News Article: Lebreton talks in mediation to salvage deal

[supsens]

Recent rumoured offer was north of $600M: .

I said if he is forced into a position to sell. i.e. he's broke and can't continue to own the team, and is put into a position where selling the team is the only viable option.

Show me anything that references your position that an out of town owner would be allowed to come in and buy a franchise and move it without anything else happening first. Come on. Put your research hat on and backup your position.

Stop positioning your assumptions like they're fact. It's lazy, and disingenuous.

Oh right, some random internet rumours. How do you know the 600 wasn't from out of towners. Or that it's true? That's right you don't.
So your lazy assumptions have the same value as mine. Funny how that works out

 

[BatherSeason]

Oh right, some random internet rumours. How do you know the 600 wasn't from out of towners. Or that it's true? That's right you don't.
So your lazy assumptions have the same value as mine. Funny how that works out

Did you just call your assumptions lazy?

 

[MNNumbers]

I believe that was for around 61% of the team.

Carolina owner sold 61% of the team for $420M USD. That would put 100% of ownership at $688M USD. Included in the sale was the 'operating rights' to PNC arena.

Here's an interesting powerpoint about how Forbes differentiates price vs value for sports franchises.
Educmate yo selves.
http://people.stern.nyu.edu/adamodar/pdfiles/country/MITSportsPresentation.pdf

Maybe you have information I do not. This article:
Winners and Losers in Tom Dundon’s Purchase of the Carolina Hurricanes

Says that the portion he purchased was based on a TOTAL franchise value of 460M, and his rights to the remainder, should he exercise them, would be based on a TOTAL franchise value of 550M. That makes the average total value 500M. And, of course, he also purchased a nice arena management contract with that.

All of which is less than the 650M for the Seattle franchise, which is the point, I guess.

 

[slamigo]

Maybe you have information I do not. This article:
Winners and Losers in Tom Dundon’s Purchase of the Carolina Hurricanes

Says that the portion he purchased was based on a TOTAL franchise value of 460M, and his rights to the remainder, should he exercise them, would be based on a TOTAL franchise value of 550M. That makes the average total value 500M. And, of course, he also purchased a nice arena management contract with that.

All of which is less than the 650M for the Seattle franchise, which is the point, I guess.

From Forbes article I found:

Media outlets are reporting the value of the sale as $550 million. Not true. Two people with first-hand knowledge of the sale have told me the enterprise value was $420 million. Still, the sale price is 13.5% more than our valuation of the NHL team last month.

Carolina Hurricanes Sold To Tom Dundon For $420 Million

 

[HSF]

Expansion always costs more cause its almost paying your way into the exclusive club of being an NHL owner

Every owner wants a cut

 

[Relapsing]

Oh right, some random internet rumours. How do you know the 600 wasn't from out of towners. Or that it's true? That's right you don't.
So your lazy assumptions have the same value as mine. Funny how that works out

The ****? [MOD] I clearly positioned myself earlier that this was a rumored offer.

Let me directly quote myself, as you seem to be confused

Either that, or he was told to not accept it as it is undervalue compared to what Seattle will pay for a new team. Not saying that's necessarily true, but the rumours are out there, and the BOG does have to approve any sale.

I do love that you admitted your assumptions are lazy, in trying to turn this back on me. Just delicious irony.

You've put yourself in the position you're in, don't try and deflect. The first course of action will not be to sell the team to an out of town owner whose only intention is to move the team. Full Stop. It will always be to find a local owner first.

 

[NorthCoast]

. Is it not just as easy to say if the market cannot keep up to the growth a new market will be needed? If it is a profit business It seems like the city and fans can't afford a team. It's not a 'keep loosing millions' business like you state.

Except the only market that keeps being brought up is QC, and they are quickly being priced out because as has been illustrated numerous times the QC market is simply not as good a market as the Ottawa market by any economic metric. Please feel free to quote any numbers, GDP, Pop, TV Market size, corp base, etc. etc. all swing in Ottawa's favor with numbers to back it up, so just saying that "qc has rabid fans willing to support the team" means nothing.

Devcore/Demarais is potentially willing to cover the team cost ($400-500 mil), the debt ($200 mil) and the stadium ($100-200 mil after condo rev).

If QC thought that they could get ROI on an $700-900 mil investment then they would have a team already.

 

[MNNumbers]

From Forbes article I found:



Carolina Hurricanes Sold To Tom Dundon For $420 Million

Which article seems to say that he didn't pay 420M. He paid his ownership %age of the team * 420M. (ie if it was 61%, then he paid 61% * 420M or about 250M)

I won't argue that Forbes gets values wrong, because there is no way to count that buying a team is an emotional buy. But in this case, the value of the team - the TOTAL value, was less than the expansion fee to Seattle. That's my point.

