| Author |
 Topic  |
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
 Posted - 08/11/2009 : 11:14:32
|
Recent News:
Balsillie has asked the court to allow more depositions for some of the key owners, including Richard Peddy of the Leafs, to determine the reasoning behind their rejection of his bid.
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/08/10/sp-balsillie.html
Oh, how I wish that this comes about . . . because compared to some of the other owners in the NHL, Balsillie has been absolutely angelic! Cross-examination would be so much fun.
An important part in this new filing that is only briefly mentioned - Balsillie has asked the judge to review a section of bankruptcy law which states that he can be accepted as an owner regardless of how the NHL rules. This is key, I think.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
Edited by - n/a on 08/11/2009 11:21:04 |
 |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 08/11/2009 : 15:11:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Just to make sure we are not just looking at one side of the story. Here are a couple the links.
This one talks about some really clean, ethic things Moyes has done, such as mail out to season ticket holders in Phoenix regarding Reinsdorf as an owner.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/judge-tackles-flurry-of-coyotes-filings/article1248311/
This one talks about Moyes having to go through a court proceeding to see if he was in contempt of court for filing documents that were to be kept confidential.
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/08/05/sp-hockey-coyotes-contempt.html
Here's one where Moyes Lawyers say "Sorry for breaking the confidentiality of the court"
http://www.canada.com/sports/Moyes+attorneys+sorry+error/1873883/story.html
I'm to the point where everyone involved in this is a dirty scumbag crook in at least one way, shape or form. However, the dirty scumbags who currently own NHL teams should have the right to make decisions based on their own dirty scumbag opinions and should not be forced to change their dirty scumbag decisions by other dirty scumbags.
the only dirty scumbag that is involved in this is Gary Bettman, that scumbag doesn't know a thing or even give a crap about the growth of hockey... All he cares about is slowly taking CANADA's game and moving it all to the USA... He will fight anyone that want to move a team to Canada, which he has no right, especially if the club is a failure like Phoenix...
Phoenix is not Bettmans property, he has no say in if the team is moved, that is the owners choice... Bettman never fought to save Quebec or Winnipeg, but when it came down to Pittsburgh or Phoenix he goes all kungfu on your ass... Bettman needs to wake up and realize the better for the NHL is not in his dreams, a team in Hamilton would gain so much more money for the NHL and the franchise than Bettman's childish imagination of Phoenix ever being a financially successful team... Keep dreaming Bettman it will never happen...
There will be an NHL team in Hamilton within a few years whether Bettman likes it or not, and there is not a thing he can do to stop it
...And the LEAFS Win the CUP |
Edited by - hanley6 on 08/11/2009 15:22:59 |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 08/11/2009 : 16:18:00
|
There is definetly scumbag dealings on both sides. The one thing that is sure here is that when it is done, it will likely all be exposed.
The NHL would have been smart to have been on top of its business in the first place. They should have taken control of the coyotes like it was their right to do before the owner declared bankruptcy. If they had done that one thing they could have saved themselves this whole thing. It is just not smart business no matter what to let the courts get involved.
I am sure Moyes was sneaky but I think he realized that Bettman didn't care that he was losing money so he did the one thing that would give him chance to get his money back, file bankruptcy. Bettman showed and demonstrates still now that getting Moyes his money is not his primary goal. If I was Moyes and realized that I was up sh#t creek and had no hope of recouping losses, then I would have done the same thing.
Also i think we could safely say that Bettman and NHL are the ones scrambling to cover their butts while Balsille is clearly in control of the direction he wants to go, not scrambling but playing power moves to make the NHL react with more scrambling. I would say right now Balsille has the upper hand but the outcome is surely still up in the air. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 13:53:15
|
There were a few very interesting twists today. Firstly, Reinsdorf has reached an agreement in principle with SOF (the largest secured creditor of the Coyotes) to buy down a significant amount of the $80 million owed, with the rest remaining as outstanding debt. The Lawyer for the SOF group has urged the court to do "anything in it's power to keep the Reinsdorf bid alive."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g4wOZpbbkMgtgb4XZWf_LigEiqMgD9A115Q80
The other big news is Reinsdorf has announced to the court that he is getting closer to pulling his bid if the costs continue to climb due to the legal costs, etc.
http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/story.html?id=1883166&p=1
I think this SOF group switching from supporting the Balsillie bid to the Reinsdorf bid is huge. Not only does the judge now need to consider the NHL Board is against Balsillie, the largest (or one of the largest) creditors now supports the other Bid.
