| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
 Posted - 06/05/2009 : 13:57:32
|
So apparently some group with a billion bucks at their disposal wants to try to bring a team to Toronto through expansion called the ''Toronto Legacy''. Their plan is a 30,000 seat arena (biggest in the NHL), offering 15,000 tickets per game at 50 bucks. They also want to give 25% of yearly profit to assorted charities. TSN.ca has the video if anyone is interested.
Is it just me or is the leader of this group doing everything he can to be the antithesis of Jim Balsilie. I think everything he said was calculated, as was the timing. In any case I think this group is a wash and I don't think it's the type of owner(s) that belong in the league.
I think Jim actually had a chance of winning the case and now this group is just going to prove to be a distraction. I know they're offering different things (relocation vs. expansion), but the whole thing has just become a circus, and all interested owners are way to unorthodox to be taken seriously.
Thoughts?
|
Edited by - Alex on 06/05/2009 13:59:39
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 14:18:29
|
Hmm, Interesting.
I guess there are people out there who will adhere to regulations and are both financially and community responsible.
What a novel concept.
But wait, there is no court room drama, no media hype, and no online petitions. This feels so.........what's the word I am thinking of.........
Oh, that's it.
Refreshing.
Here is the link to the story on TSN.
It is very intersting to see a completely different approach to adding a team to the GTA. One appears agressive (Balsillie) with a, "You won't let me in so I am forcing my way in" kind of attitude. The other, very community and League Friendly, with an " Can we come and be part of the club? We'd be honored" kind of attitude.
I far prefer and respect this newest bid.
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=280969 |
Edited by - Beans15 on 06/05/2009 14:24:14 |
 |
|
|
lyall
PickupHockey Pro
360 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 14:33:00
|
Terrible name. great idea, but seriously the Legacy. That's lame.
... and doesn't there need to be 2 expansion teams? or ditch an existing team. 31 teams doesn't seem right.
"I Was So Happy I Gave Kerry Fraser A Hug" -Bill Guerin |
|
|
|
Guest0415
( )
|
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 16:06:18
|
| gotta agree that is a brutal name good idea but brutal name |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 16:49:57
|
Great idea, love the idea of 15000 seats available each game for $50. Not so sure the that the league will agree with the 25% to charities when there is teams like Pheonix, Nashville, Tampa, and Atlanta that will need those profits in equalization payments under the current NHL regulations.
Interesting aspect of this is Bettman has stated the league is not interested in expansion right now with no forseeable expansion in the immediate future. If they were to go for this then it is just more proof that Bettman is a lying weasel. Also would be proof of his personnal vendetta against Balsille because Balsille had already offered to the NHL an opportunity of expansion as well.
All in all this is actually a weak pitch for a team in a area of the GTA that is not necessarily set for the facility they are proposing. It would need to be scaled down to just an 30,000 seat arena with on site parking. That would make it very attractive for all GTA customers. |
|
|
|
Guest6690
( )
|
Posted - 06/07/2009 : 07:31:35
|
| The name....I wouldn't mind it so much if it was a stand alone name, but to name the team after the Group, yech, terrible. I don't like corporate BS like that, it reeks of a pure money-making venture with no historic ties to the city the team would be in. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2009 : 18:55:19
|
Beans, Balsillie is being civil too. Listen to him.
But going through the right channels? LOL Good luck getting anywhere with that . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2009 : 09:06:18
|
Slozo, you are never going to convince me of Balsillie being civil. He has no intention of playing by the rules defined. He wants it his way and that's it. There is no other option. He doesn't want to own and NHL club. He wants to own and NHL club and make his own rules.
He is not being civil, but he wants you and I to believe that he is being civil. If he was so great for the NHL, the Board of Governors would have thrown Bettman out on his A$$ and Balsillie would be an owner by now.
