Atlanta 3.0: Three local ownership groups emerge

Status
Not open for further replies.

Magnus Fulgur

Registered User
Nov 27, 2002
7,354
0
I disagree with Chicken Parm to a degree. While NASCAR might be a strong #2 in the suburbs of Atlanta, within and around I-285 (almost 3m people) The Falcons and Braves are substantially more important than NASCAR.

Atlanta's not a great sports town, sure. Is Seattle? Is San Diego? Is LA? Is Miami? Really, only the older cities are great sports towns and for good reason. The Thrashers with these owners would have had the same problems if they were in Raleigh, Nashville, Miami, Tampa, Columbus...or even Calgary or Buffalo.
 

Huffer

Registered User
Jul 16, 2010
16,724
6,433
Which is why most people are wrong.

Saying...
'We don't want you in our group'
is not at all comparable to saying...
'You are in our group, you purchased this business....but we are not going to let you change the location in which you operate'.

Enormous difference....

Jeffrey93, Just so I understand your position here, are you trying to imply that any current owner of an NHL team can just decide to move their franchise location to wherever they want, and the NHL can't do anything about it?

So, the owner of the Panthers can just call up the NHL and say, "Gary, just an FYI, we are moving the Panthers to Toronto next year. We thought you should know."
 

Duke749

Savannah Ghost Pirates
Apr 6, 2010
47,915
23,035
Canton, Georgia
I disagree with Chicken Parm to a degree. While NASCAR might be a strong #2 in the suburbs of Atlanta, within and around I-285 (almost 3m people) The Falcons and Braves are substantially more important than NASCAR.

Atlanta's not a great sports town, sure. Is Seattle? Is San Diego? Is LA? Is Miami? Really, only the older cities are great sports towns and for good reason. The Thrashers with these owners would have had the same problems if they were in Raleigh, Nashville, Miami, Tampa, Columbus...or even Calgary or Buffalo.

It's hard to really compare the Braves and Falcons to NASCAR since NASCAR is only here twice a year(once now. hopefully back to two times soon). NASCAR could be more popular then those two but only being in the state once or twice a year, it won't ever take away from attendence #'s from the other sports except for one weekend a year.
 

TCsmyth

Registered User
Mar 25, 2011
1,330
257
Ferraro intent

Without knwing his true intent, I believe that Ferraro was making a comment on Nascar being #2 simply to illustrate that Hockey is a ways behind in the hearts and minds (passion) of the people/market of Georgia, and not necessarily refering to the number of events or overall attendence.

No harm nor foul there...I am Canadian, and have very little passion for Basketball or Nascar
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,280
1,356
Duluth, GA
Without knwing his true intent, I believe that Ferraro was making a comment on Nascar being #2 simply to illustrate that Hockey is a ways behind in the hearts and minds (passion) of the people/market of Georgia, and not necessarily refering to the number of events or overall attendence.

The rest of the state is quite different from Atlanta, and I think that's what some of the other Atlanta posters are trying to say.

NASCAR just isn't in the top four, when it comes to Atlanta's inhabitants.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,689
2,131
You've said this a few times, but I'm still not sure what you mean by "good image"? Why are so you concerned about how the NHL may or may not be perceived in the United States?

Are you one of these people who can't appreciate anything unless it's considered "big-league" or popular?

Further, the NHL's "good image" in Canada is essentially the economic engine that drives the League, so it sure as **** does matter, doesn't it?
Yes I am. Big League is the best. How many Canadians watch the AHL?

Teams moving from the US to Canada. and Teams moving in general. It looks bad.

And no Canadian image does not matter. You guys complain about Bettman. (I wonder why its him and not the canadian owners) but still watch, buy stuff and go to games.
 

Jesus Christ Horburn

Registered User
Aug 22, 2008
13,942
1
Any news yet? It feels like Kincade and Vivlamore have hinted for months that potential buyers might be interested, but still no names.

What is the timeline looking like to find a new local owner? I read reports a month or two back saying the ASG had anywhere between 4 weeks to 4 months to find a new owner.
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,280
1,356
Duluth, GA
What is the timeline looking like to find a new local owner? I read reports a month or two back saying the ASG had anywhere between 4 weeks to 4 months to find a new owner.

Kincade's guy is supposed to be in town this weekend. Really don't know much aside from that. Vivlamore said yesterday via Twitter that all's quiet.

I'm personally not really sure how those reporters came up with the "four weeks to four months" numbers. As we all know, the sale of any sports franchise or business takes a nice chunk of time to finalize. Since there's potentially two sports franchises and the operating rights to an arena up for grabs, here... yeah, four months is optimistic, and four weeks is nigh unreasonable.
 

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
19,717
2,938
Kincade tweeted the potential buyer is in town this weeken and will be at the game against the Sens tomorrow afternoon.

Edit: For months?! Geeze, it hasn't been that long. We are talking about a pretty major purchase you know.
 

MountainHawk

Registered User
Sep 29, 2005
12,771
0
Salem, MA
It's incredibly difficult for the leagues to block the current owner from moving his franchise, unless they have a limited period where they can't move after a sale. Easy for the league to block a relocation by a new owner by blocking the sale.
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,280
1,356
Duluth, GA
It's incredibly difficult for the leagues to block the current owner from moving his franchise, unless they have a limited period where they can't move after a sale. Easy for the league to block a relocation by a new owner by blocking the sale.

Still not entirely sure how this talk of current ownership moving the team is relevant. They're talking selling the team, not moving the team themselves.
 

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
29,283
8,702
It's incredibly difficult for the leagues to block the current owner from moving his franchise, unless they have a limited period where they can't move after a sale. Easy for the league to block a relocation by a new owner by blocking the sale.
NHL By-Law 36 would argue against the first sentence, and any team relocating without the consent of a majority of the Board of Governors would be subject to penalties as specified in the NHL Constitution - up to the involuntary termination of the franchise.
 

KevFist

is best pony
Oct 22, 2006
5,100
2
Birmingham, AL
www.mk837.com
NHL By-Law 36 would argue against the first sentence, and any team relocating without the consent of a majority of the Board of Governors would be subject to penalties as specified in the NHL Constitution - up to the involuntary termination of the franchise.

Exactly....People forget the TRUE meaning of the word "franchise"
 

KevFist

is best pony
Oct 22, 2006
5,100
2
Birmingham, AL
www.mk837.com
Yeah, we've heard that about 1,234,423,849,452,543,878,345.12326287965 times already. We've also explained the Atlanta Septoturd Group shell game between the Thrashers, Hawks and Philips Arena the same amount of times.

Basically, you can show a loss however you like.
 

Dado

Guest
I'm thinking somewhat like the Verizon Center / Wizards / Capitals here in DC.

I am unfamiliar with the particulars - if you have a chance I'd like learn more.

Because it seems a local buyer is going to HAVE to have some kind of sweetheart arena deal with ASG, but if ASG is complaining about money now, it's not clear to me how a sweetheart deal keeps them in the bling they've grown accustomed to.
 

MountainHawk

Registered User
Sep 29, 2005
12,771
0
Salem, MA
NHL By-Law 36 would argue against the first sentence, and any team relocating without the consent of a majority of the Board of Governors would be subject to penalties as specified in the NHL Constitution - up to the involuntary termination of the franchise.
Good luck enforcing that when it goes to court.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
Yeah, we've heard that about 1,234,423,849,452,543,878,345.12326287965 times already. We've also explained the Atlanta Septoturd Group shell game between the Thrashers, Hawks and Philips Arena the same amount of times.

Basically, you can show a loss however you like.

I disagree.

The owners have publicly claimed that they lose X amount per season on the Thrashers operation. I understand the attempt by Atlanta fans to mitigate the perceived damage to their market by claiming that losses elsewhere have been attributed to the Thrashers; however, if the NHL agreed with you they'd most certainly have disputed such claims by the owners. They haven't. What they instead have done is accommodate the current owners' request to exit their ownership deal and may allow relocation of the franchise if a deal to find local ownership isn't consummated - if media reports are correct.

That doesn't sound to me like the league disagree with the current owner's claims. It appears conversely from afar that they agree, given their blase reaction to all of the potential relocation chatter.
 

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
29,283
8,702
Good luck enforcing that when it goes to court.
I'll let kdb shoot down your hypothesis. Goodness knows he's only done it about 1200 times in other threads when people start in with "______ can move his team wherever he wants."
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,280
1,356
Duluth, GA
The owners have publicly claimed that they lose X amount per season on the Thrashers operation. I understand the attempt by Atlanta fans to mitigate the perceived damage to their market by claiming that losses elsewhere have been attributed to the Thrashers; however, if the NHL agreed with you they'd most certainly have disputed such claims by the owners. They haven't.

Regardless of what any of us choose to believe, I'm sure this will all come out in the court battle between King & Spalding and AS, LLC. In an effort to prove their damages claim, they'll need to submit those books as evidence.

It'll all come out in the end. Every single dirty lie.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
Regardless of what any of us choose to believe, I'm sure this will all come out in the court battle between King & Spalding and AS, LLC. In an effort to prove their damages claim, they'll need to submit those books as evidence.

It'll all come out in the end. Every single dirty lie.

You are most certainly free to believe whatever you wish; I'm simply stating that in my opinion the NHL's actions to date do not exactly back the claims made by the poster that I was replying to.
 

dj4aces

An Intricate Piece of Infinity
Dec 17, 2007
6,280
1,356
Duluth, GA
You are most certainly free to believe whatever you wish; I'm simply stating that in my opinion the NHL's actions to date do not exactly back the claims made by the poster that I was replying to.

I know. I'm just saying that no one knows for sure, given AS, LLC's lack of trustworthiness.

I understand it's your opinion, and you have every right to hold it. I'm just waiting for the truth to come out in court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad