Moreno Admits He Violated One Provision - Los Angeles Times
Advertisement

Moreno Admits He Violated One Provision

Share via
Times Staff Writer

On a day Arte Moreno acknowledged he had violated one provision of the Angels’ stadium lease, an expert witness testified the city of Anaheim could lose as much as $373 million worth of exposure because of what the city calls another violation.

Moreno, the Angel owner, said Monday he “made a mistake†in using ballpark signs in which “Angel Stadium†is not followed by “of Anaheim,†as required by the lease. He pledged to redo the signs.

The city claims Moreno also broke the lease when he changed his team’s name last year, to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. As a result, Anaheim lost $33 million worth of national media exposure last season, said Laren Ukman of IEG, a Chicago firm that helps corporations value their sponsorships in sports and entertainment.

Advertisement

Ukman testified the city’s lost exposure would reach $191 million by 2016, when the Angels can opt out of the lease, and $373 million by 2029, when the lease expires.

Rather than ask for a specific amount in damages, the city will simply present those numbers to the jury, Anaheim attorney Andy Guilford said.

The Angels challenge those numbers as “speculative†and plan to attack their credibility today. At one point, when Ukman explained that she used the laws of probability to determine the likelihood of the Angels’ making the playoffs in any given season, Moreno shook his head in apparent bemusement, and Angel attorney Bill Custer objected.

Advertisement

“If her rationale were correct, the Cubs would have won the World Series by now,†Custer said.

On Friday, in his first day of testimony, Moreno delighted in a series of comic comebacks, to Guilford’s annoyance. Moreno left that persona at home Monday, at times so subdued his answers could barely be heard.

In court papers, the team has claimed that Moreno “would not have bought the Angels ... had the lease precluded the name change.†The city argues the new name violates the purpose of a clause requiring the team name to “include the name Anaheim therein.â€

Advertisement

When he bought the team from Disney in 2003, Moreno testified, he did not personally read the lease or ask Disney or the city about the intent of that clause. In 2004, Commissioner Bud Selig advised him to discuss the pending name change with the city and with Dodger owner Frank McCourt.

Moreno said he “wasn’t interested†in talking with McCourt.

“I felt he was going to be upset,†Moreno said.

Moreno did meet with Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle. “I said I was considering changing the name,†Moreno said.

That meeting took place Dec. 29. The Angels filed legal documents to change the name Dec. 30.

Guilford read from an internal Angel memo of August 2004, warning Moreno that a name change would require a “disaster check†to prepare for “land mines†from an “Orange County constituent base.â€

“Did you know there is an emotional curtain that divides Los Angeles and Orange County?†Guilford asked.

“No,†Moreno said.

“Did you come to learn that?†Guilford asked.

“Yes, I have,†Moreno said.

Moreno agreed he would violate the lease by selling the team as Los Angeles Angels but said the current name complies.

Advertisement

“The agreement says, the team name will include Anaheim,†Moreno said. “We believe that is what we’ve delivered.â€

Moreno declined to comment after completing his testimony. When the Angels present their case, he will return for questioning from his attorneys.

Ukman, who followed Moreno to the stand, compiled her figures under the assumption the Angels would appear in six playoff rounds through 2016 and 16 through 2029.

Her analysis accounted for lost exposure in newspapers, on major league broadcasts, on ESPN, on four sports websites and on scoreboards in major league stadiums. The analysis considered advertising rates in those media, then discounted them by as much as 99% since a line in a box score or on a scoreboard does not command the attention of an ad.

The city claims it has lost 28 billion mentions of its name per year.

Ukman valued one such “impression†-- in an out-of-town newspaper -- at eight one-thousandths of a cent.

Advertisement