Very interesting. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 16:05:54
|
| Got to admit that sucks for Balsille, I really do not know what his next move could be. Somehow this is not the end of this. With SOF working a deal with Reinsdorf it huge. Would not be surprised if Bettman had arranged the dealings in his next weasel move to block Balsille. This is by far the biggest blow to Balsille. I would have to do some research to see what kind of moves he can make now because I am not sure. I do not think there has ever been a case quite so strange. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 08:17:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Recent News:
Balsillie has asked the court to allow more depositions for some of the key owners, including Richard Peddy of the Leafs, to determine the reasoning behind their rejection of his bid.
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/08/10/sp-balsillie.html
Oh, how I wish that this comes about . . . because compared to some of the other owners in the NHL, Balsillie has been absolutely angelic! Cross-examination would be so much fun.
An important part in this new filing that is only briefly mentioned - Balsillie has asked the judge to review a section of bankruptcy law which states that he can be accepted as an owner regardless of how the NHL rules. This is key, I think.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I guess Peddie won't have to take the stand.
http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/08/14/10458566-ap.html
I am not following how Peddie can be viewed negatively in this. He's protecting the investment he is involved in. If you, or any other sane person in this world, had control of the Leafs you would also fight tooth and nail to keep competition out of your region. That is smart. Intiving competition in will not increase your profits, revenue, or the value of your franchise. If you own a Pizza Hut, you would do everything you could to stop the Domino's from building in your strip mall wouldn't you?? This is no different.
It will be interesting what comes out of the two owners that will be deposed. Jacobs(owner of the Bruins and Chairman of the NHL Board of Governors) and Leipold (former Nashville and current Wild owner) will be talking. Most interesting will be Leipold as he was 'in bed' at one time with Balsillie in the Nashville thing but has since went on record as to say his 'unfavorable' views of Balsillie stems from the potential purchase of the Preds. The reason that is interesting to me is that at the time, people blamed Bettman for the Nashville team not getting sold. It will be interesting to see if something different comes out of that with Leipold's statement to the court.
Stay tuned! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 09:00:57
|
To answer your question, Beans:
If I was Peddie, I would have stood aside for another hockey team in Toronto. Screw the board and screw their financial investment portfolios, I am a hockey fan first, and I would empathise with the fans wanting more. Besides, I could totally sell it as a win-win, by ensuring greater rivalry, you'd have a new marketing push because of it and increased sales, etc.
But that's just me. I love hockey first, profits second.
Same as Balsillie.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 09:53:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
'But that's just me. I love hockey first, profits second.
Same as Balsillie.'
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Sorry to wade in so late in the discussion, but if what you stated is true regarding Balsillie's love of hockey over money, why hasn't he just put in a legitimate bid, agree to keeping the franchise in Phoenix in the interim, and file for relocation in the future? I'm sure the argument would be something along the lines of 'why buy a franchise that's losing money?', but let's call a spade a spade, Balsillie's approach would ruffle any established league/business franchise's feathers.
I don't blame, in my opinion, the NHL, for not allowing him to dictate to them, how their business should be run. I would like to think that if he simply bought the franchise for his 'love of hockey', first, and then showed that it had to be relocated due to fiscal reasons after working WITH the NHL, instead of against it, the whole situation could almost be palatable.
I'm sure we have all run into situations where there is a much more cost effective way to do things, but our hands were tied due to mandates above our control. We had to suck it up and get through, why would JB have to be any different?
It seems unimaginable to think that he may have to take some financial hits, when you're discussing millions, but when you have billions, it becomes relative. Again, we have all had to spend money in less than efficient ways to get what we 'love', we do it every day. Take the amounts out of the discussion, and JB sounds even more demanding and unreasonable, than he does now.
Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 10:32:33
|
Sorry Slozo I gotta go with Beans on this and I am going to use his Tim Hortons theory to back it up.
Peddie should and does have the right to stand firm and fight against any potential franchise within his boundries. It would be business lunacy to allow a competitor into your highly successful money making zone of business. Sorry I can't come up with a better sounding statement right now.
So using the Tim Hortons theme (can't believe i am doing this since i tried so hard to burn Beans with it). If you own a Timmys and some billionaire decides to plop a Starbucks right across the street, you have just lost a percentage of revenue. So you fight like hell to stop it from happening. Usually some sort of compensation would have to be given to the Timmys guy in order for the Starbucks guy to build should this be the only spot for the Starbucks.
I don't think this is going to end up good anyways. The NHL is going to look like stupid idiots for the way they run their business. They should never have allowed this to happen.
I agree with you Fat Elvis, JB should have had a better approach but I think he was using his only option since his "nice" approach did not work the first time. I think JB learned of something in the way that Bettman does business and he is going after him to expose it. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 11:38:08
|
Porkchop - analogy fail.
If the NHL is Tim Horton's, and Toronto is a single TH franchise, wouldn't a totally different company (Starbucks) be a totally different league . . . say, the KHL?
Your analogy should go like this: you own a Timmie's franchise, and it just happens to be the most successful one in the country. In fact, you have so much business at this Timmie's, that there are always long line-ups, and there are always people who get turned away because of the wait. You are making money hand over fist there, but the people aren't served, and frankly, the corporate entity of Tim Horton's could be making a LOT more money!
So, head office takes the bid of a very successful entrpeneur who OVERPAYS for one of you failing franchises where they are actually losing money, but his overvalued bid is contingent on him moving in close to the territory of this other bloke making money hand over fist.
Because Tim Horton's is an above-board place, and because they have no corruption, back-room deals or agreements, the head office staff fall over themselves to agree to the deal, and they then watch as the profits flow in. The franchisee of the most successful place retains his title, because the market can bear the two franchises (and probably a third) there. His profits decline marginally, but he's still number one.
THE END
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 11:39:40
|
Fat Elvis - false argument.
Can you tell me exactly what makes Balsillie's bid illegitimate?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest6749
( )
|
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 12:06:38
|
| A team in Hamilton could actually increase the value of the Leafs, by creating another natural rival. Further, I don't think it follows that the Leafs would lose revenue. There in more than enough to go around. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 12:40:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Fat Elvis - false argument.
Can you tell me exactly what makes Balsillie's bid illegitimate?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
By legitimate, I meant, within the conditions the NHL is asking for. His bid isn't illegitimate, just dictatorial, which is his right. Would a bid under the conditions the NHL was looking for have been taken as disfavorably? We'll never know, JB seems to, once again, want to have things his way, under his terms, regardless of what the governing body wants. Fair enough, he put in his bid, they said no thanks, is that not their right?
Legalities and court rulings aside, as they are still being discussed, the NHL and it's board are still the governing body for the league and it's operations.
I don't disagree that another Southern Ontario team wouldn't be successful. I don't disagree that he isn't interested in what may be best for Ontarian fans. I don't disagree that Phoenix isn't the right place to keep the team.
I do believe that there is no guarantee, that there would'nt be some sort of negative financial effects on existing franchises in the competing area, if not to Toronto, then to Ottawa, Buffalo, maybe even Detroit and Chicago.
I do believe that if you don't want me to buy one of your franchises, because I want to do anything I want with it, regardless of stipulation, and make you, as the corporate heads look like schmucks in the process, you can most definitely say no.
|
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 16:35:59
|
Ok if you think the analogy is wrong, let me put it this way. Competition moves into your area of business, you will lose a percentage of business, period.
Now lets take the Leafs in this situation. They probably would make out OK because of the 5 year waiting list for season tickets. Still as an owner, I fight like hell to keep the competition out of my area.
Now lets take Buffalo. For those that have been to Buffalo games, the fans are about 75% Canadian from the Golden Horsehoe area. There is huge potential for loss to the Sabres if a team moves to Hamilton.
I also agree with Fat Elvis that it could potentially reach other markets like Ottawa and Detroit with minimal impact, but sill that impact is loss of business clientel, which means ,loss of revenue to your business.
