Speculation: Melnyk and speculating about the sale of the team

Status
Not open for further replies.

SENATOR

Registered User
Feb 6, 2004
1,979
812
Ottawa
The last two years brought a lot of frustrations to all Sens fans around the world and in our beloved city. The Melnyk's road mapping, the grand plan, the schemes are now for everyone to see. Melnyk is keeping the team to the point, until receiving his portion of a payout for 20 million dollars of the NHL expansion dispersing fee in 2021. After this, 100% - there will be a sign "for sale" next to the Canadian Tire Center. For exactly this next step, he has to keep his payroll as low as possible. Preferably, he has to have only draft picks with no money attached to them and unsigned young stars to maximize the team's sale value and to pocket the profit as much as possible. Because he borrowed against the team - line of credit as a lien on a final sale is 250 million already, what we know at least. This is exactly why Melnyk's lieutenant Dorion in this scheme "la cloche à plongeurs" and is drafting off board or college players, or players committed to play in different league, or even players committed to go through military service as Lassi Thomson ( WTF???) and Pinto who is a galaxy far far away from NHL. It all points to the team sale, nothing else. They are drafting for sale, they are trading for sale, they are doing everything for sale.
 
Last edited:

Qward

Because! That's why!
Jul 23, 2010
18,936
5,901
Behind you, look out
I don't buy the argument that he's waiting for the expansion fees to sell. Any prospective buyer will build that into the offer -- 20 million is chump change when you're making an offer to buy a franchise for over 600 million.

It matters if it was listed in his divorce settlement that hs ex wife would receive a portion of the sale of the team.
$20M in his pocket now is better than $10 in his pocket after the sale of the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Lewler

FormentonTheFuture

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
7,761
3,732
I do think you're right that he will be selling in the next few years (based on no inside info, just my guess), but drafting Thomson would have nothing to do with that. The Finnish military thing is very easy to complete and would not delay any player's development or path to the NHL
 

GrantLemons

Church of FYOUS
Feb 3, 2013
1,997
1,584
Ottawa, ON
Oh my, I do believe that the title of this thread gave me an unreasonable and quite frankly innapropriately timed case of severe arousal.

Imma need to go see a doctor if this condition persists for more than four hours.

Don't worry, there's no "a friend of a friend of a friend of mine" story in this one. Should subside shortly.
 

2CHAINZ

Registered User
Feb 27, 2008
14,439
20,014
Oh my, I do believe that the title of this thread gave me an unreasonable and quite frankly innapropriately timed case of severe arousal.

Imma need to go see a doctor if this condition persists for more than four hours.

 

The Lewler

GOAT BUDGET AINEC
Jul 2, 2013
4,675
2,815
Eastern Ontario Badlands
It matters if it was listed in his divorce settlement that hs ex wife would receive a portion of the sale of the team.
$20M in his pocket now is better than $10 in his pocket after the sale of the team.

This.

The persistent narrative that keeps seeping is two fold:

-Divorce settlement is tied to team.
-Debt

Those are the two curveballs in the asking/sale price for the team.
 

Joeyjoejoe

Registered User
Dec 18, 2015
6,111
8,606
I could buy the theory that it's the NHL that's declining the sale as they want it to be higher than the expansion fee that Seattle paid.

But then again they just approved the sale of the Hurricanes and Coyotes and both of those were less than the Vegas fee.
 

Senscore

Let's keep it cold
Nov 19, 2012
20,065
14,784
I have a bad feeling that he's hanging onto it just so he has the sort of outlet to harass and belittle people that have to kiss his ass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed Wood

armani

High Jacques
Apr 8, 2005
9,937
4,757
Uranus
Oh my, I do believe that the title of this thread gave me an unreasonable and quite frankly innapropriately timed case of severe arousal.

Imma need to go see a doctor if this condition persists for more than four hours.

Stop Bonking yourself Bonkie!

As for a change in ownership - we will see where we land this time next year I guess. As a long time fan, I will be performing my due diligence in not supporting a Melnyk owned product (although had to reluctantly buy tickets to the Shawn Mendes concert for my family but won't be attending myself cuz who on earth is Shawn Mendes?).
 
Last edited:

NorthCoast

Registered User
May 1, 2017
1,250
1,167
Uhg....heart says yes. Head says no.



I don't think the 20m is all that important unless it is somehow outside of the divorce settlement since the money goes into team finances, not Melnyk. If an owner, Melnyk or any other NHL owner, wishes to then take it out of team finances into their own pocket it is no different then taking money out normally.

All that is special about the 20m is that it is not HRR. Therefore none of it goes to the players, or in other words, the additional 600 mil to team won't make the cap go up/player share go up. It's just a non-HRR revenue source to the team org.


I do agree that the recent moves do make the team more attractive in theory...BUT, at what opportunity cost. ie: while you take a couple years to clean up the books and increase the sale price, what are you losing out on that you could have had if you just sold right now. Because interest is still racking up on the debt, ticket revenues are still going down, and you no longer have a front-runner spot for lebreton, etc. etc. PLUS, you lose out on whatever the money in hand from a sale would earn (min. 7-8% in the markets) you while you try to squeeze out a better offer.

Unless there is a term limit on property settlement for the divorce, or his ex has sued to push things along, then IMO Melnyk doesn't like the price and is foolish enough to believe he can rebuild the team performance/revenues at a greater pace than the team is racking up debt.

Of course I would love to be wrong.
 

NorthCoast

Registered User
May 1, 2017
1,250
1,167
That's not technically true, just need to live with someone long enough for common law rules to apply!

Yes/No. In common law their is a larger burden of proof to justify that you contributed to the spouses earnings I believe. Which sounds totally outdated to me, but I just caught something along those lines while reading up for my previous post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad