Can the NHL STOP Melnyk from moving to Quebec City ( or anywhere else )?

[voyageur]

Ottawa DOES have access to all of Quebec and Atlantic Canada with their regional deal with Bell. Ottawa and Montreal share the same regional footprint.

But Ottawa's following is mostly limited to the Ottawa valley, Northern Ontario. They are not an anti-Montreal franchise. More like the Islanders to the Rangers. There are still a good many Habs fans in Ottawa. Quebec is a rival, in market, in stature and culture, and would represent a real rivalry for the Canadiens, and their brand in the province. But I still think for reasons I mentioned before about economic instability, that Ottawa is the preferred market of the NHL.

 

[Fenway]

But Ottawa's following is mostly limited to the Ottawa valley, Northern Ontario. They are not an anti-Montreal franchise. More like the Islanders to the Rangers. There are still a good many Habs fans in Ottawa. Quebec is a rival, in market, in stature and culture, and would represent a real rivalry for the Canadiens, and their brand in the province. But I still think for reasons I mentioned before about economic instability, that Ottawa is the preferred market of the NHL.

Wouldn't it be fair to say that US-born executives of the NHL based in New York do not understand the Francophone market in Canada?

What really saddened me was Quebec fans never had the chance to say Adieu to the Nords like fans in Winnipeg and Hartford did.



Less than a month after this game they were gone to Denver and the cash-strapped owners in Montreal had Bettman to thank. The Canadiens in 1995 were a mess as building the new arena was far more expensive than planned and the Nords were very popular on the eastern side of the Island of Montreal.

Mickey Cohen who was the CEO of Molson found the people in Colorado that made the Nords owner an offer he could not refuse. @Killion might have more background on Cohen but ironically Molson itself would be taken over by Colorado factions.

If the Nords had not stumbled in the 1995 first round against the Rangers they might have won the Cup.

 

[BonkTastic]

The Senators have tried to cultivate the francophone market but with little success and the team being in Ontario might be the reason.

If you had grown up in this area, you'd know that it's not "because the team is from Ontario" that the team hasn't successfully marketed to the Hull/Gatineau/Vanier. It's because their efforts to market to those groups have been half-assed and borderline negligent.

I mean, all of Eastern Ontario, pretty much all of Ontario east of St Laurent Boulevard, is francophone. Franco-Ontarien. Proud to be from Ontario. This is a huge part of the local fanbase that has always been disengaged, largely due to the team's utter disfunction in catering to that audience, and it has nothing to do with the team "being from Ontario". They are also from Ontario.

Speaking about the Francophone populations that reside in Quebec (Hull/Gatineau/Aylmer, etc...), the team's effort to market the team there has been even worse.

This market is very peculiar, and I'll be honest - it's going to take more than spending a 3-day weekend here to understand exactly how weird it is: the East-West english/french divide within the Ontario part of the city, the legacy of the Hull Olympiques with their ties to the Habs-centric media sphere and french language rights north of us in Hull/Gatineau, the legacy of Leafs and Habs fans in this area, the TV rights issues that historically have roadblocked the team's ability to advertise outside of city limits, and the past decade of short-sighted advertising efforts have excluded the entire city east of Vanier Parkway and basically pretended that Gatineau doesn't exist (not to mention basically being one of the worst team PR departments in the entire league in general over the past decade).

 

[SunDancer]

To which I still ask...if a market is THAT much better than Ottawa, why would the other Owners want to relocate Melnyk there instead of collect the expansion fee? Or, would the relocation fee be set the same as the expansion fee, making it prohibitive for Melnyk.

Bettman said that 32 is not a magic number.

The owners don't want a relocation under any circumstances and you're right, they would always prefer an expansion fee over a relocation fee. Too many headaches with a relocation ... negative PR in abandoned city, perception of league instability, relocation city encroaching into an existing team's market and realignment issues.