Now having said all that, I think that the positives of having another team in GTA would have more have impact to creating a huge fan base that follows there team to TO and Buf. The only can guarantee a sell out is if the Leafs are in town. Another local team would definetly provide more sell outs.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 17:22:21
|
All I have to say is that obviously Mr. Slozo will never be a leader of any hockey team. I would bet a very large dollar amount that he very successful person in whatever he actually does, but get hockey involved and he becomes as business schlep. Ask Balsillie if he would go broke for a team in Canada and she what his answer is. And I still think it's more than a team in Canada that Balsillie wants. He wants it in the place he picks on the terms he picks. If he was just a hockey fan, wanting to be a hockey owner, why didn't he throw his name in the hat for the Canadiens?? They were(are) for sale.
As I said before, there is not sane business person in the world that would willingly accept competition of their industry in the same priximity.
And going back to Timmy's. If I am the owner of the Timmy's double drive through at Capilano Mall in Edmonton(lined up 20 cars deep both sides for 8 hours a day), I would fight tooth an nail to keep every other Tim Horton's away. I don't care how much money I am making. Even if I am the biggest Timmy's in the land, no one comes into my territory. That's my money and I don't want it going anywhere else. I want those people waiting in line to give me thier $1.65 for their double-double that costs me about 12 cents overhead. And, the thing about this is that Timmy's corporate would NEVER put another Timmy's near by. Why is that?? Because I would sue the pants off of them and win very easily. As a franchisee, I have exclusive trading rights for an specified area when I signed on an paid my franchise fee. Even Timmy's corporate can put a Timmy's across the road with either getting my permission or breaking their contract.
Unless it's me who is going to build the Timmy's across the road.............
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 22:37:20
|
Sorry to keep answering like this Porkchop, but another false analogy.
"Competition moves into your area of business, you will lose a percentage of business, period."
This is a mathematically incorrect statement. It leaves out a bunch of factors, the main one being that some businesses have a real ceiling to the profits they could potentially make, hence, others could come in and make a decent profit while they continue to hit their ceiling.
I don't pretend that this is the case for the Leafs, I merely point it out. Maybe back in the day there was a bit of a ceiling because it was all based on ticket/gate sales, but now that only makes up a third . . . it's all merchandise these days. And although we as the public may think there's a ceiling, it's one we can't really see because it's too high.
Beans - Toronto isn't supposed to be making the decision on other franchises moving in on their territory - the NHL is supposed to be doing that, silly! Same as in the Tim's franchise example - no sane business owner, as you say, would want the opportunity to make far less, of course not!
So, uh . . . why isn't the NHL approving what should be a no brainer for them to make more money, while pissing off two and a half franchises? You can mull that one around tonight, boys.
ps, Beans - you might want to look up the internal laws for most retail franchise organisations - coffee places, restaurants, McD's, etc. Franchise owner has diddly-squat say over a new store coming into the territory. Quotas are adjusted, all kinds of studies are done, but - franchise owner has zero, nada, nothing, zilch to say about it. This is from personal knowledge, intimately knowing this rule for two coffee franchises and one pharma store in Canada.
My answer about being in Peddie's position is that of a hockey fan, period, and thinking as a man who would already be extremely wealthy with nothing more to gain from other's pain. Money in the coffin doesn't make one's sleep more comfy, you know.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/15/2009 : 08:40:19
|
Um, Mr. Slozo, in the case of Tim Horton's, you could not be more incorrect. I have a very close friend of my that owns a Tim Horton's in Edmonton today and I have been talking with him often to ensure that I am not incorrect in what I am saying. It is standard practice within Tim Horton's corporate to not allow more than 1 location in a certain area. I will not disclose what those exact numbers as it's not my place to say, but it is exactly what Timmy's does. It's also very clear in the Timmy's contract where it states that Timmy's will not place another Timmy's location within X distance of the current franchise.
And your logic, business wise, against could not be more incorrect. Competition in a spcific location does not increase either organizations profits. For example, there are 100000 people in Beansland and there is 1 Tim Hortons. Let say that there are currently 50% of the people that buy Coffee. So Timmy's has 50000 potential customers. If another Timmy's moves into Beansland, a higher percentage of people want to buy coffee all of a sudden?? No. So there are now 2 stores fighting over the same 50000 potential coffee drinkers. The original Timmy's will not make as much money by default.
And your logic in regards to "So, uh . . . why isn't the NHL approving what should be a no brainer for them to make more money, while pissing off two and a half franchises? You can mull that one around tonight, boys." is your weakest arguement to day." The NHL only shares revenues with the teams that are not profitable. The teams that do make money have to pay into the pot for the teams that don't make money. So, in the case of adding a team to Hamilton, you are dead right, the team in Toronto will still make money. But, they definately will make less (marketing, ticket prices, etc). So now they will not only have to still pay into the revenue sharing but they will be making less on top of that. The Leafs will not make as much money as they potentially could. That's all but a certainty.
And in all of this, we are not even considering Buffalo. There is a reasonable risk of that team eventually going under themselves with another team in the area. Going back to Beansland, there is the same 50000 coffeee drinkers, 1 Timmy's, and 1 Grabba Java on the outskirts of town. When the 2nd Timmy's arrives, they Grabba Java is in trouble. Not because they put out a bad product. But often people would not want to wait in the line up at Tim's, so they would drive a little further to go to the Grabba Java. However, with the 2nd Timmy's in town, the line up's are shorter at both, so those people making the trip to Graba Java are doing that less and less.
Coming back to reality for a second, what I see happening is that short term, those people in the GTA that would drive to Buffalo to watch hockey will now be going to Hamilton. Short term, Buffalo will either relocate or fold (3-5 year). Long term, the Toronto team and Hamilton level out financially, but that would more than likley put Montreal and/or New York as the most profitable teams in the league, which also reduced the value of the Leafs and significantly increases the value of the Hamilton team (you know, for that hockey fan that doesn't care about money). I am thinking the Ontario Teacher's Pension plan will not be too happy about that.
|
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2009 : 19:56:01
|
I read and reread recent articles and still dont think the judge is leaning one way or another. I dont see the disclosure by Moyer's hurting Basillie and the creditor is now supporting both bids not just Reinsdorf. The Judge has yet to through out Basillie's bid and may ultimately allow his bid to stand as the highest. The fact the city of Glendale is negotiating a better lease and is offering financial incentives with a claus for relocation in 5 years, means their legal footing isn't the greatest either and may actually be a point for Basillie's team.
The biggest point the NHL has objected to is the relocation, it looks like reindorf has writen in his offer too a claus to allow him to relocate. In the articles presented it is stated that it is the NHL who should have delivered terms to Basillie for the purchase of this team rather that outright rejecting him. Once the judge decides one way or the other whether or not he will accept a bid to Basillie the NHL had better prepare terms on which they would accept Basillie as an owner. The league has stated a unanimas no to endorsing Basillie as an owner, but the judge ruled earlier they could not outright reject becasu of an earlier approval of Basillie while he was preparing to buy the Pittsburg penguins.
I still feel Hamilton or Basillie might not be the right way to go but still support another team in Canada. One thing I did enjoy reading in the article is "This is like game 7 of the stanley cup finals. Once the game is over, no matter how hard the other team fought, still has to shake hands and congratulate the other team" From my point of view this is a very complicated game but a game none the less, the NHL better make sure they can shake hands and work with this guy at the end of the court case, if he wins. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/21/2009 : 16:37:36
|
This is interesting. It has nothing to do with the case in court, but it's still something I think is very funny.
I wonder why no one has talked about St. Jim and his $77 million in fines(through RIM) for issues with stock prices and options???? I did not hear about this either!!
I also believe Melnyk is the first owner to publicly state their feelings towards the 'angelic' Jim Balsillie.
I guess it's more than Bettman, Toronto, Buffalo, the City of Glendale, Jerry Reinsdorf, and me who think Balsillie's actions are less than desirable.
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=288286 |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 08/21/2009 : 17:07:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
This is interesting. It has nothing to do with the case in court, but it's still something I think is very funny.
I wonder why no one has talked about St. Jim and his $77 million in fines(through RIM) for issues with stock prices and options???? I did not hear about this either!!
I also believe Melnyk is the first owner to publicly state their feelings towards the 'angelic' Jim Balsillie.
I guess it's more than Bettman, Toronto, Buffalo, the City of Glendale, Jerry Reinsdorf, and me who think Balsillie's actions are less than desirable.
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=288286
Melnyk only made these comments after he was used as an example of "crooked" owners in the league already. He is simply toeing the Commissioners line here. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/21/2009 : 18:47:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by redneck76ca
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
This is interesting. It has nothing to do with the case in court, but it's still something I think is very funny.
