Hurricanes sale formally closed, Tom Dundon now majority owner

[Svechhammer]

Boondoggle? I may be misunderstanding your sentiment based on the first part of your post, but a boondoggle doesn't seem to fit here.

*sigh* - this is what I get for halfassing it with the in laws over.... I meant financial windfall, not boondoggle

 

[Wingsfan 4 life]

Um, why are we all concerned on whether this guy runs the Canes as a cap floor team or not?

It shouldn't be how much of the cap you spend that matters, it should be where the money that you do spend is going to that really matters.

 

[SunDancer]

I don't think many Americans not located in the city that loses a team would begrudge Toronto getting an NFL team if they wanted one. It doesn't move the needle for most of us.

That isn't the least bit comparable. Maybe if the NFL was run by Canadians who only granted new teams in the US once every 30 years under extremely rare circumstances and a majority of the existing US teams were also threatened with relocation anytime there was change in owner, venue or the exchange rate ... then maybe your example would be valid.

 

[BattleBorn]

That isn't the least bit comparable. Maybe if the NFL was run by Canadians who only granted new teams in the US once every 30 years under extremely rare circumstances and a majority of the existing US teams were also threatened with relocation anytime there was change in owner, venue or the exchange rate ... then maybe your example would be valid.

Except the hypothetical could never happen, so it's almost not worth discussing. The argument for the US' position in the league is based on population, much like the argument for playing games in China. You can do just as well with a lot less market penetration.

The NHL's market penetration in Canada is huge, it's a known brand and top of the sports food chain for the vast majority of people interested in sports in Canada. Adding to the market to gain that last bit of dominance doesn't have nearly as high a payoff as doubling the low market dominance in the US or China.

 

[SunDancer]

*sigh* - this is what I get for halfassing it with the in laws over.... I meant financial windfall, not boondoggle

A financial windfall? Oh, like a boon maybe?

 

[SunDancer]

Except the hypothetical could never happen, so it's almost not worth discussing. The argument for the US' position in the league is based on population, much like the argument for playing games in China. You can do just as well with a lot less market penetration.

The NHL's market penetration in Canada is huge, it's a known brand and top of the sports food chain for the vast majority of people interested in sports in Canada. Adding to the market to gain that last bit of dominance doesn't have nearly as high a payoff as doubling the low market dominance in the US or China.

You're absolutely right ... it's also exactly why the "Well, Americans don't get worked up about weak franchises" angle is ridiculous. The dynamic is completely different.

 

[BattleBorn]

You're absolutely right ... it's also exactly why the "Well, Americans don't get worked up about weak franchises" angle is ridiculous. The dynamic is completely different.

People shouldn't get worked up over weak franchises at all. The only reason to even pay attention is because someone thinks there's a better place for a team and crappy financial performance is a way to make a point. If every city that wanted a team had a team, zero people outside of the league/team offices would care that some team can't sell tickets.

 

[Svechhammer]

People shouldn't get worked up over weak franchises at all. The only reason to even pay attention is because someone thinks there's a better place for a team and crappy financial performance is a way to make a point. If every city that wanted a team had a team, zero people outside of the league/team offices would care that some team can't sell tickets.

I'll be honest, the only reason I care about discussions like this is that being told "your region isn't good enough to deserve your team" for 3 years by both fans in here and media from north of the border after listening to 17 years of "bring back the Whale" grates to the point where the gut reaction is to come to the defense of anyone who is on the receiving end of such claims.

 

[BattleBorn]

I'll be honest, the only reason I care about discussions like this is that being told "your region isn't good enough to deserve your team" for 3 years by both fans in here and media from north of the border after listening to 17 years of "bring back the Whale" grates to the point where the gut reaction is to come to the defense of anyone who is on the receiving end of such claims.

Well, your region hasn't been good enough in the past few years, that's pretty much a given.

