When NHL Buys The Ducks...

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Crazy Lunatic, Feb 7, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. If they believed that fewer teams would allow for a better product, what would stop them from shutting down the Ducks after they bought them from Disney? The only excuse anti-contraction advocates use is that owners wouldn't let them. Well, it looks like Disney will sell for about 100 million. Could this be a good investment for the league?
     
  2. Greschner4

    Greschner4 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The number is quite a bit south of 100 right now. If the league bought them for, say, 60, that would be a little more than 2 mil an owner. Over time they'd have to make that up by getting a bigger share of the monies that are split, since they'd be split 29 rather than 30 ways.

    My thought would be that 2 mil isn't very much money at all in the grand scheme of things, so unless a private buyer comes in at close to 100, it's bye, bye Ducks.
     
  3. Greschner4

    Greschner4 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ... plus it would be one fewer team that is a beneficiary of revenue sharing ...
     
  4. Good point, I really hope they do buy them and contract. That franchise was doomed by calling them the Mighty Ducks. Man, what a stupid name.
     
  5. krandor

    krandor Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I know - I laughed when I first heard that is what they were going to name then. Name an NHL team after a pretty bad kid's movie.
    :shakehead
     
  6. robcav

    robcav Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe buy them and move them to Iowa, then they can cite this team as an example of a failed CBA and use it as ammunition in the next CBA talks.
     
  7. tantalum

    tantalum Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2002
    Messages:
    16,968
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Chemist
    Location:
    Missouri
    The selling price will be much lower than the $100 mil that Forbes values the franchise at. buffalo and Ottawa sales were around that mark but they included the arena. The pond is owned by the city and would not be a part of any sale. Do they fold the team? I don't think so. I think they give it another chance in another market. Most teams will survive with a new CBA. A few will still struggle but I don't think it would be necessary to fold those teams when there could be viable markets for them in a new system.
     
  8. mooseOAK*

    mooseOAK* Guest

    I don't know why it is great that Disney who owns ESPN, the largest sports network in the world, is out of hockey.
     
  9. crossxcheck

    crossxcheck Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Nashvegas
    they could move the ducks to the midwest and rename them the "ladybugs" :dunno:
     
  10. gobuds

    gobuds Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    problem is that disney agreed to sell the team for 75 million under which disney would eat 2 years of debt, meaning, sale price was literally $35M. Bettman obviously killed the deal and disney has been looking to get out ever since. This is the #1 reason for the lockout- owners can't have teams netting $35M. In the end, that is all they care about.
     
  11. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home

    Lemme recap:

    They ran the Ducks to lose, save for one year of treating the club with dignity.

    They marketed a movie with an NHL club.

    They ran the same ESPN that does a horrific job on the NHL, showing fewer and fewer games every year, mainly showing Detroit, Colorado, Dallas and NYR games.

    They treated the game I love like a tax write off.

    They don't care about the game, or the fans, and employ a Wurtz-esque policy of NOT showing home games UNLESS the Ducks home games are sell-outs (have from DAY ONE).

    They are a lousy company producing second rate entertainment and Eisner better hope Walt doesn't get thawed, or he's gonna have some explaining to do while being strangled.
     
  12. Icey

    Icey Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mostly all teams have that same deal. If the game does not sell out, the game is blacked out. Its pretty standard.

    Wirtz is different in that he doesn't have a TV deal to show home game whether or not they sell out.

    ESPN shows one or two Dallas games a year if your lucky. Could be because Dallas has such a great local TV deal, but ESPN shows Detroit, Colorado, NYR, Philadelphia. Mostly east coast games.
     
  13. krandor

    krandor Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So does that make income from the Mighty Ducks movies "hockey related revenue"?
    :)
     
  14. snakepliskin

    snakepliskin Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Wilmington NC
    on the fan 590 one day last week they interviewed the former owner of the whalers , i cannot remember his name though, but he said that he was interested in buying the ducks and moving them to hartford, it may not have been fan 590 now that i think about it, it may have been maddens redio show in pittsburgh (i was checking several radio stations last week during all the rumour mongering during the meetings)--but why move them if they are selling out? if you have a fan base that good and you control your payroll well and you should have a pretty good local tv deal in southern california-seems to me they should make money. also 100 mill is pocket change to disney-i'm surprised they do not missmanage them on purpose touse them as a tax deduction
     
  15. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home
    No, it means the games are instead marketing expenditures for Mighty Ducks V: Emilio Needs Work.

