Balsille Signs Arena Deal with Hamitlon....

Semantics

PUBLIC ENEMY #1
Jan 3, 2007
12,150
1,449
San Francisco
For what it's worth, I'm quite sure Balsillie could have moved the Penguins if he really wanted to. I suspect what actually happened is that during the process of the Pens deal he was told behind closed doors that the Predators were also going to be available, that it would be a lot easier for him and the league to move that franchise, that the league would provide a lot less opposition to such an arrangement.

Bettman and crew aren't idiots. They are reading all the same reports we do about Balsillie meeting with the mayor of Hamilton. They know darn well he's going to move the team. If they weren't prepared to let him the sale wouldn't have made it to this stage, it would have been killed in the due dilligence. What they're doing now is just playing an elaborate game of PR and politics so that the NHL doesn't come off looking really bad in this. They have to make it look like the league tried as hard as they could to keep the franchise in Nashville. Unfortunately for Nashville, the franchise will be already as good as gone as soon as the sale closes.
 

therealdeal

Registered User
Apr 22, 2005
4,605
222
You're wrong... you're proven wrong with every Nashville fan that fills the seats or has season tickets. Before the Preds went there... those fans didn't exist... yet they do now. But I guess that isn't growth then... :dunno:

Great, Nashville now has 12000 new fans after 8 years!

Time to move teams to real hockey cities.
 

Ruzicka38

Oh man
Jan 19, 2006
1,771
0
Hopedale
Owch don't attempt to be insulting or anything.... Anyway it's exactly why I stated. You really think a team failing 30 years ago has alot of baring on whether a team will fail or succeed now? The reasons US teams are getting prefference is because the NHL wants to get new fans not just take them from other teams. Move a veiwer from one team to another your not going to make more money for the NHL and you are going to still lose the Nashville viewers.

I'm sorry. When I typed it, it wasn't mean. That's the problem with text. You can't tell if someone is kidding or not. Again, not my intention to insult. Sorry.
 

Westguy13

Registered User
Apr 6, 2005
1,524
0
Not KC...
Are you still in college? Let me summarize how business in the real world works: everything is negotiable. Doubly so if you have money.

But in this case it may be even simpler than that. It sounds to me like all Balsillie needs to do is invoke the out clause in the lease, forking over whatever penalty he has to pay to break it, and then bam, there's no lease and the 7-year agreement with the NHL no longer applies.

Regardless, all you need to do here is use some common sense. Balsillie clearly wants to move the team. Balsille is a savvy businessman. Balsillie has smart lawyers working for him to do the due dilligence. Balsillie would not have signed an intent to purchase if there was a chance he might not be able to move the team. And, to reiterate, everything is negotiable. All of these "agreements" are nothing more than formalities and technicalities to work around. The team will be moved. Sorry.

I'm in no way saying that Balsille wont be able to get the team to Hamilton I'm just saying that the NHL will try very hard to keep it from happening. You also completely forgot the fact that he has to have a way out of the lease. Since the date the NHL will be able to finalize the deal is after the date that the clause in the lease can be activated Leopold is in position to keep the team in Nashville atleast another season regardless of anything Balsillie can do. Then its in the hands of the people of Nashville. Sadly I'm sure those people wont keep up their part and the team will fail and move to Hamilton. Yet another great mistake in a history of NHL blunders.
 

Westguy13

Registered User
Apr 6, 2005
1,524
0
Not KC...
I'm sorry. When I typed it, it wasn't mean. That's the problem with text. You can't tell if someone is kidding or not. Again, not my intention to insult. Sorry.

Yeah but ya hear the cowtown jokes and such for a year you take less and less of them as jokes.
 

MAROONSRoad

f/k/a Ghost
Feb 24, 2007
4,067
0
Maroons Rd.
For what it's worth, I'm quite sure Balsillie could have moved the Penguins if he really wanted to. I suspect what actually happened is that during the process of the Pens deal he was told behind closed doors that the Predators were also going to be available, that it would be a lot easier for him and the league to move that franchise, that the league would provide a lot less opposition to such an arrangement.