 

[NorthCoast]

The F*ck? I clearly positioned myself earlier that this was a rumored offer.

Let me directly quote myself, as you seem to be confused



I do love that you admitted your assumptions are lazy, in trying to turn this back on me. Just delicious irony.

You've put yourself in the position you're in, don't try and deflect. The first course of action will not be to sell the team to an out of town owner whose only intention is to move the team. Full Stop. It will always be to find a local owner first.

Just to hammer this point home further. The NHL made a legal case to the Canadian Competition Committee during the Balsillie fiasco that the NHL had the right to block out Balsillie from buying/moving the coyotes to Hamilton because it was in the best interest of competition to keep teams where they are whenever possible.

If the NHL were to reverse that position it could open the door to billionaires buying up small market teams and moving them to larger markets regardless of NHL control.

 

[supsens]

Bettman publicly back the lawsuit?

Yes he said this project is not viable for reasons you have read in the complaint.

 

[BatherSeason]

The ****? [MOD] I clearly positioned myself earlier that this was a rumored offer.

Let me directly quote myself, as you seem to be confused



I do love that you admitted your assumptions are lazy, in trying to turn this back on me. Just delicious irony.

You've put yourself in the position you're in, don't try and deflect. The first course of action will not be to sell the team to an out of town owner whose only intention is to move the team. Full Stop. It will always be to find a local owner first.

Yawn. Are we are once again circling back to relocation talk? Pretty sure its run its course and it seems as though (based on some posts here) that Melnyk is once again getting desperate. I wonder when Lebretonfacts.com will start their new propaganda campaign?

 

[BatherSeason]

Yes he said this project is not viable for reasons you have read in the complaint.

Is there a source/link to this?? Can't seem to find this anywhere.

 

[Tuna99]

. Is it not just as easy to say if the market cannot keep up to the growth a new market will be needed? If it is a profit business It seems like the city and fans can't afford a team. It's not a 'keep loosing millions' business like you state.

I’m not saying the market can’t keep up, I’m saying the owner can’t keep up.

The Desmarais group thinks it can make a business with the Sens, why would you stick with this sad case owner when ou have 2 Billionaires with expertise in entertainment, construction, sprots and culture sitting there saying to Bettman ‘I can improve profits, build you an arena and provide expertise to the NHL the Ottawa market is lacking’

What’s Bettman supposed to say? ‘billionaires I’m good, I’m gonna stick with the guy who sued a player and said Crosby should be kicked out of the NHL and threatened to move the team.’

If you want Loyalty in the NHL - buy a dog.

 

[supsens]

The ****? [MOD] I clearly positioned myself earlier that this was a rumored offer.

Let me directly quote myself, as you seem to be confused



I do love that you admitted your assumptions are lazy, in trying to turn this back on me. Just delicious irony.

You've put yourself in the position you're in, don't try and deflect. The first course of action will not be to sell the team to an out of town owner whose only intention is to move the team. Full Stop. It will always be to find a local owner first.

No you basicly wrote off anything I said because it's 'lazy assumptions', yet your rumours and own 'lazy assumptions' some how hold more value.
The fun part is you can't even see the irony here.

 

[supsens]

I’m not saying the market can’t keep up, I’m saying the owner can’t keep up.

The Desmarais group thinks it can make a business with the Sens, why would you stick with this sad case owner when ou have 2 Billionaires with expertise in entertainment, construction, sprots and culture sitting there saying to Bettman ‘I can improve profits, build you an arena and provide expertise to the NHL the Ottawa market is lacking’

What’s Bettman supposed to say? ‘billionaires I’m good, I’m gonna stick with the guy who sued a player and said Crosby should be kicked out of the NHL and threatened to move the team.’

If you want Loyalty in the NHL - buy a dog.

The NHL is extremely loyal to it's owners. Do you think he's going to open the door and say "anyone with more money then any current owner can just come take a team"
On top of that Bettman works for EM, you understand that right?

 

[The Lewler]

No you basicly wrote off anything I said because it's 'lazy assumptions', yet your rumours and own 'lazy assumptions' some how hold more value.
The fun part is you can't even see the irony here.

None of this back and forth is fun.

 

[slamigo]

Which article seems to say that he didn't pay 420M. He paid his ownership %age of the team * 420M. (ie if it was 61%, then he paid 61% * 420M or about 250M)

I won't argue that Forbes gets values wrong, because there is no way to count that buying a team is an emotional buy. But in this case, the value of the team - the TOTAL value, was less than the expansion fee to Seattle. That's my point.

I think it's more complicated than that. Entreprize value takes into consideration the amount of debt that the team was carrying. The Forbes article states that prior to the sale, the team had $260M USD debt. After the sale, it's down to around $100M USD. It's also unclear how this constitutes an actual 'sale' as both parties now claim to be partners. Dondon owns 61% of the team and Karamanos still owns 39%.