What happens after that point is where the argument starts. Raleigh people will say it's because the team has stunk (and they have) and it's not worth going to games at the prices they're asking (and it probably isn't.) People that want a team in their area will say they can do better, and there's really no proof that they can't since there's no team to measure. It all comes down to opinion, and while it's fun to argue over opinion, nothing's going to change.

I get it, and there's points on both sides that make sense. What matters is that you've got a team in your area and hopefully the people will support the team when they improve/when the team does something to improve the product. Very few US markets are going to give a Canadian market a run for their money when it comes to overall market interest in hockey, but there's plenty of other things that US markets offer outside of blind allegiance to the sport. The good news is that there's a lot of opportunity for improvement in Carolina, I hope it comes to pass.

ETA: I'm a Chicago Cubs fan, there's a lot to be said about the negatives of selling a facility out for a crappy team. The sweet spot, IMO is a mix between Toronto and Carolina. A rabid fanbase that demands results with their pocketbook.

 

[the halleJOKEL]

i think it should be noted that carolina's attendance hung on for awhile into the streak of being horrible before completely cratering a few years back. we were considered one of the success stories along with nashville from the early 2000's to early 2010's. but then we were really bad.

actually that is part of the problem, we have never been really bad. we've been mediocre bad which is the worst kind of bad to be when trying to build a fanbase. no early draft pick hype. no playoff hype. no playoff race hype (typically were out of it by start of november most of those years.)

it has been painful to watch even for diehard hardcore fans like us who actually sit around and willingly talk about this team day in and day out.

 

[Svechhammer]

Well, your region hasn't been good enough in the past few years, that's pretty much a given.

Its not a given at all. If it was a given, the team would have sold and moved. Instead, it sold for a price that literally everyone in here laughed at when it was originally announced with the first offer, was called "fake news" by Forbes, with the added stipulation that the team cannot move. Period. But the league deems this area and these fans worthy of the franchise, so they're enforcing policy to keep it in Raleigh. In fact, there have been articles the past week that the so-called attendance disaster in Raleigh is by design. So no, that's not a given, its an opinion.

 

[BattleBorn]

Its not a given at all. If it was a given, the team would have sold and moved. Instead, it sold for a price that literally everyone in here laughed at when it was originally announced with the first offer, was called "fake news" by Forbes, with the added stipulation that the team cannot move. Period. But the league deems this area and these fans worthy of the franchise, so they're enforcing policy to keep it in Raleigh. In fact, there have been articles the past week that the so-called attendance disaster in Raleigh is by design. So no, that's not a given, its an opinion.

I didn't mean to touch a nerve, and it wasn't meant as a dig. 65% capacity isn't getting it done and isn't doing well. That's the given.

Outside of that, there's plenty of other factors in play. Namely the lease at PNC, the fact that the league has done everything in its power to keep teams where they are assuming there's an ownership desire to keep them there, and the idea that the league doesn't want to move a team that's won a cup regardless of the rest of the stuff in play.

The idea that teams are just ready to get plucked up and moved somewhere is something that's been disproven time and time again in recent memory with the exception of Atlanta, which was a completely different can of worms. If there's an owner in the region that wants to stay in the region and a place to play, the team's not moving regardless of whether that team is the Hurricanes or the Leafs.

The league hasn't deemed anyone worthy of anything, that's not really the way it works. The new owner deemed the team a good investment in Raleigh and made a move to purchase the team.

 

[powerstuck]

Well, your region hasn't been good enough in the past few years, that's pretty much a given.

What happens after that point is where the argument starts. Raleigh people will say it's because the team has stunk (and they have) and it's not worth going to games at the prices they're asking (and it probably isn't.) People that want a team in their area will say they can do better, and there's really no proof that they can't since there's no team to measure. It all comes down to opinion, and while it's fun to argue over opinion, nothing's going to change.

I get it, and there's points on both sides that make sense. What matters is that you've got a team in your area and hopefully the people will support the team when they improve/when the team does something to improve the product. Very few US markets are going to give a Canadian market a run for their money when it comes to overall market interest in hockey, but there's plenty of other things that US markets offer outside of blind allegiance to the sport. The good news is that there's a lot of opportunity for improvement in Carolina, I hope it comes to pass.