There is a reason that has not happened that is clearly more obvious to me than it is to you. And as I said in the who will buy Phoenix post, I am done with this debate. It's pointless. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 04:50:55
|
The NHL governors and ownership is a corrupt old boy's club that constantly bends its own rules to fit its own agenda.
The reason the Toronto Legacy might get a public smile and handshake would be to throw off the Balsillie bid in an attempt to give it bad PR - "this is the way to do business, etc". But it will die a quiet death, as all bids like that have, for southern Ontario.
When you have a corrupt bunch like the NHL has running the show (with their corrupt lame duck Bettman as spokesperson and soon to be fall guy), you have to push your way in, otherwise it will just never happen. History teaches us this, look at all the past attempts at getting another team in southern Ontario . . . the NHL has always fought it tooth and nail.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 08:45:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
The NHL governors and ownership is a corrupt old boy's club that constantly bends its own rules to fit its own agenda.
The reason the Toronto Legacy might get a public smile and handshake would be to throw off the Balsillie bid in an attempt to give it bad PR - "this is the way to do business, etc". But it will die a quiet death, as all bids like that have, for southern Ontario.
When you have a corrupt bunch like the NHL has running the show (with their corrupt lame duck Bettman as spokesperson and soon to be fall guy), you have to push your way in, otherwise it will just never happen. History teaches us this, look at all the past attempts at getting another team in southern Ontario . . . the NHL has always fought it tooth and nail.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Gotta disagree. Bettman tried to save franchises long before this one and no one complained then. It just so happens that Balsilie is trying to force the NHL into doing something that is clearly against their constitution. There's a reason the NBA, NFL and MLB all threw their support behind Bettman. Either all North American major sports commissioners and owners are corrupt, or Jim Balsilie's method is. I know which one I pick. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 09:26:41
|
Hey Alex, I happen to think all Billionaires pissed in someones cornflakes on there rise to the top. My point is they do not like Basillie's tactic's, but most would use tactics similarly to there advantage out of the public eye. This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
The real reason Edmonton and Calgary were struggling was the value of the dollar 0.70 - 0.75 at that time and the fact these team where not recieving a fair share of the TV time or press in the paper, to promote them in markets outside the local TV stations and papers. When Detroit and New York can field a $65 million team and Calgary was fielding a $21 million team, which had nobody but local TV/papers to promote the team, what do you think is going to happen.
I remember when the Jets and Nordiques left Canada, all us fans blamed the NHL brass back then too. I remember when the NHL was proposing moving Edmonton and Calgary to New southern markets. Us as fans told the NHL and Bettman what we thought of that. It dominated the sports news in Alberta for a good length of time. If they would have moved them, then my friends and I would have boycotted the league. If enough of us felt this way this might have caused the league irreperable harm. That is why Bettman came up with eqaulization payments to save the franchises. Bettman was no savior, he was playing the hand he was dealt here
Now its 10-12 years later and the teams which are the major contributors to the equalization payments are the same teams he was trying to move(exception TO, Montreal). Majority of the payments are being given to teams which were the expansion and/or relocating franchises. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2009 : 11:30:29
|
Just a couple of things:
JoshuaCanada - I was in Edmonton when the whole moving them situation was happening. You have most if not all of your story wrong. The fans and communities of Edmonton and Calgary stepped up in the hour of need. The fans and communities in Winnepeg and Quebec City did not.
Slozo - You might be right. The whole NHL might be a corrupt group. But those with the Gold make the rules. It's their money and they can do with it what they want. And it's interesting that other new owners did not have to 'push' their way in. Just had to follow the rules and put up the money.
|
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 05:25:46
|
Honestly, as much as I would LOVE for this to happen, not gunna.
First of all, Legacy? Is this a soccer team? Name them the St. Pats or Torontonians or something with some historic value! Really, a 30,000 seat arena, for hockey? Would be good, but have you seen the areas around Downsview? All due respect, not exactly the best place to park my Lincoln lol...also, if you actually know who this guy is, he doesn't have $1,000,000,000 in "private investors and assets", it's just a huge PR move for whatever this guy does. Hell, if I want to, I can hold the same presentation, cost me about a grand, thats all.
Ladies and gentelmen...I give you....the TORONTO HAWKS!!! or Wildcats or whatever name pops into my head. Look for my press release real soon :)
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 07:08:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Just a couple of things:
JoshuaCanada - I was in Edmonton when the whole moving them situation was happening. You have most if not all of your story wrong. The fans and communities of Edmonton and Calgary stepped up in the hour of need. The fans and communities in Winnepeg and Quebec City did not.
Slozo - You might be right. The whole NHL might be a corrupt group. But those with the Gold make the rules. It's their money and they can do with it what they want. And it's interesting that other new owners did not have to 'push' their way in. Just had to follow the rules and put up the money.
No one in Edm stepped up. 500 people at best showed up to rally, no money was ever raised by the fans. For the most part the Edm fans did not care. I was there at the time.
Now, I was living in Winnipeg when the Jets were leaving. Winnipeg had the biggest gathering since WW2, kids were breaking there piggy banks top donate to keep the team. The leauge said if the city can raise enough money the Jets can stay. The city rasied the money all on there own and the team left.
Edm did almost nothing to keep there team and Winnipeg did all they can do.
Please dont say Winnipeg did not try. The fans all came together, from 3 year olds to 90 year olds. The fans never got there money back either.
I am an Edm fan but comments like Winnipeg did nothing and Edm did everything gets to me. It was the opposite. |
|
|
|
Radoria
Top Prospect
Canada
17 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 07:11:19
|
| Beans, the fact the Jets left Winnipeg was due to the fact the proposed ownership group (Manitoba Entertainment Complex) failed to secure enough funding to buy the team AND build a new arena. Community support (fan and corporate support), as stated by the previous owner (Barry Shenkarow), was never an issue. Unfortunately for him the weak Canadian dollar at the time, coupled with rising player salaries and an arena owned by a City of Winnipeg NGO led to Mr. Shankarow projecting a $15 million dollar loss for the 1996-97 season. I don't think that because the proposed ownership group "dropped the ball" on the deal constitutes the community not stepping up, because boy we tried! |
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 07:20:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Just a couple of things:
JoshuaCanada - I was in Edmonton when the whole moving them situation was happening. You have most if not all of your story wrong. The fans and communities of Edmonton and Calgary stepped up in the hour of need. The fans and communities in Winnepeg and Quebec City did not.
Slozo - You might be right. The whole NHL might be a corrupt group. But those with the Gold make the rules. It's their money and they can do with it what they want. And it's interesting that other new owners did not have to 'push' their way in. Just had to follow the rules and put up the money.
Bean, your comments for the most part are very informative and precise and I hate to ask you to put your hat in your hands and swallow your pride but I think you should retract your Winnipeg comment as trust me Winnipeg did EVERYTHING they were asked to do, and then some.
|
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 07:21:28
|
Bean, your comments for the most part are very informative and precise and I hate to ask you to put your hat in your hands and swallow your pride but I think you should retract your Winnipeg comment as trust me Winnipeg did EVERYTHING they were asked to do, and then some.
|
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 08:55:32
|
If Balsille wants to make money on another Canadian team, Hamilton is NOT the place. Their economy is struggling, they can barely support their CFL team. Winnipeg would be the best bet. They already have an NHL calibre facility, enough corporate sponsors, and a much larger fan base then Hamiltion...
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 08:56:15
|
Wrong forum, but yea, i stand by my earlier comments about the Billion Dollar bid! lol
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 09:17:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6196
Bean, your comments for the most part are very informative and precise and I hate to ask you to put your hat in your hands and swallow your pride but I think you should retract your Winnipeg comment as trust me Winnipeg did EVERYTHING they were asked to do, and then some.
Guest6196, I also lived in Winnipeg during the relocation period and agree the city had an outpouring of fan support during the last hope campain for the Jets. It was corporate sponsours not fan support that sank this team. After the team left Winnipeg I through my fan support behind Ottawa.
I moved from Red Deer to Edmonton in 1998 and although I do remember the rabid fans at the Oilers games, the town did not rally or campain to save the Oilers. It was the league wide sum of disgruntled fans which forced Bettmans hand. Beans, dont say I don't have personal knowledge or can't express my opinion of that period of time. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 09:30:32
|
To Beans: The other owners who got in (Columbus, Minnesota, Atlanta, Nashville) happened to be in the right place - the US of A. Hamilton's bid in 1997 for an expansion franchise was a weak one, to be sure, but don't forget that a month later when Hartford was moving, the city was actually told that they would never be considered. Obstacles cited were indemnity with Toronto and Buffalo (compensation fee) and what the league saw as growth in the US. Why weren't league rules followed then? All sorts of accomodations were made for many of the US franchises to get an NHL team, but at the slightest hint of trouble with a Canadian bid, it automatically got scuttled.
How long do you have to lose money in a non-traditional hockey market before the NHL decides to move you?
Phoenix - 13 years
Tampa Bay - 17 years, one Stanley Cup and STILL losing money
Florida - 16 years
Atlanta - 10 years
Nashville - 11 years
How long do you have to lose money in a traditional hockey market in Canada before you are moved?
Quebec City - 15 years (first 6/7 years were not a loss financially, from what I understand, but really I have no good info on that)
Winnipeg - 16 years (first 6-10 years had a decent amount of financial success, interspersed with a few losing years)
If you want a team in Canada, or if you want to keep a team in Canada, you will have to fight for it, history has proved that. Ottawa and Edmonton can tell you all about how close they came to losing their franchises . . .
We won't be hearing too much about the Legacy again, rest assured.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 22:20:52
|
OK, various things to talk about:
Firstly, If Winnipeg did everything they could to keep they team, it would still be there. The fact that Edmonton business people(close to 40 of them)pooled their money together(plus money they didn't have) to save the team coupled with the 13,000+ season tickets that every media company (radio, print, everywhere) petitioned for people to buy (to get the NHL small market subsidy created by the Devil) and City Hall getting involved save the team. Period. End of story.
I will not retract my comments. I don't have to put my hat in hand and say anything. I am not wrong. The people and corporate community in Edmonton stepped up and save the team. The same did not happen in Winnepeg.
Josua, here's a little piece I found. This will clearly explain the season ticket drive spearheaded by future Oilers Chairman Cal Nichol. It will explain the situation where Pocklington was in receivership with the banks and a fella from Houston had $5 million deposit to move the team. Then it will explain how Cal Nichols also put the deposit down and used a clause in the contract with Northland Coliseum to keep the team in Edmonton. If you don't remember any of this, I would suggest it's because most of it happened before 1998. The team was sold in March of 98.
http://www.oilersheritage.com/legacy/contributions_owners_EIG.html
And finally to Slozo, very good points. What does that have to do with anything??? If an owner wants to keep a money losing team in a money losing market, it's their choice. For as long as they own the team. And I think you made a very great point. The teams in Canada received some very long period of time of losing money prior to moves even being considered. Above that, the teams that did move (or nearly moved) had some serious attempts at keeping their team. Why is Phoenix not warranted the same?? Why do they have to move so quickly???
And I don't understand where your loyalty is. If it's more teams in Canada, why not support this Legacy thing as well as the Balsillie this. Then you have 2 chances at a team rather than one. Or is your loyalty to moving franchises??? Or is it moving teams from Southern US locations and moving them to Canada??
Seriously, it's really hard to argue with your information. However, it's also hard to argue with the increase in league revenue from about $400 million in 1993 to over $2.2 billion in 2006. Not sure how many other organizations can talk about more than quintupling their revenues in 13 years. I can't believe this commish who would do something crazy like this. What was he thinking??? And the owners who keep him in power??? Complete idiots.