I wonder why no one has talked about St. Jim and his $77 million in fines(through RIM) for issues with stock prices and options???? I did not hear about this either!!
I also believe Melnyk is the first owner to publicly state their feelings towards the 'angelic' Jim Balsillie.
I guess it's more than Bettman, Toronto, Buffalo, the City of Glendale, Jerry Reinsdorf, and me who think Balsillie's actions are less than desirable.
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=288286
Melnyk only made these comments after he was used as an example of "crooked" owners in the league already. He is simply toeing the Commissioners line here.
Does this explain the angelic Jim Balsillie's $77 million in fines through something his corporation was involved in??
Nope.
|
|
|
|
Guest4090
( )
|
Posted - 08/22/2009 : 11:14:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Porkchop73
Ok if you think the analogy is wrong, let me put it this way. Competition moves into your area of business, you will lose a percentage of business, period.
Now lets take the Leafs in this situation. They probably would make out OK because of the 5 year waiting list for season tickets. Still as an owner, I fight like hell to keep the competition out of my area.
Now lets take Buffalo. For those that have been to Buffalo games, the fans are about 75% Canadian from the Golden Horsehoe area. There is huge potential for loss to the Sabres if a team moves to Hamilton.
I also agree with Fat Elvis that it could potentially reach other markets like Ottawa and Detroit with minimal impact, but sill that impact is loss of business clientel, which means ,loss of revenue to your business.
Now having said all that, I think that the positives of having another team in GTA would have more have impact to creating a huge fan base that follows there team to TO and Buf. The only can guarantee a sell out is if the Leafs are in town. Another local team would definetly provide more sell outs.
it is called a free market system what our country is based on go to russia where monopoplies run wild. For the last time everthing basille is doing is legal................Leafs are a monooply in southern ont.holding fans hostage to outrageous ticket prices concessions parking etc Beans I could get season tickets of the oilers for the price of platinums at leafs. Oh by the way being an albertan youll love this you and the rest of canada susidize the leafs ie cbc And the fact that big corps can write off around 50% of the cost of corporate boxes abd seats. Beans your good with numbers find out how much that costs taxpayers. And it was toronto that saved Cdn teams it was their suggestion of curency equalization, which they only did beacuse eugene melnyk asked ottawa for money.Ottawa response was maybe they should look at the tax breaks given to nhl teams and restructure them. Torontos immediate reaction was whoaaaaaaa and golly gee beans shortly after the equalization program was in place.
YOU have to read not only the facts but use common sense and read between lines. Fact Toronto is the straw that stirs the drink they are the richest franchise in the nhl. If you think different then you are stupid.They bought the Raptors, site of their arena, built it without any govt money or outside financing. Fact bettman works for the owners.(toronto) |
|
|
|
Guest4090
( )
|
Posted - 08/22/2009 : 11:38:21
|
bea[quote]Originally posted by Beans15
Um, Mr. Slozo, in the case of Tim Horton's, you could not be more incorrect. I have a very close friend of my that owns a Tim Horton's in Edmonton today and I have been talking with him often to ensure that I am not incorrect in what I am saying. It is standard practice within Tim Horton's corporate to not allow more than 1 location in a certain area. I will not disclose what those exact numbers as it's not my place to say, but it is exactly what Timmy's does. It's also very clear in the Timmy's contract where it states that Timmy's will not place another Timmy's location within X distance of the current franchise.
Beans i beleive his point is if tims could only srve 5000 people that leaves 45000 unserved I know in your neverland there is unlimited seats in your timmys but there is a limit, operating hours seats parking etc or is your timmys as big as west edmonton mall (and I believe a timmys franchise cant charge 100 times what another franchise charges for coffee(as there is competition Other places sell coffee) Leafs rink side $2400 oilers what 100) No one is denying franchise loc but there is limits toronto doesnt own all of southern ont as there market and were not talking across the street. Again we are not communists Canada is a free market soceity Basille is using the legal system as with bettman as is his right. Ps beans I would put a coffee time right beside your timmys sounds like a good loc.Oh and there is nothing you could do. In regards to the NHL it is the only game in town so stop comparing it to timmys. |
|
|
|
sharksfan44
Rookie
Canada
228 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 10:53:07
|
well balsillie has made a final offer and set a deadline, and if he ets the team he will move them to hamilton with or without the leaues permission. read this
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=288716 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 18:18:17
|
Re: the Tim Horton's thing . . . for all you Edmontoners, if you come to the big city (ahem, I am talking about Toronto), then you will pass by several busy large intersections with a Timmie's on opposite corners, and even across the street from each other. Check it out here: http://www.findbyclick.com/layer/layercake/tag/TimHortons
I guess the strict rules about the location of Tim Horton's franchises means . . . you can't have one on top of the other? ;)
If by "there are strict rules" you mean that they have to have so much of a population, have so many customers, make so much money from that area, have a certain median income, etc etc etc - then of course, EVERY smart business has those rules! It's called ensuring the success of the franchise.