Bettman and crew aren't idiots. They are reading all the same reports we do about Balsillie meeting with the mayor of Hamilton. They know darn well he's going to move the team. If they weren't prepared to let him the sale wouldn't have made it to this stage, it would have been killed in the due dilligence. What they're doing now is just playing an elaborate game of PR and politics so that the NHL doesn't come off looking really bad in this. They have to make it look like the league tried as hard as they could to keep the franchise in Nashville. Unfortunately for Nashville, the franchise will be already as good as gone as soon as the sale closes.

The idea in your first paragraph was speculated about on a recent Toronto sports show, i.e., the NHL directed Mr. Balsillie towards the Predators as a preferred target. I agree with your last two posts. People need to "read between the lines" and not take all statements at face value. Also, your point that things can be renegotiated by people, especially billionaires, is important. The amount of spin that goes on in the NHL is amazing and Bettman is a master of spin. I am not sure, however, that the NHL wants a team where Balsillie wants his team.

GHOST
 

Wetcoaster

Guest
Balsillie had a similar option deal in place with Copps earlier when he was bidding on the Pens.
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
The difference is that Hamilton clearly should have been granted a franchise when they bid for one in the early 90s. Their bid was clearly superior to both Ottawa and Tampa Bay's, and was only rejected because of the Leafs and Sabres, and then the league continued to expand to markets that weren't as ready for a team as Hamilton.
No, they were denied a team because they balked at paying the expansion fee up front. Ottawa & Tampa were the only ones that didn't.
 

TRVIPERS

Registered User
Sep 26, 2006
264
0
Home of the Jets
Bettman told Balsillie back in December that the league would not even consider putting a team in the Copps arena, which seats about 17,000. Instead, Balsillie would have to build a new arena.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061221.wsptwaldie21/BNStory/GlobeSportsHockey

Richard Rodier, a Toronto lawyer who has been involved in discussions with the City of Hamilton on Mr. Balsillie's behalf, said the move was "a contingency plan in the unlikely event that the Predators arena lease terminates prior to its normal course expiration."
The Predators lease with the city of Nashville has an out clause that must be activated by June 19, by which the team can move in another year if the team averages fewer than 14,000 fans per game in the coming season. Exercising that clause would cost Mr. Balsillie $18-million. The catch is that the city of Nashville can buy enough tickets to make up the required difference (this season, the Predators averaged 12,806 fans.)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070531.COPPS31/TPStory/TPSports/Ontario/
 
Last edited:

MuzikMachine

Registered User
Nov 14, 2005
800
5
nik11 said:
The NHL can't ignore the GH market forever. Even if this play by Balsillie doesn't work out, the GH market is one of the fastest growing regions in North America. By the end of this year the population will be nearly 8.5 million people, and it's projected to grow to 11.5 million people by 2030 with hockey being #1. In other pro sports, most markets of that size have multiple teams. Chicago, LA, and NY have multiple baseball teams. LA and NY have multiple basketball teams. The same will inevitably be true for the GH and hockey, so the NHL should really just support Balsillie and get this done now.

I think it would be great to have another team in the Golden Horseshoe, but the multiple team markets in baseball have teams in seperate leagues. Also, those markets got their second team within a short time, the longest being a 10 year gap between the Giants and A's, meaning that both fan bases could develop at a relativley same pace. New York is a little different, but keep in mind there was only a 3 year gap between the relocation of the Giants & Dodgers and the arrival of the Mets.

Any GH-based team would have a tough time establishing it's own fan base (see the Ottawa Senators when they play Toronto or Montreal). Going deep into Leaf country and trying to convince fans to cheer for the new guys, especially when they play the Leafs at "home", would be very difficult because that area has been a one team market forever.

I noticed you have a Leaf themed avator so I'll go out on a limb and guess you're a Leaf fan. If you became a season ticket holder of the Hamilton/K-W Predators, would you cheer AGAINST the Maple Leafs if they were playing the new GH team?
 

Jazz

Registered User
I think that amongst all of the arguments about numbers and facts, a key point is being lost:

Nashville, as a market, is not performing much better than failed NHL markets did. And that is on base attendance numbers. When you consider revenues/expenses/losses, the lack of corporate support, etc, Nashville simply is not doing well.

Really, Nashville defenders are stuck in the same mode as Winnipeg defenders: "We'll we're better than the worst!" I don't believe Winnipeg is viable today, and such defenses of Nashville only serves to argue that Nashville is not viable either.

Thus, we are at this point.

Does moving to Hamilton or K-W "grow the game"? Nope. However, at some point, the NHL needs to remember its strongholds too. In this case, there is an excellent chance that moving into Southern Ontario will grow the buisness.

The NHL has been trying to grow the game for 40 years, with indifferent success. Frankly, I find the "growing the game" defense for saving Nashville to be utterly worthless. Unless Nashville can grow its revenues, it will, and should, join the Jets and Nordiques in the NHL's graveyard.
Except the point that all the teams you mentioned were allowed at least 15 seasons to determine their fate (and add 7 or so more if you include the WHA seasons), not only 9 or 10.

Also, given the number of hockey fans in Nashville compared to before the team arrived, their growing attendance figures, Nashville's growing population base, and that kids in the area are now being exposed to the game from a young age (ie, tomorrow's ticket buyers) gives Nashville good demographic points for allowing more time.

Nashville has more room for fan growth than Winnipeg, Hartford and Quebec City ever did since these 3 were already familiar with hockey.
 

Resolute

Registered User
Mar 4, 2005
4,125
0
AB
These teams moved because they were unable to generate the revenues required to sustain their operations, or because their owner believed they could generate more revenue elsewhere. The time that a team was "permitted to try" is irrelevant. There is no reason whatsoever why a team owner - be it Leipold or Balsillie - should be expected to lose their own money ad nauseum. Ultimately, this is a business.

In the real world, when a business cannot generate enough money to sustain itself, it closes. Any company owner has a limit to the losses they are willing to sustain, and the Nashville market apparently has reached its limit. Sucks for the fans of the team, but that's life in the real world.

The only way for this business to remain viable is for the market to support the product. If it does not, then Nashville has no claim to keep the team. There is no room for sentimentality in the board room.
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Simply put, Balsillie did not pay nearly a quarter of a BILLION dollars for a hockey team barely worth half that much to keep it in a failing market. If he bought the team with the desire to move it, you can be absolutely certain that there is an agreement between him and the league over where, when and how he moves the Preds. He would not have put his signature on a cheque otherwise.

Leopold has stated that the Preds will be in Nashville next year, and unknown after that.
Res, Balsillie has not "put his signature on a cheque". He did not "pay nearly a quarter of a BILLION dollars". He has not paid anything. He has an agreement to buy, with a number of conditions that must be met, not the least of which is NHL BOG approval.

Boy, even sensible people have gotten WAY ahead of themselves.
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Bettman told Balsillie back in December that the league would not even consider putting a team in the Copps arena, which seats about 17,000. Instead, Balsillie would have to build a new arena.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061221.wsptwaldie21/BNStory/GlobeSportsHockey

Richard Rodier, a Toronto lawyer who has been involved in discussions with the City of Hamilton on Mr. Balsillie's behalf, said the move was "a contingency plan in the unlikely event that the Predators arena lease terminates prior to its normal course expiration."
The Predators lease with the city of Nashville has an out clause that must be activated by June 19, by which the team can move in another year if the team averages fewer than 14,000 fans per game in the coming season. Exercising that clause would cost Mr. Balsillie $18-million. The catch is that the city of Nashville can buy enough tickets to make up the required difference (this season, the Predators averaged 12,806 fans.)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070531.COPPS31/TPStory/TPSports/Ontario/
Actually, it was ~13,800 fans. Blair got it wrong, as was pointed out in one of the comments to the article in the Globe.

Incidentally, topping up that total this year would have cost the city a paltry $200-300k. Chickenfeed.

Blair is a baseball writer. He should stick to that sport, where he is passable at best.
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Are you still in college? Let me summarize how business in the real world works: everything is negotiable. Doubly so if you have money.

Spoken like someone who is fresh out of college. Let me fill you in on how business actually works. "Everything is negotiable" only if one has the requisite knowledge. It is "doubly so if you have money" only if (a) you have more money than the other guy, (b) the difference is material to the transaction, and (c) the resulting leverage is not counterbalanced by other, potentially more potent leverage on other issues.

Based on the simplistic viewpoint you have articulated in your posts on this thread, I am not sure you should be challenging people or instructing anyone on "the real world" or how "business works".

But in this case it may be even simpler than that. It sounds to me like all Balsillie needs to do is invoke the out clause in the lease, forking over whatever penalty he has to pay to break it, and then bam, there's no lease and the 7-year agreement with the NHL no longer applies.

Remind me not to call you next time I need to draft a lease. You think the document might be a little more detailed than that?

Regardless, all you need to do here is use some common sense.

Aaaaah, "common sense". The last refuge of someone who does not have a single solid justification for their position, and is not articulate enough to even make one up.

Balsillie clearly wants to move the team.

I notice you like to use the word "clearly". Can you point to a single thing Balsillie has actually said that supports that? His actions are nothing more than neutral on this point, as they can be used to suuport either viewpoint. Strip away the assumption that my fellow Canadians have that a guy like Balsillie MUST want to move his team close to his house (forgetting that a guy like Balsillie is probably not in KW 100 days or more a year, and that Balsillie can fly a private plane to Nashville in only a little more time than it would take to drive to downtown TO), and there is nothing to support that view, much less demonstrate it "clearly".

Balsillie is a savvy businessman. Balsillie has smart lawyers working for him to do the due dilligence.

At least one thing we agree on, although (as was noted in the NTP patent suit), Balsillie's "savvy" does not translate into "infallibility" or even "unerring judgment".

Balsillie would not have signed an intent to purchase if there was a chance he might not be able to move the team.

You think so, huh? I can think of two such scenarios off the top of my head: (1) he has no intention of moving the team unless attendance craters, instead of continuing on its upwards trend in Nashville, and (2) he has placed the ability to move as a condition that must be satisfied before the transaction closes.

And, to reiterate, everything is negotiable. All of these "agreements" are nothing more than formalities and technicalities to work around. The team will be moved. Sorry.

Having completely deconstructed all of your positions at this point, all I can add is that you should not trouble yourself with "formalities and technicalities". I suggest that you get yourself more familiar with the business issues involved before you try to comment further.
 

salty justice

Registered User
May 25, 2004
7,194
0
Los Angeles
Wow thank god this guy didnt buy a team with rich tradition like Pittsburgh, he seems pretty hell bent on moving them.

On the bright side it looks like the NHL and Predator fans will have a dedicated owner, if they continue to root for the team.
 

TorFC-TML*

Guest
I wonder how having a team in Hamilton or Quebec can help to grow the game when everybody in those markets already are hockey fans? This will only result is some people switching from the Leafs or the Habs to cheer for this new team but it doesn't create new hockey fans at all.

If an American market fails to keep an NHL team afloat, this team will simply move to another American market, such as KC, Seattle, Houston, etc. The game really can't grow in Canada in terms of popularity.


I dont know why so many people look at it like that.

It is simply unfair being a hockey fan in Southern Ontario. If you want to go to more than 1 game a season you have to have some serious money. And if you want good seats you better have some serious connections. Ive sat in the lower bowl once in my lifetime, and I got the tickets through a friends parents business.

Aside from that, If you want to look at it from a simple supply and demand, economic perspective, the move makes sense.

Youre arguging the team should stay and lose money because a small amount of people in Nashville are now hockey fans; In the process, neglecting the consumers who provide the most money to the NHL's revenue sharing program, propping up franchises like the Predators, so that they are able to lose a little less money.

