Bobster231*
Guest
Don't believe everything you hear in the media. Take that to the bank.
Media is just speculation almost 80 percent of the time.
Media is just speculation almost 80 percent of the time.
No, of course not. I dont think it'll come to that in Atlanta though.
Yeah, I was wondering about that. But I'm assuming this would be a self-imposed info. blackout by the parties involved, and NOT something that legally prevents any news from being released, no?
There is now a report that the all-cash offer for the Stars - the Stars! - is only $80M. Something seems to have gone seriously wrong with NHL franchise values.
One thing going wrong is that they are being reported, read, and interpreted without the benefit of knowledge. Half-witted sportswriters quote the cash portion of a transaction as "the price". i guess that means most of those sportswriters' "purchase price" for their house was about $25,000, since you obviously don't count the debt you are taking on. Yeesh.There is now a report that the all-cash offer for the Stars - the Stars! - is only $80M. Something seems to have gone seriously wrong with NHL franchise values.
There may not be an owner, but the NHL was able to enforce their rights: not even bankruptcy can challenge the NHL by-laws relating to ownership approval.If I offer you a deal that is guaranteed to leave you dead, there is no cost to you taking a likely-suicidal scorched earth alternative path of action. That's what happened in Phoenix - NHL tried to enforce the rights you described and bankruptcy court shoved it right up their backsides and two years on we're STILL sorting it out.
And there is STILL no local owner.
Something seems to have gone seriously wrong with NHL franchise values.
Hardly indicative of the Stars "actual" franchise value.
There is now a report that the all-cash offer for the Stars - the Stars! - is only $80M. Something seems to have gone seriously wrong with NHL franchise values.
...and they only have real value when being bought or sold, and only to those involved in the transaction.
Those saying here that the Balsillie case made it clear that the NHL has the right to deny teams permission to move are dead wrong. Baum actually ruled all the offers not good enough, so the NHL wound up coming in and taking over as the owner. Baum really avoided all of the big questions about league rights. I would also bet my life that if Glendale had taken the Balsillie cash offer to endorse his offer to the court, Baum would have granted the team to Balsillie and told the NHL to go to hell.
Those of you who think pro leagues have this huge power in courts and can do what they want should really look at the current climate. No court would rule that the NHL has the right to force an owner to sell locally at $110 million and ignore an outside offer of $200 million. It ain't gonna happen, and the NHL would not get into that fight with an existing owner. Again, the Balsillie case was totally different. New unapproved potential team owner, and the likely demand to move the team into somebody else's territory. There are no such complications here.
On a slightly different vein, why do you want owners to be able to sell to whomever they want? If that happened, then all the Canadian teams minus the Big 2 would pack up and move south (and they would have already).
Edmonton would be in Houston, the Sens in Kansas City, and Vancouver and Calgary would be sold as soon as their finances went south.
No, they're not.In what parallel universe would Kansas City bring in more money than the Ottawa Senators? Ottawa is in the Top 10 for revenue (as are all Canadian teams). Vancouver moving? Are you insane? Again, what US city (that doesn't currently have a team) could ever hope to pull in more money than Vancouver? Milwaukee? Vegas? Portland? Omaha?
One thing going wrong is that they are being reported, read, and interpreted without the benefit of knowledge. Half-witted sportswriters quote the cash portion of a transaction as "the price". i guess that means most of those sportswriters' "purchase price" for their house was about $25,000, since you obviously don't count the debt you are taking on. Yeesh.
Just to debunk the assertion of Dado above, "the all-cash offer" of $80M was a reported offer of mark Cuban, who offer was (i) NOT just for that amount, and (ii) was summarily dismissed, making it as valid as the $1 offer for the team from my mailman.
Actually, it is not indefensible in the least, but don't let that stop you.
To smokey, effectively what they are doing is to require that the effective date of any transaction for the club be the same date as the NHL acquired it. Any losses thereafter would constitute a closing adjustment to the purchase price.
One thing Fugu does have right is that the price is the price.
No, they're not.
REgarding Vancouver, I think the poster is saying they would have moved before they had a chance to be successful - years ago, when they were drawing flies.
Given their average attendance hasn't been under 14,000 - even in the dreadful Keenan/Messier days - since moving to the new rink, are you talking about the 1980s, or even further back when they were owned by the crooks in the early 70s?No, they're not.
REgarding Vancouver, I think the poster is saying they would have moved before they had a chance to be successful - years ago, when they were drawing flies.
There is now a report that the all-cash offer for the Stars - the Stars! - is only $80M. Something seems to have gone seriously wrong withNHL franchise valuesthe economy.
Are you certain? Because I dug up this link from the AMLaw Daily...Those saying here that the Balsillie case made it clear that the NHL has the right to deny teams permission to move are dead wrong.
Balsille offered about $240 million; the NHL offered $140 million. Judge Baum ended up accepting the bid from the NHL.Baum actually ruled all the offers not good enough, so the NHL wound up coming in and taking over as the owner.
Why? Judge Baum basically ruled that the NHL needs to approve a new owner, and that Balsillie wasn't approved, therefore, the franchise could not be sold to him...Baum really avoided all of the big questions about league rights. I would also bet my life that if Glendale had taken the Balsillie cash offer to endorse his offer to the court, Baum would have granted the team to Balsillie and told the NHL to go to hell.
Yet we have a court almost two years ago that did exactly that by allowing the NHL to purchase the Coyotes for $100 million less that Balsille, and the court even fortified that the league's by-laws must be followed, even in bankruptcy.Those of you who think pro leagues have this huge power in courts and can do what they want should really look at the current climate. No court would rule that the NHL has the right to force an owner to sell locally at $110 million and ignore an outside offer of $200 million.
Sure there are complications, compounded by the fact that Judge Baum ruled that the NHL has the right to approve ownership groups.It ain't gonna happen, and the NHL would not get into that fight with an existing owner. Again, the Balsillie case was totally different. New unapproved potential team owner, and the likely demand to move the team into somebody else's territory. There are no such complications here.
In what parallel universe would Kansas City bring in more money than the Ottawa Senators? Ottawa is in the Top 10 for revenue (as are all Canadian teams). Vancouver moving? Are you insane? Again, what US city (that doesn't currently have a team) could ever hope to pull in more money than Vancouver? Milwaukee? Vegas? Portland? Omaha?
Let TNSE present a big bag of money to Atlanta Spirit Group and see how fast TNSE is treated like Jim Balsille. No one can "sell and move" an existing franchise without the blessing of the NHL.
A
Let TNSE present a big bag of money to Atlanta Spirit Group and see how fast TNSE is treated like Jim Balsille. No one can "sell and move" an existing franchise without the blessing of the NHL.
I am simply arguing that the "sell and move" aspect is dead because the NHL must approve the sale. Now if you start talking about a "move then sell", that would be different.