Fight over Canucks ownership

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by I in the Eye, Aug 24, 2006.

View Users: View Users
  1. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
  2. CBJ goalie

    CBJ goalie Registered User

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    260
    Trophy Points:
    124
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    To me, that story is pure sensationalism - yes, it's a big story in the way it will be a big fight in court, but the future of the Canucks at stake?
    Give me a break.
     
  3. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
    In your opinion, what are all the possible implications you foresee - new personnel, more involved, "hands on" owner (Wang, Wirtz, etc.), simply status quo (McCaw and Beedie in a working partnership like McCaw and Aquilini), etc.?

    I don't think that the future of the Canucks are at stake - in that they will die... but new ownership can bring change to the day-to-day Canuck operations... and if McCaw and Beedie et. co don't get along now (due to these past events, court case, etc.), it could make for a very interesting partnership if Beedie wins - especially if it's a 50% ownership... don't you think? Or does Beedie et. co get 100% ownership if they win - and what are all the potential outcomes that come from this?

    I'm trying to wrap my brain around all of this - and like Daley, refrain from forming a strong opinion at this time :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2006
  4. CBJ goalie

    CBJ goalie Registered User

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    260
    Trophy Points:
    124
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    Pretty well I expect status quo - but overall, would hope that whatever combination of ownership group comes out of all of this, doesn't try and change the day-to-day operations of the Canucks, or the way business is conducted. And I don't believe it will either.

    I don't see any threat to McCaw losing his 50%, since Beedie only wanted 50% in the first place (from what I know) - so it'll be interesting to see how a court of law will rule on this.
    Did McCaw pull the deal on Beedie because Aquillini performed some "side-door" deal?

    We can surmise all we want, but should probably wait until more facts are known.
     
  5. kmad

    kmad riot survivor

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    34,119
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Location:
    Vancouver
    I'd much rather have Aquilini in charge than McCaw. Aquilini is a local businessman whereas McCaw's enterprises are based in Seattle and I'm not convinced McCaw gives two ***** about the Canucks more than as a business investment.
     
  6. Burke's Evil Spirit

    Burke's Evil Spirit Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2002
    Messages:
    17,336
    Likes Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Occupation:
    CS
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Aquilini is effectively in charge. He's the acting president, and the way Vancouver spent after what must have been a huge shortfall of income due to missing the 2006 playoffs is very encouraging.

    I've heard good things about Gaglardi, too, so him owning the franchise wouldn't exactly be catastrophic.

    What I'm trying to say is, I don't care who gets the Canucks.
     
  7. Burke's Evil Spirit

    Burke's Evil Spirit Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2002
    Messages:
    17,336
    Likes Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Occupation:
    CS
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Uh, the lawsuit purports that the Beedie/Gaglardi group had an agreement with McCaw to completely assume ownership of GM Place and the Vancouver Canucks. That is what they are seeking as compensation.
     
  8. kdb209

    kdb209 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,271
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    If that's the case, this could turn into Steve-Belkin-vs-The-Atlanta-Hawks-and-Thrashers, the Sequel.
     
  9. CrazyCanucks

    CrazyCanucks Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    2,150
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Umm did you forget who actually has stepped up and kept the Nucks here? Was it the Griffiths? No he had to bail because he was losing money. Who had lost millions of his money just to keep the team here? He could have sold the team just like he did the Grizz. Did anyone else step up and invest in the team that was losing millions?

    So who cares that Macaw doesn't show his face at the games. I would rather he pay all the bills than not have the team here. If he really didn't care about the Nucks, he would have sold the team to someone else and they might have re-located the team somewhere else.

    He has built the Nucks so they are a strong investment, so that local owners now realize how much of a good investment the team reall is. Look at what is going on. You have 2 parties that wanted the team in Oct 2004, and this is in the middle of a lockout!

    Look at Kerfoot and the Whitecaps. Noone has really seen him either and noone complains about that, but he is commited his own money to build a stadium downtown.

    I would rather have ownership like Macaw than that idiot Wang. At least Macaw doesn't think he is the GM and has a ******* everybody else attitude. He has good hockey people in place that take care of the hockey side, and he pays the bills

    Some people have very short memories :banghead:
     
  10. StevenintheATL

    StevenintheATL Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Coffee Route Sales
    Location:
    The ATL!
    As a Thrashers fan, I feel for the Canucks fans. Your ownership dispute is pretty intriguing, but in some ways pales to the whole situation here in Atlanta. Ours involves two sports teams, two pro sports leagues, an arena, and several judges. There's a good possibility that Steve Belkin eventually ends up with both the Hawks and Thrashers; of course, there'll be more lawsuits and injunctions before that even happens. Our ownership dispute is so messed up that Atlanta Spirit can't even bring in any additional investors and for a time could not make any sort of player deals (with some limited exceptions).

    Time-Warner several years ago had a lawsuit filed against them by David McDavid, who they had agreed to sell the Hawks, Thrashers, and Philip Arena operating rights to. When McDavid was taking a bit too long to finalize the deal, they quit negoiating with him and that's when the Atlanta Spirit LLC group came forward. McDavid filed suit a little more than two years ago, but nothing has been heard from him since. He perhaps quietly dropped it, but I wouldn't be surprised if after this ownership dispute is settled, his lawsuit gets revived.
     
  11. Hawker14

    Hawker14 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    innuendo is no better.
     
  12. sticknrink

    sticknrink Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    7,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    London
    And you complain about the garbage from cdc?

    If McCaw just saw it as a business investment:

    1) Why didn't he relocate to recoup expenses when the team was doing horribly?
    2) Why does he sit in the lower bowl during some playoff games?

    :shakehead Seriously, that was a stupid comment. McCaw is a fine owner and I'm very worried that Aquilini will butt in and not let the hockey people (Tamby/Nonis) not do their jobs.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"