Southern Ontario deserves another NHL team. I dont care specifically if it is the Preds or not. But the NHL fans in this region deserve better treatment.
 

Roger Explosion

Registered User
Aug 30, 2006
244
1
Redbank Plains, QLD
How about we leave the Predators where they are and add 2 brand new Canadian teams? That way Preds fans like me are happy and Winnipeg/Hamilton residents or wherever are happy as well. Obviously doing this would be a long term plan as I believe the arenas of these cities aren't up to scratch to house an NHL team?

I see no reason to move the Predators, the fanbase has increased every year, the problem is getting corporate support. As previously said in this thread it takes a lot more than 9 years to develop a fanbase and the NHL would be taking a step backwards if they allow this potential move to go through.
 

Jazz

Registered User
......Balsillie forked over $220M for the team and will therefore be able to move it wherever the heck he wants.....
Yes, but with approval of the Board of Governors.

Your assertion that the league will make more money by moving the franchise to a new market is very tenuous. They didn't, after all, make more money by expanding to Nashville. A healthy franchise in Southern Ontario that contributes positively to the revshare pool and generates excitement about the game and the league in the world's biggest hockey market could very easily be just as profitable for the league in the long run as going to a "non-traditional" market. At this point the league needs more strong franchises a fewer embarassments.
The assertion is that the league can make more potential money by moving franchise to a new market. Moving to an established market will bring marginally more money, but nowhere near the potential than that of increasing the footprint in the US.

Also, these "embarrassments" should be rephrased "works in progress".
 

The Bob Cole

Ohhhh Baby.
Apr 18, 2004
7,700
11
Centre Ice
How about we leave the Predators where they are and add 2 brand new Canadian teams? That way Preds fans like me are happy and Winnipeg/Hamilton residents or wherever are happy as well. Obviously doing this would be a long term plan as I believe the arenas of these cities aren't up to scratch to house an NHL team?

I see no reason to move the Predators, the fanbase has increased every year, the problem is getting corporate support. As previously said in this thread it takes a lot more than 9 years to develop a fanbase and the NHL would be taking a step backwards if they allow this potential move to go through.

Makes the season longer and dilutes the player talent on each team even more. We're seeing too many scrubs make the league. If we took away 6 teams or so, spread around the talent, we'd have some more entertaining hockey.

Not that I am pro-contraction though.
 

Jazz

Registered User
These teams moved because they were unable to generate the revenues required to sustain their operations, or because their owner believed they could generate more revenue elsewhere. The time that a team was "permitted to try" is irrelevant. There is no reason whatsoever why a team owner - be it Leipold or Balsillie - should be expected to lose their own money ad nauseum. Ultimately, this is a business.

In the real world, when a business cannot generate enough money to sustain itself, it closes. Any company owner has a limit to the losses they are willing to sustain, and the Nashville market apparently has reached its limit. Sucks for the fans of the team, but that's life in the real world.

The only way for this business to remain viable is for the market to support the product. If it does not, then Nashville has no claim to keep the team. There is no room for sentimentality in the board room.
Except that this is not 100% like businesses in the actual market place (ie, this is not the real world). This is a league with 30 different outposts that all contribute to the same revenue pie. If a team is losing money, it is not that big a deal if the league as whole is in the black.

That is why there is revenue sharing in the league. This revenue sharing should be more comprehensive, but that is another story.

As I keep mentioning, the Board of Governors hired Bettman with a mandate to increase TV exposure (and eventual TV revenue) in the US. Given this, they will make any move out of Nashville hard.
 

bkl

Registered User
May 31, 2007
2
0
Franklin, TN
Youre arguging the team should stay and lose money because a small amount of people in Nashville are now hockey fans;
:biglaugh: It's so easy to say something based on assumption rather than fact, isn't it? Have you ever been to Nashville? Clearly not, or you wouldn't have made such an asinine statement.