Guest 4090 - if Canada was a true free market, Balsillie would have had an NHL franchise already. And I agree, the Timmie's analogy isn't the greatest, especially when people don't realise how businesses work.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 18:31:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Re: the Tim Horton's thing . . . for all you Edmontoners, if you come to the big city (ahem, I am talking about Toronto), then you will pass by several busy large intersections with a Timmie's on opposite corners, and even across the street from each other. Check it out here: http://www.findbyclick.com/layer/layercake/tag/TimHortons
I guess the strict rules about the location of Tim Horton's franchises means . . . you can't have one on top of the other? ;)
If by "there are strict rules" you mean that they have to have so much of a population, have so many customers, make so much money from that area, have a certain median income, etc etc etc - then of course, EVERY smart business has those rules! It's called ensuring the success of the franchise.
Guest 4090 - if Canada was a true free market, Balsillie would have had an NHL franchise already. And I agree, the Timmie's analogy isn't the greatest, especially when people don't realise how businesses work.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Maybe all the Tim Hortons on that block are owned by the same person? |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 05:57:45
|
Ha ha, redneck . . . well, if you look at the map, you will find literally dozens of locations (Timmies) right beside one another, either right across the block or within a few hundred meters of each other.
Bottom line - if there is enough money to be made without killing the other franchise, they will allow another location to be put there . . . because businesses LIKE MAKING MONEY.
The breaking news now is that Reisendorf is out now, with all kinds of silly excuses . . . of course, no mention about the fact that he just didn't have the money, lol.
Well, I predicted that Bettman getting Reisendorf into it at the last minute was a bluff, and it was. Balsillie is the man, calling the bluffs left right and centre.
It's a super high stakes game of poker, and the "pot" is the Coyotes franchise. What fun to watch . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 06:39:39
|
Let's throw another wrench into the pot. The NHL now has a formal bid in for the team. This will allow the NHL, if they buy the team, to literally pick the future owner.
Now, this tells me a couple of things. Firstly, the NHL is trying to ensure that Balsillie doesn't get the team even more so now. Maybe they are not as confident in the judge's opinions as they once were. Secondly. this tells me that the Board of Governors have told Bettman to do everything to keep Balsillie out. Bettman does not have the control over that kind of decision or funds without the Board.
However, this, in my opinion, is the first really bad thing from the NHL side. This has as much negative potential to the league as Balsillie being able to buy and move the team without league permission. If the NHL can buy the team this time, they can put in a bid for any team that's for sale and that's a very bad thing. The NHL should stay out of the ownership side and manage. That's what they are they for.
Honestly, I am at the point where I wish the Board would simple disolve the franchise in Phoenix and, in good faith, have a 3rd party analyze the expansion potential in Hamilton. If it's the best thing for the NHL, then put out expansion bids. Again, I said the best things. I don't really care if Hamilton can support a team. I am sure they can. But is Hamilton the best place or is Winnipeg, or Kansas City, or somewhere else.
I have no faith in either side after this move by the NHL to put in a bid. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 08:03:13
|
I'm really tired of this entire fiasco but here's my question....
Why didn't the NHL purchase the Jets or Nordiques and help keep them in Winnipeg and Quebec City?
Bettman =  |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 10:54:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I'm really tired of this entire fiasco but here's my question....
Why didn't the NHL purchase the Jets or Nordiques and help keep them in Winnipeg and Quebec City?
Bettman =
Exactly. This is a dangerous precident to set, just like it is dangerous to allow a team to be relocated through the bankrupcy system. It not right. The NHL has been fighting a side to support a framework in how they do business. That has worked for decades. They are now working around their own system. |
|
|
|
Guest3341
( )
|
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 14:37:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I'm really tired of this entire fiasco but here's my question....
