Los Angeles Football Club announced their soccer-specific stadium will be called Banc of California Stadium at their stadium groundbreaking event last month. The deal, reported to be worth $100 million to be paid over 15 years, was touted as the biggest of its kind in MLS and bigger than some similar deals in the “big four” American pro sports.
One of the details of the deal, that Banc of California is chaired by Steven Sugarman, brother of LAFC co-owner Jason Sugarman, was acknowledged but initial reports said the brothers did not work together on the deal and it was made independent of their relationship.
But in a new story on Bloomberg.com on Wednesday, the stadium deal, as well as Banc of California’s dealings altogether, are indirectly brought into question.
The report piles up several insinuations that the bank, while performing very well from a financial perspective at the moment, is rife with personal conflicts of interest (like the stadium sponsorship deal) and an increased level of risk for shareholders.
It’s an interesting tone taken by the article. While I am not a finance and markets reporter, the story appears to throw shade at Banc of California’s practices but stops short of indicating the practices outlined will lead to the bank’s ultimate failure. But that appears to be the implication.
Who’s to say what’s going to happen? I honestly don’t know here. It would be concerning if Banc of California went under before their 15-year sponsorship period was up, surely. At the same time, that’s true of literally any business that sponsors anything in sports, right? The future is not assured.
In the meantime, we’ll have to watch and see if Banc of California survives, thrives, and fulfills the sponsorship deal with LAFC. Bloomberg seemed to throw a lot of shade, but time will tell how it will turn out.
What do you think? Leave a comment below!