But if we're speculating about Melnyk making a rogue move, he may have the support of some owners if it's a big US market. Moving the Sens to Quebec doesn't benefit anybody but the folks in QC.

 

[MNNumbers]

The owners don't want a relocation under any circumstances and you're right, they would always prefer an expansion fee over a relocation fee. Too many headaches with a relocation ... negative PR in abandoned city, perception of league instability, relocation city encroaching into an existing team's market and realignment issues.

But if we're speculating about Melnyk making a rogue move, he may have the support of some owners if it's a big US market. Moving the Sens to Quebec doesn't benefit anybody but the folks in QC.

True, but.....

Also, as far as US publicity goes, no one here really cares much about either Ottawa or Quebec. One would think that it would promote a view of the NHL as being unstable as a league, etc.... But in reality, it's well possible that no one here would even bat at eye at the move.

On the other hand, north of the border, everyone who cares knows the story of Melnyk, etc.... So, again, no problem.

It's well understood that NHL is not expanding to Quebec, so the whole "relocation vs Expansion" argument doesn't really play there.

I maintain that most posters here are correct: The Sens aren't going anywhere.

But I'm not at all sure about that....

 

[Mightygoose]

The owners don't want a relocation under any circumstances and you're right, they would always prefer an expansion fee over a relocation fee. Too many headaches with a relocation ... negative PR in abandoned city, perception of league instability, relocation city encroaching into an existing team's market and realignment issues.

But if we're speculating about Melnyk making a rogue move, he may have the support of some owners if it's a big US market. Moving the Sens to Quebec doesn't benefit anybody but the folks in QC.

The NFL has just had 2 relocations and a 3rd one on the way, no one really thinks of that league is unstable. They may have issues but franchise stability is not one of them.

In all 3 of those cases, these we're owners that moved the teams themselves to new markets and in all cases they either were able to build their own stadium (Rams) or had leases in place in the new location.

Bringing this back to Ottawa, Melnyk has neither. Even in the OP it suggests a sale would happen after he moves to QC so there isn't a scenario where he can move and keep 100% of the team. With at least one local offer made, the NHL would have a huge PR issue on their hand if they allowed the team to move with even a partial sale involved.

 

[SunDancer]

As long as Quebecor control the arena the Sens are one of the few team in bad shape that I don't see moving to Qc. The TV contract just does not work out. Now if that change, if the city and Quebecor agree one day to end their partnership that would be a big indicator that something is cooking. Now to be fair TVA Sports does have some Sens games as part of their national French package. Could we see a situation where they suck it up for the rest of the current TV contract knowing that they can eventually kick BCE out anyway.

Now if were speculating the big screw you to the league from Melnyk would be Hamilton.

Hamilton would definitely be the ultimate "screw you" to the league but pulling off something that big would require support in key places and a lot of resources ... something Melnyk lacks.

Melnyk could look at Hamilton but the arena today is no longer suitable to be a NHL facility as it needs serious renovations. Then you have to pay the Leafs and most likely the Sabres an indemnification fee. QC as a territory is free and clear.

True. And considering that Melnyk isn't savvy enough to coordinate a new arena in his own market, we can forget about him initiating a large development anywhere outside of it, let alone Hamilton.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Nordiques would have access to regions that Ottawa doesn't, mainly the Saguenay, and certainly rallies Quebec as the anti-Montreal team.

Did you not see this map? It shows the Regional TV markets for Canadian Based NHL Franchises.

Notice the Senators (Shared) Regional Market consists of Eastern Ontario, and Everything east of the Ottawa river tot he Atlantic Ocean ........ pretty sure that includes the Saguenay

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

But Ottawa's following is mostly limited to the Ottawa valley, Northern Ontario. .

Again, look at the Map (above) Northern Ontario Is Leaf/Jets shared Regional territory ...... Not Senators.

 

[JofaKing25]

Alright here is my opinion. so since melynk has filed his lawsuit for I think around 500 million no real news has come out in regards to it since then. IMO I believe there will be a settlement and I think OSEG who own the redblacks and 67s will purchase the team in tandem with Devcore and the Desmarais family. This will happen over time and probably will be announced soon as the NHL just announced the Seattle deal this past week. As a former season ticket holder, I can tell how much the Mood around the arena and city has changed for the Senators and I and everyone else want the Senators to be sustainable but it starts in the Business Operations and having a total overhaul of the team Business Operations. This will hopefully breed new life into the team and get the Fans back in the team's good graces. I do think it is possible but will not be announced till after the playoffs. Bettman saved the team before because he does not want to lose out on his deal with Rogers and Bell.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

It is fairly well established that the League cannot prohibit an owner from moving. A new owner may be obliged to commit to stay in the location for a certain period, the League is rumored to request seven years’ commitment.

However, as well established in Coyotes/Basillie saga, the League has the right to approve or reject a new owner and thus Melnyk would not be able to sell Senators after the move without the League’s consent.

From the NHL Constitution
4.2 Territorial Rights of League The League shall have exclusive control of the playing of hockey games by Member Clubs in the home territory of each member, subject to the rights hereinafter granted to members. The members shall have the right to and agree to operate professional hockey clubs and play the League schedule in their respective cities or boroughs as indicated opposite their signatures hereto. No member shall transfer its club and franchise to a different city or borough. No additional cities or boroughs shall be added to the League circuit without the consent of three-fourths of all the members of the League. Any admission of new members with franchises to operate in any additional cities or boroughs shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4.3.

 

[MNNumbers]

From the NHL Constitution
4.2 Territorial Rights of League The League shall have exclusive control of the playing of hockey games by Member Clubs in the home territory of each member, subject to the rights hereinafter granted to members. The members shall have the right to and agree to operate professional hockey clubs and play the League schedule in their respective cities or boroughs as indicated opposite their signatures hereto. No member shall transfer its club and franchise to a different city or borough. No additional cities or boroughs shall be added to the League circuit without the consent of three-fourths of all the members of the League. Any admission of new members with franchises to operate in any additional cities or boroughs shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4.3.

This might well be the NHL Constitution. However, in the US, US trade law has established precedent that sports leagues cannot prohibit franchise relocations, although they can influence them through relocation fees, which are to be an evaluation of the difference in value of the markets involved. That means that, in the US anyway, regardless of the NHL Constitution, the league cannot stop an owner from moving his team. This is, in fact, how the Stars came to be in Dallas, rather than Minnesota. Awful owner, as a result the market turning on him. No chance of public cash for a new arena under his ownership. So, he found a different market to play in.

The big question, which I have not seen answered, is how Canadian law would feel about that. Or, even, the legalities of a league which plays in 2 countries. Is US law applicable? Or, Canadian? Where are the legal NHL headquarters? Does that factor in? All these are questions for the courts, and we don't have solid answers as of yet about them.

 

[patnyrnyg]

If Melnyk moves to Quebec city what happens to the B-Sens any thing Senators whould be toxic in Ontario would the AHL team take Vancouver's Place in utica.

Binghamton Senators? Binghamton is not in Ontario.

 

[patnyrnyg]

For how long does the tv contract run with TSN? Quebecor could buy the team with the understanding they just have to wait for the television rights.

As someone pointed out, the league does have to approve the relocation. However, would the owners turn it down? I remember hearing owners generally will not vote against each other in these cases as they do not want to create enemies that would cause something they want voted down out of spite.

 

[LeHab]

The big question, which I have not seen answered, is how Canadian law would feel about that. Or, even, the legalities of a league which plays in 2 countries. Is US law applicable? Or, Canadian? Where are the legal NHL headquarters? Does that factor in? All these are questions for the courts, and we don't have solid answers as of yet about them.

Closes precedent in Canada AFAIK is the following when Balsillie complained:

Proposed acquisition of predators

In the Bureau's view, the facts do not establish that the NHL or any of its representatives interfered with or otherwise obstructed the potential sale of the Nashville Predators Franchise for the purpose of lessening or preventing competition. The NHL was consistently of the view that the Nashville Predators Franchise should not be relocated at this time, irrespective of where the Franchise would be relocated. For the reasons discussed above, the NHL had a legitimate interest in ensuring that the Predators Franchise is successful in Nashville and that any prospective purchaser continued, at least for the near term, to attempt to succeed in Nashville.
Overall, the Bureau does not consider the restrictions on transfers of ownership or the relocation of franchises as applied by the NHL in the present matter to constitute a practice of anti‑competitive acts for the purpose of section 79 of the Act. The Bureau found that in the present circumstances, the NHL's policies were not implemented with an intended predatory, exclusionary or disciplinary purpose. Rather, such policies were applied in furtherance of the legitimate business interests of the NHL as discussed above.

Competition Bureau Concludes Examination into National Hockey League Franchise Ownership Transfer and Relocation Policies - Competition Bureau Canada

As stated, this is very case-by-case. However current relocation policies were not found to be inherently anti competitive, depends on the overall context. I think this is the right approach. An owner should not have the right to move where he wants (say Dubai or into territory of another franchise) and the league should also not impose unreasonable restrictions if there is a good business case.

 

[MNNumbers]

Closes precedent in Canada AFAIK is the following when Balsillie complained:

Competition Bureau Concludes Examination into National Hockey League Franchise Ownership Transfer and Relocation Policies - Competition Bureau Canada

As stated, this is very case-by-case. However current relocation policies were not found to be inherently anti competitive, depends on the overall context. I think this is the right approach. An owner should not have the right to move where he wants (say Dubai or into territory of another franchise) and the league should also not impose unreasonable restrictions if there is a good business case.

Without reading that through, I assume it means that, if Melnyk wanted to move to Quebec on his own, and the NHL objected, that we would see a full blown case in Canadian courts? I'd relish that.....Can you imagine the discovery phase?

 

[garnetpalmetto]

Binghamton Senators? Binghamton is not in Ontario.

In this case the B's for Belleville, not Binghamton. The Sens relocated their AHL team from Binghamton in 2017. Binghamton's with the Devils now after the Devils moved there from Albany.

 

[LeHab]

Without reading that through, I assume it means that, if Melnyk wanted to move to Quebec on his own, and the NHL objected, that we would see a full blown case in Canadian courts? I'd relish that.....Can you imagine the discovery phase?

Good entertainment for us.

 

[patnyrnyg]

In this case the B's for Belleville, not Binghamton. The Sens relocated their AHL team from Binghamton in 2017. Binghamton's with the Devils now after the Devils moved there from Albany.

Oh ok, thanks. After I posted I thought, "Maybe the Sens moved their AHL team and he means a B-city in Ontario?"

 

[LeHab]

Back in Boston after working Sunday night's game in Ottawa and THREE different Sens gameday employees told me the same thing - Sunday was possibly the last time the Bruins will play in Ottawa.

They all believe that Melnyk will bolt for Quebec City and the NHL can not stop him. Then once the team has relocated he can then sell part or all of the team to people based from QC.

Were they trying to sell you memorabilia? Grab your Ottawa Boston souvenir now before the team is gone, last chance!

 

[cbcwpg]

This might well be the NHL Constitution. However, in the US, US trade law has established precedent that sports leagues cannot prohibit franchise relocations, although they can influence them through relocation fees, which are to be an evaluation of the difference in value of the markets involved. That means that, in the US anyway, regardless of the NHL Constitution, the league cannot stop an owner from moving his team. This is, in fact, how the Stars came to be in Dallas, rather than Minnesota. Awful owner, as a result the market turning on him. No chance of public cash for a new arena under his ownership. So, he found a different market to play in.