ETA: I'm a Chicago Cubs fan, there's a lot to be said about the negatives of selling a facility out for a crappy team. The sweet spot, IMO is a mix between Toronto and Carolina. A rabid fanbase that demands results with their pocketbook.

This is true. If one has anything to learn from what we folk in Qc are realizing today is that it is much much much harder, to get a 2nd chance at a team than keeping the team you have where it is.

Pretty sure, after everything that happened today, if you ask people in Quebec who could have maybe done something more 22 years ago...they are would say they regret not doing it back then.

It does suck paying every year 1000s of $ for something that ends up being no so enjoyable, but I guess it's the price to pay if you wanna be able to enjoy it for the next 10-20-30 or even 50 years.

 

[Svechhammer]

I didn't mean to touch a nerve, and it wasn't meant as a dig. 65% capacity isn't getting it done and isn't doing well. That's the given.

Outside of that, there's plenty of other factors in play. Namely the lease at PNC, the fact that the league has done everything in its power to keep teams where they are assuming there's an ownership desire to keep them there, and the idea that the league doesn't want to move a team that's won a cup regardless of the rest of the stuff in play.

The idea that teams are just ready to get plucked up and moved somewhere is something that's been disproven time and time again in recent memory with the exception of Atlanta, which was a completely different can of worms. If there's an owner in the region that wants to stay in the region and a place to play, the team's not moving regardless of if that team is the Hurricanes or the Leafs.

The league hasn't deemed anyone worthy of anything, that's not really the way it works. The new owner deemed the team a good investment in Raleigh and made a move to purchase the team.

No nerves touched, just enjoying a little debate. Can't argue too much with what you've said.

My opinion on the matter is that the ownership consortium within the NHL is treating the league as a whole like a company. They're trying to maximize profits and exposure to their best of their abilities. My personal opinion is that, for the most part, the relocation efforts we saw in the mid-90s were the last realistic round of relocation we're going to see for a very long time, and if it does happen again, it'll be with teams you might not necessarily consider right now. Moving Quebec to Denver and Hartford to Raleigh was less about finding regions that worked, and more about expanding the footprint of the league as a whole. With both, there were already nearby established Original 6 franchises (Montreal and Boston) that the league believed would easily absorb the fans of the departing teams, and largely, this has been proven correct. By moving the franchises to areas that were not established, they added to the league footprint in both area as well as TV viewership, filling regional gaps the league deemed to be important. Atlanta is a massive exception here, but, as you said, that situation was different because of how toxic that environment became behind the scenes.

Going forward, the only kinds of franchises that I could see moving are ones that exist in areas saturated by another, larger franchises, and the ones that stick out the most are the Isles, Devils, and Ducks, where the league may deem them expendable in lieu of the larger local teams (Rangers, Kings). Unfortunately, and as you said, this will always be the biggest sticking point, the league isn't interested at all in moving championship banners to regions that didn't win them, and all 3 of them would be impacted with that predicament. And even if those franchises did move, they would be to areas that would be filling a regional gap in the overall footprint to expand regional broadcasting rights to get larger TV/streaming contracts.

 

[BattleBorn]

No nerves touched, just enjoying a little debate. Can't argue too much with what you've said.

My opinion on the matter is that the ownership consortium within the NHL is treating the league as a whole like a company. They're trying to maximize profits and exposure to their best of their abilities. My personal opinion is that, for the most part, the relocation efforts we saw in the mid-90s were the last realistic round of relocation we're going to see for a very long time, and if it does happen again, it'll be with teams you might not necessarily consider right now. Moving Quebec to Denver and Hartford to Raleigh was less about finding regions that worked, and more about expanding the footprint of the league as a whole. With both, there were already nearby established Original 6 franchises (Montreal and Boston) that the league believed would easily absorb the fans of the departing teams, and largely, this has been proven correct. By moving the franchises to areas that were not established, they added to the league footprint in both area as well as TV viewership, filling regional gaps the league deemed to be important. Atlanta is a massive exception here, but, as you said, that situation was different because of how toxic that environment became behind the scenes.

Going forward, the only kinds of franchises that I could see moving are ones that exist in areas saturated by another, larger franchises, and the ones that stick out the most are the Isles, Devils, and Ducks, where the league may deem them expendable in lieu of the larger local teams (Rangers, Kings). Unfortunately, and as you said, this will always be the biggest sticking point, the league isn't interested at all in moving championship banners to regions that didn't win them, and all 3 of them would be impacted with that predicament. And even if those franchises did move, they would be to areas that would be filling a regional gap in the overall footprint to expand regional broadcasting rights to get larger TV/streaming contracts.

The league is pretty much a company and the Hurricanes are the franchise for that company in the Raleigh area. We all get a little confused sometimes because every franchise has a different name, but they can just as easily be called NHL Carolina and play a game tonight against NHL Dallas. It's just two franchises playing a game.

If you own a Coldstone Creamery franchise in Dubuque and decide your location sucks, you can't just pack up your scoops and coolers and move to Los Angeles and sell Coldstone ice cream because you own a Coldstone franchise. You've only got the rights to the franchise in that area. Of course, it goes a little deeper than that once you get legal/antitrust things in play, but essentially that's it. The NHL has a franchise in Raleigh and they don't want to abandon the market unless they can't find someone that wants to own the franchise in the market.

The salary cap, revenue sharing, and those associated policies work to eliminate a lot of the franchise movement we've seen in the past. That was caused by money and smaller markets more than anything else.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

I didn't mean to touch a nerve, and it wasn't meant as a dig. 65% capacity isn't getting it done and isn't doing well. That's the given.

Outside of that, there's plenty of other factors in play. Namely the lease at PNC, the fact that the league has done everything in its power to keep teams where they are assuming there's an ownership desire to keep them there, and the idea that the league doesn't want to move a team that's won a cup regardless of the rest of the stuff in play.

The idea that teams are just ready to get plucked up and moved somewhere is something that's been disproven time and time again in recent memory with the exception of Atlanta, which was a completely different can of worms. If there's an owner in the region that wants to stay in the region and a place to play, the team's not moving regardless of whether that team is the Hurricanes or the Leafs.

The league hasn't deemed anyone worthy of anything, that's not really the way it works. The new owner deemed the team a good investment in Raleigh and made a move to purchase the team.

No nerves touched, just enjoying a little debate. Can't argue too much with what you've said.

My opinion on the matter is that the ownership consortium within the NHL is treating the league as a whole like a company. They're trying to maximize profits and exposure to their best of their abilities. My personal opinion is that, for the most part, the relocation efforts we saw in the mid-90s were the last realistic round of relocation we're going to see for a very long time, and if it does happen again, it'll be with teams you might not necessarily consider right now. Moving Quebec to Denver and Hartford to Raleigh was less about finding regions that worked, and more about expanding the footprint of the league as a whole. With both, there were already nearby established Original 6 franchises (Montreal and Boston) that the league believed would easily absorb the fans of the departing teams, and largely, this has been proven correct. By moving the franchises to areas that were not established, they added to the league footprint in both area as well as TV viewership, filling regional gaps the league deemed to be important. Atlanta is a massive exception here, but, as you said, that situation was different because of how toxic that environment became behind the scenes.

Going forward, the only kinds of franchises that I could see moving are ones that exist in areas saturated by another, larger franchises, and the ones that stick out the most are the Isles, Devils, and Ducks, where the league may deem them expendable in lieu of the larger local teams (Rangers, Kings). Unfortunately, and as you said, this will always be the biggest sticking point, the league isn't interested at all in moving championship banners to regions that didn't win them, and all 3 of them would be impacted with that predicament. And even if those franchises did move, they would be to areas that would be filling a regional gap in the overall footprint to expand regional broadcasting rights to get larger TV/streaming contracts.

It might not have touched a nerve with Lurkerbee, but it definitely touched a nerve with me. Were this franchise in say, North Dakota, people wouldn't be saying boo about our attendance - or if they were, we'd be lauded for "speaking with our wallets" rather than rewarding an owner who was happy with icing a mediocre product. I saw that through both Chicago and Pittsburgh's struggles when Chicago's AHL team (which wasn't even affiliated with the Hawks and is out in Rosemont) outdrew the Blackhawks and Pittsburgh was but a new arena or a sale away from a relocation to Hamilton or Kansas City. But no, because we're in North Carolina it's not good enough - and honestly probably never will be for some. I'm a self-professed cynic on this. I know that if PNC Arena was full every day - packed to the rafters - you'd still have people calling for the team's relocation or crying crocodile tears for the Whalers and about how that poor franchise should have never left. Go on an attendance skid and the excuses people trot out for some teams would be called inexcusable and decry ever putting a team there and hoping, some silently and some not so silently, that somebody swoops in and moves the team to some place that deserves hockey. It's never good enough for some. Take your Golden Knights, BattleBorn. They're the toast of the League now, but go on a skid and all that good grace will be washed away by the roars of the people who were complaining loudly when Vegas was awarded a team, now calling for their relocation to "a real hockey market." It may not be today, but remember that there'll likely be one day that you'll have someone calling your region "not good enough."

 

[Killion]

...It may not be today, but remember that there'll likely be one day that you'll have someone calling your region "not good enough."

Every markets been through this gp including Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton & Calgary, Vancouver, Detroit, Chicago, Boston etc. Only difference being no internet, no chatboards back then. What goes around comes around. Bottom line; if you believe in hockey, the power of hockey, the NHL brand which is what we got... location irrelevant beyond some basic fundamentals. It will succeed & if you dont believe it can succeed then whomever needs to look in the mirror. Rather than wishing for a fail they should be wishing for success. Employing some magnanimity, imagination. Why not share? Problem? No one, no one owns the game. No one. Were all merely caretakers. Everyone. Share & share alike. One family, one tribe.

 

[BattleBorn]

It might not have touched a nerve with Lurkerbee, but it definitely touched a nerve with me. Were this franchise in say, North Dakota, people wouldn't be saying boo about our attendance - or if they were, we'd be lauded for "speaking with our wallets" rather than rewarding an owner who was happy with icing a mediocre product. I saw that through both Chicago and Pittsburgh's struggles when Chicago's AHL team (which wasn't even affiliated with the Hawks and is out in Rosemont) outdrew the Blackhawks and Pittsburgh was but a new arena or a sale away from a relocation to Hamilton or Kansas City. But no, because we're in North Carolina it's not good enough - and honestly probably never will be for some. I'm a self-professed cynic on this. I know that if PNC Arena was full every day - packed to the rafters - you'd still have people calling for the team's relocation or crying crocodile tears for the Whalers and about how that poor franchise should have never left. Go on an attendance skid and the excuses people trot out for some teams would be called inexcusable and decry ever putting a team there and hoping, some silently and some not so silently, that somebody swoops in and moves the team to some place that deserves hockey. It's never good enough for some. Take your Golden Knights, BattleBorn. They're the toast of the League now, but go on a skid and all that good grace will be washed away by the roars of the people who were complaining loudly when Vegas was awarded a team, now calling for their relocation to "a real hockey market." It may not be today, but remember that there'll likely be one day that you'll have someone calling your region "not good enough."

I go into every conversation here knowing that there's a decent chance my team is the one in the sights for relocation to Saskatoon in the future.

The well wishes the Knights get has only started recently, and it's usually phony. In this very thread (and pretty much every thread involving potential relocation) people have marked Vegas as a relocation candidate "in a few years once the newness wears off/once the Raiders come/once they start losing."