Why didn't the NHL purchase the Jets or Nordiques and help keep them in Winnipeg and Quebec City?
Bettman =
Exactly. This is a dangerous precident to set, just like it is dangerous to allow a team to be relocated through the bankrupcy system. It not right. The NHL has been fighting a side to support a framework in how they do business. That has worked for decades. They are now working around their own system.
With this one swift move the NHL is showing everyone what they really want is to be the one and only to decide location, to decide who is worthy of ownership. I am sure the numbers offered for this franchise will not satisfy Moyer's or the creditors. So who is going to get screwed if and when their bid is approved. This bid is not to save this franchise or for the good of the game this is for their ego. |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 15:08:53
|
| Aren't there conflict of interest considerations with the NHL trying to buy a franchise? Balsillie might have a claim if Reisdorf buys the team off of the NHL. Collusion is what I'm thinking. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 15:30:25
|
| All I have to say is BINGO redneck, this has collusion written all over this if they turn and sell it to Reinsdorf in any way at all. It actually opens up any other franchise that declares bankruptcy to legal actions against the NHL. A truly desperate and dangerous move by the NHL. I wonder if all owners agree with this? If anyone wondered who are the real crooks, they got their answer today. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 20:33:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Porkchop73
All I have to say is BINGO redneck, this has collusion written all over this if they turn and sell it to Reinsdorf in any way at all. It actually opens up any other franchise that declares bankruptcy to legal actions against the NHL. A truly desperate and dangerous move by the NHL. I wonder if all owners agree with this? If anyone wondered who are the real crooks, they got their answer today.
As I said above, although without any facts behind it, one can assume that Bettman/the NHL does not have the authority to allocate that kind if dollar amount and/or own a franchise in the NHL without the support of the Board to which each team has a rep. So one can assume reasonably confidently that the NHL has the support of the Board. If not, we would have heard reports of an emergency meeting of the Board and Sir Gary would be out on his anus.
I agree with the Collusion if Reinsdorf get his hands on the team, but would it not be collusion if the NHL sells it to anyone???
This move by the NHL is as dirty as any of Balsillie's moves. I'm now Switzerland.
Here's a pretty layman's report on what happens next and details out what the NHL gets to do if they are the new owner. On a side note, Darren Dreger and Ryan Rishaug are the two reasons TSN is the best hockey network around. Seriously, great, honest, clean reporting. I dig it. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 08/26/2009 21:18:39 |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 21:42:38
|
If the NHL is essentially the Board of Governors (which represent the owners) and they go an buy a team in the NHL there must be conflict of interest, IMO.
And you are right Beans, if the NHL buys and then sells the Coyotes then it is collusion as well. Weird situation. I'm still pulling for Balsillie, but Bettman just upped the ante. |
|
|
|
umteman
PickupHockey Pro
USA
662 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 21:51:53
|
Well at least this soap opera has kept the off season from being as boring as it usually is.
Did you hear about the retired proctologist? He spent 40 years saying "what's a place like this doing in a girl like you?" |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 09:43:36
|
You know since the beginning I've thought the likelyhood of Basillie getting this team was farfetched at best but sided with him because I truly want more Canadian content in this league. I just cant believe how far the league has gone to stop his attempt. I think if they would have taken a different approach to this all along, Basillie wouldn't have had a chance. There have been too many underhanded tricks done by both Moyers and the NHL to say Basillie is unworthy based on his character. What does this say about the character of the current ownership group and the board of governers.
I am actually starting to believe Basillie might actually stand a chance here. I just wish he was flexible on the location of his offer rather than being inflexable on Hamilton. I personally wish he would have chosen another location. |
|
|
|
Odin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
350 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 09:45:32
|
| If the NHL is truly serious about this, then they better up their bid. From what I've seen, the offer is $140M, which is good for 3rd best. |
|
|
|
Guest9838
( )
|
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 10:48:00
|
Latest News today...
So in the NHL's bid, there is a provision to move the team if it performs badly (financially) or if a "suitable" buyer isn't found who wants to keep the team in Phoenix.
This is looking worse on the league by the day.
http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/687119
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Balsillie to buy the Phoenix Coyotes? 