The big question, which I have not seen answered, is how Canadian law would feel about that. Or, even, the legalities of a league which plays in 2 countries. Is US law applicable? Or, Canadian? Where are the legal NHL headquarters? Does that factor in? All these are questions for the courts, and we don't have solid answers as of yet about them.

Given that the NHL can't legally stop a move in the U.S. and maybe this law hasn't been tested in Canada, but would not stop a move hypothetically... then what is to stop the NHL ( Bettman ) from slapping down a $650,000,000 relocation fee on Melnyk? Because from what I have read, the commissioner can call for any relocation fee he sees fit to pull out of his ass... depending upon what he see the relocated market to be worth, again, in his opinion.

 

[MNNumbers]

Given that the NHL can't legally stop a move in the U.S. and maybe this law hasn't been tested in Canada, but would not stop a move hypothetically... then what is to stop the NHL ( Bettman ) from slapping down a $650,000,000 relocation fee on Melnyk? Because from what I have read, the commissioner can call for any relocation fee he sees fit to pull out of his ass... depending upon what he see the relocated market to be, again, in his opinion.

Could not do that in US, because Melnyk would take the relocation fee to court. It's supposed to be as assessment of the difference between the 2 markets. The league would have to explain the difference, and a 650M difference would obviously NOT fly.

Again, as far as I know, this has not been fully tested in Canadian law.

 

[voyageur]

Again, look at the Map (above) Northern Ontario Is Leaf/Jets shared Regional territory ...... Not Senators.

Yes, yes. But through RDS I would figure that the Sens would reach
as far Sudbury, as francophone Ontario, which is not Leafs territory, would have more interest in them. I don't think there are too many Sens followers in the Saguenay, Val D'Or is probably their regional limit of attraction.

 

[NorthCoast]

Without reading that through, I assume it means that, if Melnyk wanted to move to Quebec on his own, and the NHL objected, that we would see a full blown case in Canadian courts? I'd relish that.....Can you imagine the discovery phase?

It's the competition bureau. So basically they would get involved if the move was not in the interest of fair competition.

In the Balsillie case, the NHL argued that blocking him from buying the team was not a monopolistic act by the league because their was a legitimate number of benefits to keeping the team in arizona:

1. creating and enhancing spectator interest by preserving traditional team rivalries and fostering the development of new ones;
2. encouraging investment by private parties and municipalities in arena construction and related infrastructure;
3. respecting the investment made by private parties in the supply of refreshments, parking, transportation, and team and league paraphernalia relating to the franchise;
4. attracting spectators and corporate sponsors by showing a strong commitment to a local market and the league as a whole;
5. ensuring that the sport is being appropriately promoted and that the reputation and goodwill of the league and its individual teams are not being compromised; and
6. maximizing revenues generated by the league in the form of television and media coverage rights by promoting the overall stability of the franchises that constitute the league and creating an appropriate regional balance to ensure that the greatest number of spectators is reached.

While some of these would also be achieved by starting a franchise to QC, moving the team from Ottawa would pretty much break every one of these the clauses above that the NHL used to block out Balsillie.

Does it still apply if Melnyk is moving on his own...maybe not?

But if any new buyer, or significant new financial partner was involved in moving the team to a same/worse market than Ottawa, when new local owners were willing to keep it in Ottawa...then it would be very hard for the NHL to make the case that they were not using Monopolistic power to choose the new market over the old market, because they would essentially have to argue against the exact points they provided to the bureau a decade ago.

Caveat...I am not a lawyer. if there is one out there, please clarify and correct.

 

[Centrum Hockey]

Could not do that in US, because Melnyk would take the relocation fee to court. It's supposed to be as assessment of the difference between the 2 markets. The league would have to explain the difference, and a 650M difference would obviously NOT fly.

Again, as far as I know, this has not been fully tested in Canadian law.

The clippers and the rams owners both threatened to take the nba and nfl to court over a move and the league backed down both times and the clippers moved to la and the rams to St. Louis.