It just is what it is, it sucks. For as much as we tend to let go here on the BoH, it's supposed to be the place where we can discuss the nasty parts of a team without getting too much emotion involved. If it were up to me, every claim on a potential relocation would be supported with some sort of evidence that the other place is a better option, something other than the money is different colors would be just fine.

I'd have plenty of words for Calgary/Chicago/wherever if they were selling 65% of their tickets for the past few years as well.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

Every markets been through this gp including Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton & Calgary, Vancouver, Detroit, Chicago, Boston etc. Only difference being no internet, no chatboards back then. What goes around comes around. Bottom line; if you believe in hockey, the power of hockey, the NHL brand which is what we got... location irrelevant beyond some basic fundamentals. It will succeed & if you dont believe it can succeed then whomever needs to look in the mirror. Rather than wishing for a fail they should be wishing for success. Employing some magnanimity, imagination. Why not share? Problem? No one, no one owns the game. No one. Were all merely caretakers. Everyone. Share & share alike. One family, one tribe.

That's truly touching, Killion, but unfortunately not enough people share that view. I've known how much being a fan of the team the vultures are circling over sucks - I went through it with the Pens and the Canes both. I just know that having been in that situation that if somebody else's team was in the sights of relocationist jackals or those jackals were openly weeping about the relocation not happening, I wouldn't be shrugging my shoulders nonchalantly and saying "Oh well, it is what it is and it sucks to be you. You just weren't good enough."

 

[madhi19]

Buy half and change, buy the other half later... Amazing that Karmanos managed to stick around. Off course now the game is to meet the yearly cash calls.

 

[Killion]

That's truly touching, Killion, but unfortunately not enough people share that view. I've known how much being a fan of the team the vultures are circling over sucks -

Unhuh, your welcome, and they'd better start sharing that view because know what?.... I shoot Vultures & Vermin round these here parts. Billy the Exterminator can only wish. Has to be sensitive, caring, use eco-friendly Bug Bombs n' whatnot. Not me. No Sir. Nothing like the smell of napalm in the morning.

 

[Rob]

NFL: St Louis >>> Jacksonville. San Antonio is, imo, also a better market for the NFL than Jacksonville.

St. Louis had a team though

NBA: Seattle > Memphis, OKC. And here's a prime example of the NBA being just like the NHL. An ******* owner moved a team when they couldn't get the money for a new arena paid for by the public.

Different situation.

MLB: Tampa Bay Rays have been an atrocity for years and virtually any city of a decent size like for instance Portland would do better. Oh, and the commissioner of the MLB is threatening relocation if they can't get a new arena of course....

If there was a ready MLB ballpark they would be gone.

 

[Rob]

Um, why are we all concerned on whether this guy runs the Canes as a cap floor team or not?

It shouldn't be how much of the cap you spend that matters, it should be where the money that you do spend is going to that really matters.

Well it seems to be important to Canes fans who would rightfully be disappointed if they don't have a higher payroll next season.

While someone did say it was peanuts to a billionaire owner I'm sure he is still an acute businessman who may not like the tens of millions of dollars he may loose.

 

[VikingAv]

St. Louis had a team though

Different situation.

If there was a ready MLB ballpark they would be gone.

1. Everybody knows why St Louis was moved. It wasn't for being a failing market. It was for being not as good a market as LA. And St Louis is still a better market than Jacksonville.

2. You claimed none of the other leagues have better markets without teams. Seattle is a better market than those other two and another poster also gave you a couple of examples. Don't move the goalposts.

 

[powerstuck]

1. Everybody knows why St Louis was moved. It wasn't for being a failing market. It was for being not as good a market as LA. And St Louis is still a better market than Jacksonville.

2. You claimed none of the other leagues have better markets without teams. Seattle is a better market than those other two and another poster also gave you a couple of examples. Don't move the goalposts.

That argument can be used for many discussions.
Carolina is a better market than Hartford
Houston is a better market than Carolina
Seattle is a better market than Phoenix...

and so on and on and on and on. We end up having 12 teams in Toronto, 10 in Montreal, 8 in NYC.