    The Federov signing won't count against the cap if he makes a cameo in the film.
     
  16. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home

    The team only sells out when the Red Wings are in town or any other big name.

    Half the crowd (2/3 would be more accurate) was rooting for the Wings when I went to the 1/21 game against Detroit. It was packed then, but take away the visiting team's fans and it resembles the Islanders' Nassau Coliseum during the '90's.

    Take the Ducks out of Anaheim and likely it'll be like they were never there after a year or two of faux outrage. Seriously. The real fans of the game (NOT the novelty) would just have to drive 45 minutes to the Kings at the Staples Center.

    And you may be 100% correct on the tax deduction......


    Would hockey be better pretending in Anaheim or thriving in Winnipeg, Hartford, Seattle or elsewhere?
     
  17. snakepliskin

    snakepliskin Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Wilmington NC
    so--the ducks could abuse a cap (if one is implemented) by signing free agents as employees of disney and giving them a job description of say stuntmen or extras of the next duck movie ( mighty ducks 25-the revival of emilio's career) and with disneys bankroll they could pretty much destroy the rangers corner on the market of overpaying semi-average players!
     
  18. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home
    and another fine film was born.....
     
  19. mooseOAK*

    mooseOAK* Guest

    Would those places be selling out for a 14-21-8-5 team as the Ducks were when you saw them? Those cities don't have an NHL class arena anyway.
     
  20. rwilson99

    rwilson99 Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,911
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Occupation:
    Real Estate Agent
    Location:
    TAMPA, FL
    Home Page:
    Why would you spend $100 Million dollars to buy an organization and then shut it down?

    Move the team to Houston , Portland or Seattle.
     
  21. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home
    So a FEW sellouts by opposing teams' fans outweigh a sure and steady stream of gate reciepts by a city who knows and cares about hockey?

    If I ran a business whose sole hope for profit (and credibility) came from people wanting to see who I was doing business with (NOT how I was doing business), I'd be a joke.

    The Disney name is the only reason that team had any success and the main reason why it's a joke. If a Corporation or billionaire came and wanted a serious team, we wouldn't be talking about moving a joke from the RICHEST county in N. America.
     
  22. mooseOAK*

    mooseOAK* Guest

    Were the Canucks, Flames and Oilers seling out every game when they were losing? No.

    And, yes, part of the reason Anaheim has a franchise is that there are thousands of people who live there who came from Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and Canada.

    No one has mentioned a thing about the Ducks moving.
     
  23. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home
    That would make sense, but the braintrusts who ARE the economic planners of the NHL would rather lose $100M than make money elsewhere where the team has a chance.
     
  24. OlTimeHockey

    OlTimeHockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    16,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    stick figure porn
    Location:
    home
    No, they just had fans that really cared about the game and followed them passionately, attending games in MANY multiples than the actual head count the Ducks had (not the announced crowd bolstered by Disney buying seats for posterity).

    And the thousands who live here from Massachussetts, NY, Michigan and Canada are going to abandon their allegiance to THEIR team for a Angry Duck mask and a schill ownership? Leave the legacy of the Wings and Howe, the faith and spirit of the Rag$, the religeon that is TML or Canadien hockey.......and they'll root for Dark Wing Duck and the Emilio's?

    No chance. Some locals have loyalty to the MD of Anaheim. Enough to fill a bowling alley, maybe. Just a bad idea moving hockey here with the Kings already here. Akin to having two teams in Nashville. :dunno:
     
  25. What kind of lease does the team have with The Pond? I remember that when Karmanos moved the Whalers to Carolina that he (or the league maybe) had to pay the city of Hartford to break the lease (I believe it was like $25 million to do so). This is another expense if you're going to relocate or contract Anaheim that some of you are missing.

    Also, the reasoning for the league buying the team was to make sure any future sales aren't based on an undervalued commodity (this is basically the same principal that is employed in arbitration processes...comparing one commodity of similar ilk to another). This isn't about relocating/contracting a team...its about protecting the other NHL organizations for when they sell.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"