 

[Relapsing]

No you basicly wrote off anything I said because it's 'lazy assumptions', yet your rumours and own 'lazy assumptions' some how hold more value.
The fun part is you can't even see the irony here.

I will always write off lazy assumptions: You make a lot of them, so it's easy to do. I have referenced known NHL processes, and clearly stated when I was referencing a rumor or a speculative statement, like the tweet above about the rumoured offer.

All you've done here is try and perpetuate a myth as an inevitability. It's tiring.

 

[harrisb]

Yes he said this project is not viable for reasons you have read in the complaint.

That's what you call backing a lawsuit? Here is the direct quote:

“Let’s not draw any conclusions yet. This is a complicated situation, although in its original form, for a lot of reasons, some of which you’ve read in the complaint that’s been filed, the project as originally envisioned unfortunately isn’t viable.”

So the first thing you did was draw a conclusion, second you assumed that he backed the lawsuit (both wrong). He clearly stated that SOME of the reasons you've read in the complaint without saying which ones. Those could be the deterioted relationship, they could also be that given Melnyk's financial situation the project isn't viable for him. See how easy that was?

This is in no way, shape or form a Bettman endorsement of the lawsuit, that would be incredibly stupid.

He also said this which is just parroting Melnyk:

“For a whole host of reasons it would be nice (to have the team move downtown), But Mr. Melnyk has said if he has to make Canadian Tire Centre work, he can do that."

Finally, he also said this:

“There are some places where we have been involved in (and) I think (been) very constructive — Edmonton, Pittsburgh, among others come to mind, there have been other places where we’ve been disinvited by one of the participants." “We don’t like to go where we’re not welcome if it’s not going to be helpful.”

So are they in or out? Nobody knows but we do know for sure that he said this: "I would say I’m more disappointed with how this played out" which is not exactly a ringing endorsement for the Euge.

Your play...

 

[RaMai]

The NHL is extremely loyal to it's owners. Do you think he's going to open the door and say "anyone with more money then any current owner can just come take a team"
On top of that Bettman works for EM, you understand that right?

And because of the fact that he has Bettman in his pocket he took the stage at the BOG (unusual) and cried them a river...?

 

[Relapsing]

No the problem is you think what you think matters more than what i think.
I think what I think matters the same as what you think. You talk down to people and insult them.
There is no myth and no I didn't. You are lieing

You've surprisingly identified the problem with a lot of news these days: This notion that all opinions have equal merit, even those that are factually incorrect, or made in bad faith.

Don't be upset because I think what you say doesn't matter. Take it as an opportunity to think objectively and challenge your own incorrect assumptions. You might end up with something worthwhile to say.

 

[supsens]

You've surprisingly identified the problem with a lot of news these days: This notion that all opinions have equal merit, even those that are factually incorrect, or made in bad faith.

Don't be upset because I think what you say doesn't matter. Take it as an opportunity to think objectively and challenge your own incorrect assumptions. You might end up with something worthwhile to say.

Im not upset I am sad for you and your inability to open your mind. Bad faith? You still parrot that because you read it in another post one time? Lol
You think your post is worthwhile? Sad

 

[supsens]

That's what you call backing a lawsuit? Here is the direct quote:

“Let’s not draw any conclusions yet. This is a complicated situation, although in its original form, for a lot of reasons, some of which you’ve read in the complaint that’s been filed, the project as originally envisioned unfortunately isn’t viable

Your play...

This isn’t viable the reasons are in the lawsuit.
Stop being dishonest in an attempt to prove me wrong. It is clear as day

 

[topshelf15]

And people are worried about the fanbase here......Its been almost a year and a half of hell,but the arguing is still going...We f***en care ,thats the entire point some here fail to realise

 

[harrisb]

This isn’t viable the reasons are in the lawsuit.
Stop being dishonest in an attempt to prove me wrong. It is clear as day

You are wrong, stop being dishonest by cherry picking pieces of a post to reply to rather than responding with the entire context. Context matters and you are purposely trying to deflect. He said SOME of the reasons are in the lawsuit but you made the assumption that it meant he backs it, you left out all the other evidence I positioned. I gotta wonder what your motive was to spend the time to edit my original post?

 

[harrisb]

This isn’t viable the reasons are in the lawsuit.
Stop being dishonest in an attempt to prove me wrong. It is clear as day

You are wrong, stop being dishonest by cherry picking pieces of a post to reply to rather than responding with the entire context. Context matters and you are purposely trying to deflect. He said SOME of the reasons are in the lawsuit but you made the assumption that it meant he backs it, you left out all the other evidence I positioned. I gotta wonder what your motive was to spend the time to edit my original post?