Confirmed with Link: #MelnykOut Campaign - successfully raised 8K over this past weekend.

[BankStreetParade]

Forbes estimates the operating income of the team for the last 10 years combined at 78.9 mil, and that doesn't include the ~16 mil expansion he just received. Granted Forbes isn't perfect by any means, and Operating income doesn't include taxes, it's hard to believe he's losing money hand over fist as you suggest.

The team has had plenty of time to pay down debts, and he bought the team for pennies on the dollar. Any debt the team is currently servicing has little to do with prior ownership at this point.

So where is your evidence to support this claim of losing tens of millions of dollars per year?

Our reality is one where we don't have the figures to know whether or not the team loses money or not, but even if we assume the team is breaking even on average (Forbes seems to suggest otherwise, but it's certainly something that can be questioned) the owner still stands to see the net value climb steadily making the venture fruitful.

I'm not sure success signing our own UFA means as much as you seem to be implying. Most teams are able to sign their UFA, and when they think it's in question, they trade them (like we did with Turris). Sure it does happen, like when Chara walked away. Heck, we offered some lesser guys contracts who walked (Stalberg and Hemsky for example) too but the bigger issue is that we won't patch holes and operate on too strict a budget; things like needing cash in to match the cash out on deals like Spezza, and opting for bandaid solutions like Oduya.

So despite the fact that this is the third owner of the Ottawa Senators to say the finances of this team are dire, we should actually believe Forbes and their best guess estimates? Three different owners through three different time periods of this franchise's life. All saying the same thing.

Even if those Forbes estimates are close on operating income they don't give us the numbers on interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. How much do corporate taxes in Ontario alone take out of that figure?

Then you look at the fact that despite buying the team and building for around $127 million, he also assumed a significant amount of the debt load. A number that was so substantial that our team was virtually bankrupt in 2003 and unable to pay players, even borrowing $14 million from the NHL to pay its bills. Since he bought the team, he's also spent another $60 million on renovations at the arena including the new scoreboard, light system, covered walkway and restaurant renovations.

Even as of 5 years ago, that debt amount was reported to be close to $130 million when he was seeking new lenders to restructure the debt. There are significant costs associated there with the agreement itself, the fees and the interest being charged. And in all of the years he has owned the team he's only been able to pay off roughly 15-25% of the original debt he bought.

Cyril Leeder and Erin Crowe (CFO) themselves have said that the team has lost $94 million since Melnyk bought the team. A number which excludes additional interest and fees associated with the debt extensions.

Do you honestly think Melnyk has been playing a 15-year long game where he pretends he can't control this team's debt and that he doesn't make any money (in fact, claiming to lose money almost every single year) just so he can cut costs all these years later? You think that's been his long term plan since he bought the team?

It's not the debt ... It's not the fact that the Senators are the cheapest average ticket out of all the Canadian teams, by far, and one of the cheapest average tickets in all of the NHL ... It's not the fact that they are, by far, the least attended Canadian team in the last 2 years and one of the lowest attended in all of the NHL ...

All along, it's been a 15+ year long con where Melnyk set up everything so that he could pretend to be losing money so he could cut staff and cut player payroll? Literally undermining his own f***ing investment for 15 years so he could pretend.

I'm no apologist for this guy because he's definitely not an ideal owner (for a host of reasons, including his inability to not say stupid shit all the time) but when I read this kind of stuff just regurgitated as fact, assumed incorrectly, it makes me angry.

 

[Byron Bitz]

So what’s the timetable on this? When can we get this billboard up and running?

 

[Philadelphia Collins]

If this billboard doesn’t get him to sell the team, lets get a kickstarter going to pay for Karlssons extension

 

[dumbdick]

Im going to laugh my ass off if someone just walks away with all your cash.

 

[Micklebot]

So despite the fact that this is the third owner of the Ottawa Senators to say the finances of this team are dire, we should actually believe Forbes and their best guess estimates? Three different owners through three different time periods of this franchise's life. All saying the same thing.

Even if those Forbes estimates are close on operating income they don't give us the numbers on interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. How much do corporate taxes in Ontario alone take out of that figure?

Then you look at the fact that despite buying the team and building for around $127 million, he also assumed a significant amount of the debt load. A number that was so substantial that our team was virtually bankrupt in 2003 and unable to pay players, even borrowing $14 million from the NHL to pay its bills. Since he bought the team, he's also spent another $60 million on renovations at the arena including the new scoreboard, light system, covered walkway and restaurant renovations.

Even as of 5 years ago, that debt amount was reported to be close to $130 million when he was seeking new lenders to restructure the debt. There are significant costs associated there with the agreement itself, the fees and the interest being charged. And in all of the years he has owned the team he's only been able to pay off roughly 15-25% of the original debt he bought.

Cyril Leeder and Erin Crowe (CFO) themselves have said that the team has lost $94 million since Melnyk bought the team. A number which excludes additional interest and fees associated with the debt extensions.

Do you honestly think Melnyk has been playing a 15-year long game where he pretends he can't control this team's debt and that he doesn't make any money (in fact, claiming to lose money almost every single year) just so he can cut costs all these years later? You think that's been his long term plan since he bought the team?

