Rumor: Ottawa Senators in for potential Ownership Change

[DaveMatthew]

If anyone wants an example of what can happen before and after bad ownership, look at the LA Dodgers. During the McCourt years in the early 2000's, they were a mess. Completely mismanaged and a joke in the MLB.

Since the Guggenheim partners bought the team in 2011? A model franchise, both on and off the field.

Now, the Senators don't have the cache of the Dodgers and wouldn't all of a sudden become the biggest spending team in the NHL. But, they can for sure be a hell of a lot more than what they are now.

There's a great profile on John McDonagh, President of the Blackhawks (read it here: A conversation with Blackhawks president John McDonough:...). Here is some of what he says:

"On the business side, it’s kind of a simple philosophy for Jay and his people. They’ve done an amazing job humanizing these players, marketing them, making them household names. Certainly winning helps, but the philosophy I’ve imparted to Jay is you have to assume we’re going to go 0-82. You have to assume we’re going to go 0-82, and every single win is a bonus, every win is a bonus."

"But we don't take the 400-and-some sellouts in a row or pretty strong ratings and partnerships and alliances with WGN TV and WGN Radio and six outdoor games, we don't take any of this for granted. We are not entitled to another win, another rating point, another fan."

Night and day compared to our ownership and management team.

 

[JD1]

The fact Dorian said they stalled it for a few days, then a few more days... "though the money never meant anything...." The deal was done on the draft floor June 25th, it just took another 20 days until his bonus kicked in for the trade to occur.

Of course he's not going to say we had to nickle and dime it, he's a GM that works directly for the owner.

Also, the way Dorian tries to spin that we got a 7th rounder back from the Rangers and that that pick may be better than the 2nd we gave up is painfully embarrassing.

Pierre Dorion Speaks: Acquiring Brassard, Trading Zibanejad

Here's one from a credibility lacking NYR beat writer Larry Brooks

https://nypost.com/2016/07/19/no-senators-didnt-fleece-rangers-they-were-just-cheap/

the Brooks article I've seen before. thats specifically what I was referring to with my credibility lacking beat writer comment

 

[JD1]

so we'e

More credible, no. That doesn't make Forbes particularly credible though, they are providing an educated guess. It's a fluff article for them to draw in some revenue from people who wouldn't read a single article they write otherwise. It gives a general idea the landscape, but try and use it as a detailed map and you'll likely end up lost.

so we are just going to go with Melnyk's broke then?

 

[Agent Zub]

No wonder Alfredsson only stuck around for one year.


f*** Melnyk, f*** Dorion, f*** Randy Lee

 

[BondraTime]

the Brooks article I've seen before. thats specifically what I was referring to with my credibility lacking beat writer comment

Yeah I figured that, it's why I used your exact words

 

[JD1]

No wonder Alfredsson only stuck around for one year.


**** Melnyk, **** Dorion, **** Randy Lee

he was there for 2 years

 

[BloodRedArmy]

I am officially done giving my money to this nosebleed. The Sens are quickly dying to me, and it's all because of ownership and management. Sad to say it, I've been a loyal fan since the mid-90's and have supported them through every silly, short-sighted decision they've made. Lately it's just been hard to stomach, and Melnyk really crossed a line with this horsecrap.

 

[Agent Zub]

he was there for 2 years

He's got the patience of a Saint.

 

[Micklebot]

so we'e

so we are just going to go with Melnyk's broke then?

So, I've never claimed that. I posted some articles highlighting some financial issues he's had and some speculation. If Melnyk were to cash out of all his ventures right now, he'd be a very rich man, no doubt. My suspicion is that things like taking on high interest loans, the Canadian dollar tanking, some failed business ventures, along with being part of the group to finance a bid for Lebreton may be causing him to have some issues in terms of liquidity. I've also been pretty steadfast in my belief that lists of franchise valuations, and richest Canadians like the ones Forbes et al put out are base on a lot of speculation; they are educated guesses which have in the past been way off. Most of the data needed to makes lists such as these accurate simply isn't available because a lot of the assets involved don't have shareholders that they need to put out financial statements too.

Basically, I'm saying apply the same degree of critical thought when looking at something published by Forbes as you would any other source. When they outright admit they were off on their valuation of Wiblur Ross because they just took for granted what he told them, you know the methodology is dubious. I have no issues is somebody looks at all the info out there and still feels Melnyk is in fine shape financially. Just as I have no issues if they think otherwise. I just think all the info out there currently is speculation, especially those Forbes lists, so treating one as fact and the other as fiction rubs me the wrong way.

 

[JD1]

So, I've never claimed that. I posted some articles highlighting some financial issues he's had and some speculation. If Melnyk were to cash out of all his ventures right now, he'd be a very rich man, no doubt. My suspicion is that things like taking on high interest loans, the Canadian dollar tanking, some failed business ventures, along with being part of the group to finance a bid for Lebreton may be causing him to have some issues in terms of liquidity. I've also been pretty steadfast in my belief that lists of franchise valuations, and richest Canadians like the ones Forbes et al put out are base on a lot of speculation; they are educated guesses which have in the past been way off. Most of the data needed to makes lists such as these accurate simply isn't available because a lot of the assets involved don't have shareholders that they need to put out financial statements too.