I like the theory behind the Legacy. I like community based hockey regardless of where it is. Even if it's a pipe dream, it's the kind of dream I like.
|
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 05:14:07
|
I definetly will back up Beans with the Oilers and Winnipeg arguement. It was well documented at the time and Winnipeg would likely still have a team if they had recieved the same "last minute" support as the Oil did.
As I posted earlier I find this proposed Toronto Legacy team interesting in several points, yet I think it is weak from the aspect of location and facilities. As another post mentioned, this is not a particular great area and I believe the group in charge of this proposal is looking more for a way to revitalize their business area with this proposal of a huge multi-purpose facility. I would support it but I think their first motive is not the hockey team and would fold like a cheap shirt should they not get desired results on the rest of the community. People in T.O. will still flock to more desirable locations is what I mean.
I think Slozo's point really has nothing to do with how much the NHL has made off the backs of teams that turn huge profits like the Maple Leafs and others. I think it was more to the point of Bettman forcing owners to stay in a market that continually posts a financial loss. The only way they survive is from equalization payments from the other teams. I do not know any corporation in the world that holds on to money losing assets other than some sports leagues. Even the NBA moves franchises to prevent losses, can I mention the grizzlies, and the Hornets?
Everyone still says Balsille broke the rules, I would like someone to tell me what rules he broke. I can't find one that legally applies to his offer to purchase a bankrupt franchise, because that is all that is on the table right now, an offer. |
Edited by - Porkchop73 on 06/11/2009 05:15:57 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 05:55:51
|
Beans, I think you missed the point that the Canadian teams that left weren't losing money for nearly as long, and the fact that they were in traditional Canadian hockey markets is a huge mitigating factor when compared to these southern states franchises.
I think there is a good reason why the NHL has made sure not to make very clear for exactly how many years Winnipeg and Quebec lost money, and how much they were losing. Then we as fans could make a clear and concise correlation to the situation at hand today, and see that the NHL is not being fair.
I would support the Legacy, sure - if it means getting another team in Toronto proper as opposed to Hamilton, I'd probably be MORE behind it. But I don't see it as a serious bid with serious backing.
Balsillie's Make It Seven website sent out another letter yesterday, this time from Doug Gilmour - in support of Balsillie's bid, and to promote his special olympics charity event. Labatt brewery and Home Hardware, as well as new sponsors Prime Restaurants, DeWalt Tools and FirstOntario Credit Union, are all corporate sponsors.
I don't see that with the Legacy . . . all I see is a "vision" with no business plan and no financial backing. To me, it's a bit of a non-story, but here's an article on it:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/postedsports/archive/2009/06/05/the-toronto-legacy-an-nhl-team-in-the-making-probably-not.aspx
I also would support a team moving back to Winnipeg or Quebec City, or a new one in Halifax, Kitcher/Waterloo, or Yellowknife. Obviously I would personally want one closer to me (Toronto, Hamilton, K-W or even London), but I think any move back to Canada satisfies a larger fanbase and would in general be more beneficial to all Canadians.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 06:13:07
|
Just to add, from the National Post article dated June 5 2009 on the Legacy bid:
"NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly had not heard of — or from — the group before it issued its brief news release Thursday.
"We always appreciate expressions of interest in affiliating with the National Hockey League," Daly wrote in an e-mail to National Post on Friday. "And, this seems to be just the latest indication that interest for NHL hockey in the Toronto area is perhaps at an all-time high. Having said that, our position on expansion or relocation right now has not changed. We have no current interest or plans to do either."
Someone please explain to me the so-called proper procedures that this Legacy bid followed? Beans, How can you say that they area refreshing change from Blasillie when the first the NHL heard of them is through a PRESS CONFERENCE?!?
The Legacy bid is a red herring for southern Ontarians.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 07:25:41
|
Beans, Edm may have had the Business backing but Win had the fan backing, something Edm never had. Edm is a rich town with a lot of GC's and Oil companies can who buy season tix, look and see Beans it was never the average FAN.