The Nashville Predators have been here for nine years and have only truly been competitive for three. The franchise was only six years old when the lockout occurred and effectively killed our corporate support. The corporations that supported the team before the lockout didn't return. The fanbase has had to try to fill the void left by businesses-not an easy task in a "non-traditional" market with a population of only 600,000 and virtually no media coverage.

Nashville's season ticket holder base is, I believe, 65% fans to 35% corporations. There are a lot of Predators fans in Nashville, diehard fans who have done so much to try to support the Predators and still are. Predators fans are taking their hard-earned money and buying extra tickets to give to family and friends, or to donate to charity. The fans have stepped up in a big way, and the corporations and city government have dropped the ball.

Nine years is not long enough to gage the success of a "non-traditional" market. Hockey is growing here. Before another disappointing first round exit in the playoffs, corporate support was coming back. People who might not have given hockey a chance in the past were starting to pay attention to the Predators and were excited about the team we had. Every playoff game sold out quickly-something that didn't happen in some "traditional" NHL markets.

If we do the lose the team, the saddest part to me will be knowing what could have been. Nashville is a prosperous, fast-growing city. Many people are moving here from other NHL markets and would likely support the Predators. Youth hockey is huge here and could provide a very large, home-grown season ticket base in the future. It's unfortunate that Leipold is more concerned with covering up his own mistakes-like his marketing department-than seeing the potential that exists here.

I hate to disappoint you, but I wouldn't get too excited about the possibility of Basillie moving the team to Canada just yet. Nashville fans still have something to say about that. We're not going to let anyone steal our team without a fight.
 

Jazz

Registered User
:biglaugh: It's so easy to say something based on assumption rather than fact, isn't it? Have you ever been to Nashville? Clearly not, or you wouldn't have made such an asinine statement.

The Nashville Predators have been here for nine years and have only truly been competitive for three. The franchise was only six years old when the lockout occurred and effectively killed our corporate support. The corporations that supported the team before the lockout didn't return. The fanbase has had to try to fill the void left by businesses-not an easy task in a "non-traditional" market with a population of only 600,000 and virtually no media coverage.

Nashville's season ticket holder base is, I believe, 65% fans to 35% corporations. There are a lot of Predators fans in Nashville, diehard fans who have done so much to try to support the Predators and still are. Predators fans are taking their hard-earned money and buying extra tickets to give to family and friends, or to donate to charity. The fans have stepped up in a big way, and the corporations and city government have dropped the ball.

Nine years is not long enough to gage the success of a "non-traditional" market. Hockey is growing here. Before another disappointing first round exit in the playoffs, corporate support was coming back. People who might not have given hockey a chance in the past were starting to pay attention to the Predators and were excited about the team we had. Every playoff game sold out quickly-something that didn't happen in some "traditional" NHL markets.

If we do the lose the team, the saddest part to me will be knowing what could have been. Nashville is a prosperous, fast-growing city. Many people are moving here from other NHL markets and would likely support the Predators. Youth hockey is huge here and could provide a very large, home-grown season ticket base in the future. It's unfortunate that Leipold is more concerned with covering up his own mistakes-like his marketing department-than seeing the potential that exists here.

I hate to disappoint you, but I wouldn't get too excited about the possibility of Basillie moving the team to Canada just yet. Nashville fans still have something to say about that. We're not going to let anyone steal our team without a fight.
Welcome to the board bkl.

I have made many posts in defense of your team and will support you in your fight to keep the team, but I am in the minority. By coming to this board, be prepared to argue with a vast majority who don't let facts get in their way, and many Canadians who want to keep hockey their secret.
 

Roger Explosion

Registered User
Aug 30, 2006
244
1
Redbank Plains, QLD
How exactly would this make the season longer?

I agree with you that theres probably not enough talent to go around, and I am also against league contraction.

Makes the season longer and dilutes the player talent on each team even more. We're seeing too many scrubs make the league. If we took away 6 teams or so, spread around the talent, we'd have some more entertaining hockey.

Not that I am pro-contraction though.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->