Basically, I'm saying apply the same degree of critical thought when looking at something published by Forbes as you would any other source. When they outright admit they were off on their valuation of Wiblur Ross because they just took for granted what he told them, you know the methodology is dubious. I have no issues is somebody looks at all the info out there and still feels Melnyk is in fine shape financially. Just as I have no issues if they think otherwise. I just think all the info out there currently is speculation, especially those Forbes lists, so treating one as fact and the other as fiction rubs me the wrong way.

so then you're looking at all these lists, which are compiled annually, that contain data on many people and many entities and throwing them all under the bus because of Wilbur Ross? Forbes methodology for valuing sports franchises is out there, go look for it.

you posted very out of date articles that pre date significant increases in the value of TV contracts.

your suspicion is he has liquidity issues. so what's that based on? if the data isn't there to assess his net worth or to assess the franchise value then it isn't there to assess his liquidity is it? so really your just blowing smoke out of your butt and posting a lot of smart sounding words about something you have zero factual knowledge of. right?

apply the same degree of critical thought to your own suspicions as you do the educated guesses of respected publications. How do your suspicions stack up? what methodology are your suspicions based on? what qualifications do you have in financial mgmt do have developed educated suspicions?

look the bottom line is that the forbes list of sports franchise values may not be 100% accurate but that information is without doubt the most respected view into the subject on this continent. it is picked up by media and discussed all over North America. Same goes for lists of individual wealth. if there are better lists, more respected lists, great.

But throwing it all under the bus to talk about your suspicions and using a few fancy words while doing so.....sorry man that doesn't add up.

Now on the other hand, if you simply said

I really have no detailed basis for my suspicions, but here they are kind of thing

then at least you' be presenting your suspicions in a more appropriate context.

and please don't tell me "I don't think you understand my point" because I understand it well. you have a habit of thinking people don't understand your point because they don't agree with you which isn't much different than suggesting people just aren't as enlightened as you.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Great news would imply improvement. This is neutral news.

Melnyk as an owner certainly has it's flaws but it's also better than some situations out there. The groups rumoured to be interested in buying the team, regardless of whether or not Melnyk is currently will to sell, seem like upgrades in terms of their reputations, and financial situations, but the grass is always greener they say.

In the end, my stance is that Melnyk has a reputation for being misleading, so I'm not all that willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he denies the rumours, but at this stage that's all they are, so that's how I treat them.

As do I.

 

[Micklebot]

so then you're looking at all these lists, which are compiled annually, that contain data on many people and many entities and throwing them all under the bus because of Wilbur Ross? Forbes methodology for valuing sports franchises is out there, go look for it.

you posted very out of date articles that pre date significant increases in the value of TV contracts.

your suspicion is he has liquidity issues. so what's that based on? if the data isn't there to assess his net worth or to assess the franchise value then it isn't there to assess his liquidity is it? so really your just blowing smoke out of your butt and posting a lot of smart sounding words about something you have zero factual knowledge of. right?

apply the same degree of critical thought to your own suspicions as you do the educated guesses of respected publications. How do your suspicions stack up? what methodology are your suspicions based on? what qualifications do you have in financial mgmt do have developed educated suspicions?

look the bottom line is that the forbes list of sports franchise values may not be 100% accurate but that information is without doubt the most respected view into the subject on this continent. it is picked up by media and discussed all over North America. Same goes for lists of individual wealth. if there are better lists, more respected lists, great.

But throwing it all under the bus to talk about your suspicions and using a few fancy words while doing so.....sorry man that doesn't add up.

Now on the other hand, if you simply said

I really have no detailed basis for my suspicions, but here they are kind of thing

then at least you' be presenting your suspicions in a more appropriate context.

and please don't tell me "I don't think you understand my point" because I understand it well. you have a habit of thinking people don't understand your point because they don't agree with you which isn't much different than suggesting people just aren't as enlightened as you.

Well part of the problem is you act as though I'm claiming things as fact. I am saying that it's all speculation. Wilbur Ross isn't the only guy out there to exaggerate his wealth, it's a flawed methodology being used because better ones are possible, but just because better methods don't exist doesn't make the one being used a good one.