Win had more FAN support than Edm will ever have when the two teams were about to leave |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 10:08:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6196
Beans, Edm may have had the Business backing but Win had the fan backing, something Edm never had. Edm is a rich town with a lot of GC's and Oil companies can who buy season tix, look and see Beans it was never the average FAN.
Win had more FAN support than Edm will ever have when the two teams were about to leave
Umm, yes it was the average fan as well as the corportate community. I will look into and prove it, and when I do, then what??
REgardless, the fact of the matter is this. Edmonton's community (the average fan and the corporate dollar) did what it took to keep the team. The same did not happen in Winnipeg.
And Mr. Slozo, how is it different that the NHL hears about the potential expansion of the Legacy from a press conference compared to to them hearing from a Bankruptcy Court in Balsillie's case??
And Mr. Chop, let's me clarify. I don't think Balsillie is "break" rules as much as "not following" rules. To buy a team, you put in an offer. Then the board of governors approves or denies. Then, if you want to move a team, you propose it to the League. They approve or deny. He is not breaking those rules, but he is definately not following them. |
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 11:31:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6196
Beans, Edm may have had the Business backing but Win had the fan backing, something Edm never had. Edm is a rich town with a lot of GC's and Oil companies can who buy season tix, look and see Beans it was never the average FAN.
Win had more FAN support than Edm will ever have when the two teams were about to leave
Umm, yes it was the average fan as well as the corportate community. I will look into and prove it, and when I do, then what??
REgardless, the fact of the matter is this. Edmonton's community (the average fan and the corporate dollar) did what it took to keep the team. The same did not happen in Winnipeg.
And Mr. Slozo, how is it different that the NHL hears about the potential expansion of the Legacy from a press conference compared to to them hearing from a Bankruptcy Court in Balsillie's case??
And Mr. Chop, let's me clarify. I don't think Balsillie is "break" rules as much as "not following" rules. To buy a team, you put in an offer. Then the board of governors approves or denies. Then, if you want to move a team, you propose it to the League. They approve or deny. He is not breaking those rules, but he is definately not following them.
If you can prove that we can chat then, what if and I know most of the season tix were corperate then what??? Not fans but money and Business kept Edm team there. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 13:19:41
|
Beans thanks for the links and the information with regards to prior Edmonton rally to save the Oiler's I do enjoy debating with you because I do consider you to be knowledgeble about the topic of hockey. I do disagree with a few of your points, but that is life.
I will never agree that Winnipeg should have lost there franchise, and strongly disagree with the NHL keeping the team in that Pheonix market. If the team could make more money elsewhere it should not force to remain in that market. An owner does not have the right to relocate a franchise with out 1st seeking a leagues approval, yes. A prospective buyer can make what ever offer he so chooses to make with whatever clauses in the contract he chooses to put in it. Its up to the current owner and the league to hash out the details with the new prospective owner. If the former owner has a greivance with a creditor (ie the NHL) he has every right to settle the dispute in court or to file bankruptcy to protect him from a creditor.
I do not believe the relocation of a franchise belongs in a bankruptcy court, but it might belong in some type of Federal court. The NHL's location and territorial clauses in their constitution and fee's do seem excessive and counter-productive to a healthy financial league. Why are some owners sipping from the champaine while others are force into bankruptcy. The rule's in which they enforce have not always been applied with the same force or vigor. I do believe if similar generous offer's had been made by someone other than Basillie, that person would already own a NHL team in southern Ontario, as long as the league felt they had final decisions on location. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 13:29:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6196
Beans, Edm may have had the Business backing but Win had the fan backing, something Edm never had. Edm is a rich town with a lot of GC's and Oil companies can who buy season tix, look and see Beans it was never the average FAN.
