the remaining stadium funding would be in proportion to their ownership interests. Scott Reid of the Orange County Register.


: The Oakland Raiders would generate far more revenues in L.A. than the Chargers would. The Raiders, who used to play in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, provided Southern California its only Super Bowl champion to date and still move the needle in greater Los Angeles.

The details on the financing remain general, and it’s not clear who would bear the large costs of maintaining the massive stadium. An expert on stadium financing predicts Inglewood will bear significant costs, short and long term.

• ESPN sports business analyst Darren Rovell said the NFL’s play for L.A. is fraught with huge risks and challenges. Rovell notes that Kroenke, the NFL’s second-wealthiest owner, is worth $14 billion and could withstand an investment gone bad. As for the chances of success on the crowded L.A. sports scene, Rovell is pessimistic.

It’s a crazy move. It’s not the natural that everyone is saying it is.

Rovell is adamant that Kroenke will not align with the Chargers in Los Angeles.

Because he is putting that much money on the line, the idea that he’s going to share the stadium with the Chargers makes no sense at all.


The analyst, in addition to noting several familiar hurdles to thriving in L.A., notes that spending three years in the cavernous Los Angeles Coliseum is a troublesome prospect for any team. Not only will short-term sales suffer, but the experience could hurt chances of a long-term buy-in from fans and sponsors “because you allow people to sample the product for three years before you make them make a commitment.”

He also cited an ongoing plummet elsewhere in the market for season tickets and personal seat licenses, about one-third of which go to ticket brokers who’ve bathed in red ink. The Atlanta Falcons, he said, “cannot sell a ticket to save their lives” for a new stadium that’s now being built.

My take: Expect Kroenke and Spanos to reach some sort of agreement, but on a pact that can be undone at the 11th hour. It’s in the League’s best interest to put pressure on San Diego City Hall and voters here.

As the Blog has said for the last 12 months, it’s not clear that a move to Los Angeles would make sense for the Chargers. No matter how much lipstick is put on the pig -- and the NFL and its media applied Costco-sized quantities to the Carson porker -- joining up with Kroenke in Inglewood looks like a dubious move. That is, unless a sale of the team lurks down the road.

• The St. Louis Post-Dispatch found that St. Louis taxpayers are on the hook for $16.2 million spent on a stadium task force whose work did not succeed at retaining the Rams.


My take: Before they go too far down the road on a stadium proposal, San Diego leaders should resolve to seek only a stadium project that’s a clear win for the city. Otherwise, why bother? The stakes and costs are too high, such deals too complicated to aim for merely an OK result. Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s hired guns must vet not only short- but long-term costs, a complicated task that will run up a tab.

San Diego city and county officials, in a term letter set to the NFL, have offered to pay $350 million for a new stadium. As it is, the city of San Diego still owes about $50 million on bonds used to renovate the stadium for the NFL. In light of the wasteful ticket guarantee with the Chargers and the current sweetheart lease for the team, City Hall doesn’t need St. Louis’ struggles as a reminder: when bargaining with the NFL, good intentions aren’t enough to protect public finances. (UDDATE: The original version of this story included a stadium study that I misidentified; here is the clarification.)