I use all the information I have to rationalize the teams actions. So when we repeatedly trade away assets and the return seems to be motivated by cost savings, when we have the among smallest front office and scouting staff, when our attendance drops a couple years in a row resulting in us ceasing papering the arena and tarping off seats, I try to figure out why a guy with a Forbes valuation of 1.15 billion, and a franchise worth whatever it is now isn't keeping pace with franchises in similar circumstances. My suspicion is a big project like Lebreton may be making him have to squeeze a little more, but I don't know for sure. I don't pretend to have the answer, but I also don't pretty everything is guaranteed hunky dory just because of a couple lists which just as speculative as a lot of the other stuff out there say he and the franchise are valuable. You keep wanting to put me in the "sky is falling crowd", all I did was post a couple articles in response to someone asking what financial strains, and following it up with, I don't think it's as bad as some are suggesting but there are some issues. I also pointed that these lists aren't infallible and should't be treated as such. You disagree, that's fine. I'm not, and never have claimed to know one way or another. I try to keep an open mind on both sides. I suspect when Melnyk claimed he lost millions, he was massaging the numbers, for example. The financial world is full of half truths, so I try to take it all with a grain of salt.

 

[JD1]

Well part of the problem is you act as though I'm claiming things as fact. I am saying that it's all speculation. Wilbur Ross isn't the only guy out there to exaggerate his wealth, it's a flawed methodology being used because better ones are possible, but just because better methods don't exist doesn't make the one being used a good one.

I use all the information I have to rationalize the teams actions. So when we repeatedly trade away assets and the return seems to be motivated by cost savings, when we have the among smallest front office and scouting staff, when our attendance drops a couple years in a row resulting in us ceasing papering the arena and tarping off seats, I try to figure out why a guy with a Forbes valuation of 1.15 billion, and a franchise worth whatever it is now isn't keeping pace with franchises in similar circumstances. My suspicion is a big project like Lebreton may be making him have to squeeze a little more, but I don't know for sure. I don't pretend to have the answer, but I also don't pretty everything is guaranteed hunky dory just because of a couple lists which just as speculative as a lot of the other stuff out there say he and the franchise are valuable. You keep wanting to put me in the "sky is falling crowd", all I did was post a couple articles in response to someone asking what financial strains, and following it up with, I don't think it's as bad as some are suggesting but there are some issues. I also pointed that these lists aren't infallible and should't be treated as such. You disagree, that's fine. I'm not, and never have claimed to know one way or another. I try to keep an open mind on both sides. I suspect when Melnyk claimed he lost millions, he was massaging the numbers, for example. The financial world is full of half truths, so I try to take it all with a grain of salt.

it was me that asked what financial strains and the articles you posted were dated. I think you cited his divorce, being sued for 1.5M, the ciizen article and the loans on the arena.

so in order

the divorce was years ago and his net worth would have accounted for that years ago

being sued for 1.55m is chicken feed assuming he pays that full amount

the citizen article was several years old predating both the rogers nhl deal and the local tsn deal

the revenue listed in the forbes article is net of arena debt so the interest rate really doesn't matter does it?

from everything I've read, credibility lies in his net worth being > 1b which equals not broke. That isnt forbes saying that btw. forbes assesses the franchise, not melnyk. but broke owner is the accepted rule around here.

I challenge a lot of things I read on this site. what's interesting to me about that is that when doing so other posters want to turn around and put words and thoughts in your mouth. for example, I never once suggested that I think everything is hunky dory, you suggested I think that. What I did is point to some generally accepted information that shows Melnyk is not broke.

 

[Tuna99]

it was me that asked what financial strains and the articles you posted were dated. I think you cited his divorce, being sued for 1.5M, the ciizen article and the loans on the arena.

so in order

the divorce was years ago and his net worth would have accounted for that years ago

being sued for 1.55m is chicken feed assuming he pays that full amount

the citizen article was several years old predating both the rogers nhl deal and the local tsn deal

the revenue listed in the forbes article is net of arena debt so the interest rate really doesn't matter does it?

from everything I've read, credibility lies in his net worth being > 1b which equals not broke. That isnt forbes saying that btw. forbes assesses the franchise, not melnyk. but broke owner is the accepted rule around here.

I challenge a lot of things I read on this site. what's interesting to me about that is that when doing so other posters want to turn around and put words and thoughts in your mouth. for example, I never once suggested that I think everything is hunky dory, you suggested I think that. What I did is point to some generally accepted information that shows Melnyk is not broke.

Melnyck might not be financial broke to run the Senators, but he is brand, reputation and fan-loyalty broke and that is a more severe problem, and he won’t ever recover from this.

(He may also not have the financing to run the Sens, we don’t know that)

 

[JD1]

Melnyck might not be financial broke to run the Senators, but he is brand, reputation and fan-loyalty broke and that is a more severe problem, and he won’t ever recover from this.

(He may also not have the financing to run the Sens, we don’t know that)

ya that first paragraph likely has some truth to it

 

[The Lewler]

He isn't the owner that fans and opponents love to hate.

He's just hated.

 

[slamigo]

How is this a thread? There is no story here. Just a bunch of people hating Melnyk and guessing about things that they have no knowledge about. Seriously, shut this thread down. There hasn’t been one actual fact posted about any potential ownership change. Not one.

 

[Rhaegar Targaryen]

Haven’t heard anything since Dreger and the President threw cold water on it.

 

[Micklebot]

Let's lock it up, if new info comes out we can re-open it or start a new one.