Win had more FAN support than Edm will ever have when the two teams were about to leave
The Leafs whole fan base that makes them extremely rich are not the average fans. They are stuffy blue suits who only watch half the game. So it does not matter what type of fan saved the Oil, the fact remains the Oil were saved by the people of edmonton and the jets were not. |
|
|
|
Guest6196
( )
|
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 14:14:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Porkchop73
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6196
Beans, Edm may have had the Business backing but Win had the fan backing, something Edm never had. Edm is a rich town with a lot of GC's and Oil companies can who buy season tix, look and see Beans it was never the average FAN.
Win had more FAN support than Edm will ever have when the two teams were about to leave
The Leafs whole fan base that makes them extremely rich are not the average fans. They are stuffy blue suits who only watch half the game. So it does not matter what type of fan saved the Oil, the fact remains the Oil were saved by the people of edmonton and the jets were not.
Then don't use the term "FAN". Use corperate. Bean used the term "FAN" that is what i disagree with. Winnipeg had great FANS. TO has great CORPERATE sponsers. Same with Edm. |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 15:29:17
|
I do not recall anyone saying the Jets did not have great fans. They started the whole white towel, sea of white thing during the playoffs. One of my most memorable games I attended was a Jets/Oil game (forgive me if I forget the date) but it the last times I saw Gretzky play with the Oil and the last time i saw a game in Winnipeg. I was 14 yrs old I think. The place was alive and the fans were loud.
No offense was mean't just stating the facts which didn't mean the Jet fans were not great fans. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/11/2009 : 18:30:21
|
Couple of things. Firstly, I never once said anything was positive about Winnipeg losing their team. It was a bad day for Canadian Hockey. All I was saying is that the Community, regardless of Corporate or Average Fan saved the team in Edmonton. I like that. Not just because I am an Oilers fan. I give all the respect to Calgary who was going through the same thing. I like Community Hockey Teams.
And I never knew that "corporate" could not mean "fan." Every owner in the NHL is a fan of the sport are they not?? The current Oilers owner is a superfan. The former 28 owners were all fans.
And it's not the corporate sponsors who were the only one's involved. 13-15,000 season tickets are sold every season. I would say at least 1/2 of those are to regular joe fan. Al beit wealthy joe fan. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 04:20:31
|
Beans, you first wrote:
Hmm, Interesting.
I guess there are people out there who will adhere to regulations and are both financially and community responsible.
What a novel concept.
But wait, there is no court room drama, no media hype, and no online petitions. This feels so.........what's the word I am thinking of.........
Oh, that's it.
Refreshing.
Here is the link to the story on TSN.
It is very intersting to see a completely different approach to adding a team to the GTA. One appears agressive (Balsillie) with a, "You won't let me in so I am forcing my way in" kind of attitude. The other, very community and League Friendly, with an " Can we come and be part of the club? We'd be honored" kind of attitude.
I far prefer and respect this newest bid.
Then, I pointed out that the Legacy were presenting themselves first in the media, and that the first time the NHL (Bill Daly) claims they heard of them, it was through a press conference. I noted that the only real difference between them and Balsillie would be the whole . . . ah, money thing, fan support, arena deal, etc.
Then you wrote back:
And Mr. Slozo, how is it different that the NHL hears about the potential expansion of the Legacy from a press conference compared to to them hearing from a Bankruptcy Court in Balsillie's case??
Well Beans, YOU were the one who first said that it was so refreshing to see this new bid that was doing everything so nice and proper. It had me scratching my head frankly, as surprising the league with a no-notice press conference would often be regarded as . . . well, it's certainly not kosher from the NHL's side, that's for sure.
Not that they care about it anyways, as it is a bid to be given a short flurry of press, then ignored completely, as it has zero legitimacy.
ALSO: Every owner is definitely not a fan, although most probably are. Corporate versus fan . . . if you have corporate interests at heart, by very definition, you cannot be a fan. You are siding with business over the every day regular fan.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 09:25:10
|
Wow, not sure when this became personal, but I guess it has.
Mr. Slozo, someone stating their intentions publicly is fine in my book. The group involved with the Legacy (from what I read) were simply stating they intended to seek league approval, Leaf approval, and communitiy approval to do a positive thing for the NHL and the community by building a new area (including areas that are designed for the public). Stated they would be honored to be part of the NHL but would respect the wishes of the League and Leafs if they did not see the Legacy being a positive thing.
Key word, intend.
Balsillie, on the other hand, is not intending to do anything. He is attempting to do the things he wants. He is using the backdoor(rightly or wrongly is irrelevant)to gain access the the NHL on his terms.
Key word, attempt.
In my world, there is a huge different in annoucing your intentions to do something and announcing your actions.
And as far as your owners can not be fans. Completely disagree and completely wrong(IMO). A fan with money can buy a team. That fan with money can make more money with a good team.
I don't see how they have to be separate. And can you argue, specifically with the case of the Edmonton Investors Group, that the group was not 38 "fans" with money (some gambled their entire fortunes) who bought an NHL team to save it and invest in the community are not fans???? Tell that to Cal Nichol. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 09:57:26
|
Not personal at all, Beans - just disagreed with you.
Your group of monied fans saving Edmonton is a good example, btw, glad you brought it up. IMHO, once they bought the Oilers, they became corporate. They were fans who were willing to do anything to save the team, but once in financial control, I think they would put corporate interests ahead of fan interests.
See, it's important to seperate the two, as they sometimes have conflicting interests. Corporate interests have a bottom line - money, and fans have a bottom line - entertainment (high level of competetiveness).
When they were fans, they would have wanted Edmonton to spend nearly to the cap (not so that they screwed themselves for next year, but you know what I mean) to get the best players and build the best team. But, once they became owners and it was THEIR money they were "playing" with, it's a different story . . . they want to make money, and no matter how much they love their team, fiscal responsibility is #1.
Thus, my opinion: once a corporate owner, you cannot be a true 'fan'.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 10:25:50
|
what about Mark Cuban, he seems like a hardcore fan to me...
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 10:31:57
|
Slozo, I can definately see that point. I agree that when the money is yours, it creates a different dimension.
However, the successful teams in the league on the ice are most often successful teams at the bank as well. With the exception of maybe Toronto, Montreal, and NYR. They make money regardless.
Look at Detroit as a perfect example. When Illich bought the team, they had a value of $8 million. The, for basically the 60's and 70's, were an below average team. They made the playoffs only twice and won only 1 series between 1967 and 1982. Illich bought the team, put the right people in, and spent them money. Since Illich bought the team, they only missed the playoffs 3 times in 27 years and have 4 Cups(soon to be 5) and been to the finals 6 times. Now, his $8 million investment is worth in the neighbourhood of $300 million. This doesn't include the millions he has made in the time he has owned the team.
Now, I also agree that this can work in the opposite direction. Nashville for example. The owner there started to tighten the belt, the team got worse on the ice, and he lost more money. This is bad for the fan, and the owner being a fan in this case is irrelevant. If there is not money there, what else can a guy do.
All I am saying is that more often than not, a team with a good product on the ice will produce good financial numbers. A fan as an owner, willing to spend the money to produce that product on the ice will reap the benefits. Personally, I like Daryl Katz in Edmonton. I do beleive he is a fan and he has the stratch to spend what he wants. Balsillie would be very much the same as an owner. I'd just like to see him become an owner with the support of the league. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2009 : 12:23:39
|
I'd also like to see Basillie become an owner, as well, with the support of the league. It sound like the possibility is become more and more probable with ideas of relocation fee's being thrown around now. The only way it won't happen now is if some other offer comes close to his offer, without requiring relocation or at least a possible relocation that the league would endorse and would best satisfy the creditors.
I have no proof, but I believe the real reason Basillie doesn't already own a franchise has always been dollar's and cent's not the front door, backdoor policies. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Toronto ''Legacy'' - new bid for expansion! 