It's not the debt ... It's not the fact that the Senators are the cheapest average ticket out of all the Canadian teams, by far, and one of the cheapest average tickets in all of the NHL ... It's not the fact that they are, by far, the least attended Canadian team in the last 2 years and one of the lowest attended in all of the NHL ...

All along, it's been a 15+ year long con where Melnyk set up everything so that he could pretend to be losing money so he could cut staff and cut player payroll? Literally undermining his own ****ing investment for 15 years so he could pretend.

I'm no apologist for this guy because he's definitely not an ideal owner (for a host of reasons, including his inability to not say stupid **** all the time) but when I read this kind of stuff just regurgitated as fact, assumed incorrectly, it makes me angry.

So that's a lot of typing to go through to have one major factual flaw undermine the whole thing. Melnyk bought the team through bankruptcy proceeding so he didn't actually take the crippling debt. In fact, Bryden put in a bid himself which would have seen him continue to own the team while off loading significant debt. It also ignores where the debt came from, which next to none of which is relevant to the current situation.

 

[InTkachukWeTrust]

Just out of curiosity, didn't Melnyk go through a divorce that took away a huge share of his wealth? I mean if you lose 50% or whatever the amount of money lost is not pocket change. It would make sense why he's penny pinching.

 

[BankStreetParade]

So that's a lot of typing to go through to have one major factual flaw undermine the whole thing. Melnyk bought the team through bankruptcy proceeding so he didn't actually take the crippling debt. In fact, Bryden put in a bid himself which would have seen him continue to own the team while off loading significant debt. It also ignores where the debt came from, which next to none of which is relevant to the current situation.

You think bankruptcy protection means you can just say "nope, don't want to pay this debt anymore" and that's the end of it? Are you serious?

 

[Micklebot]

You think bankruptcy protection means you can just say "nope, don't want to pay this debt anymore" and that's the end of it? Are you serious?

No, it means a firm like Price WaterhouseCoopers is entrusted with the liquidation of assets, and a deal is struck to maximize creditors payments. What it certainly does mean though is creditors do no get everything they are owed, and in the case of the sale of the sens, the creditors got a fraction of what they were owed.

For example, Bryden's initial attempt to buy the team out of bankruptcy was expected to write off 80% of the teams debt, I'm sure Melnyk got at least as good of a deal. Because the team was bought through bankruptcy, it also allowed Melnyk to accept or reject any existing commercial contracts, which he used to negotiate better deals for parking and food concession operators, along with ending the teams affiliation with tickmaster opening up a new revenue stream with capital tickets. The team Melnyk bought was instantly in much better shape than the one Bryden owned simply because of the process through which he acquired it. I'm really unsure why you'd contest this...

 

[BankStreetParade]

No, it means a firm like Price WaterhouseCoopers is entrusted with the liquidation of assets, and a deal is struck to maximize creditors payments. What it certainly does mean though is creditors do no get everything they are owed, and in the case of the sale of the sens, the creditors got a fraction of what they were owed.

For example, Bryden's initial attempt to buy the team out of bankruptcy was expected to write off 80% of the teams debt, I'm sure Melnyk got at least as good of a deal. Because the team was bought through bankruptcy, it also allowed Melnyk to accept or reject any existing commercial contracts, which he used to negotiate better deals for parking and food concession operators, along with ending the teams affiliation with tickmaster opening up a new revenue stream with capital tickets. The team Melnyk bought was instantly in much better shape than the one Bryden owned simply because of the process through which he acquired it. I'm really unsure why you'd contest this...

I contested the fact that they didn't simply wish away the whole debt. And if anything, the banks would have wanted to negotiate a deal where they got to write off a number much lower than 80% of the $375 million debt. I don't know if it even bears saying but banks would want to recoup as much of the loans they wrote as they could, not less. What exactly would compel them to write off more of the debt for Melnyk instead of Bryden? Not to mention they probably found ways to compensate through high interest rate loans on the remaining balance or through other mechanisms.

Notwithstanding, if this team was able to write off 80% of the team debt, that still means there was nearly $75 million in serviceable debt on top of the $127 million price tag to buy the team and arena. Add on to that he's spent nearly $60 million on renovations at the arena and that the interest rate on the debt was most likely a standard 8-10% per year and we're easily at the $130 million debt mark that I've been quoting. In 2013, after refinancing the debt it's possible that the new interest rate on the loans was a more comfortable 6-8%.

That debt is for a team with an operating income of about $79 million in the last decade (quoting your number) which doesn't include important figures like taxes, depreciation and amortization.

Even if the new interest rate is now 5% (virtually unheard of for these types of business loans) from 10%, that's still roughly $6.5 million per year in interest payments on that debt.

Why is it so hard for you guys to admit that something about the financials of this team doesn't add up?

 

[harrisb]

I contested the fact that they didn't simply wish away the whole debt. And if anything, the banks would have wanted to negotiate a deal where they got to write off a number much lower than 80% of the $375 million debt. I don't know if it even bears saying but banks would want to recoup as much of the loans they wrote as they could, not less. What exactly would compel them to write off more of the debt for Melnyk instead of Bryden? Not to mention they probably found ways to compensate through high interest rate loans on the remaining balance or through other mechanisms.

Notwithstanding, if this team was able to write off 80% of the team debt, that still means there was nearly $75 million in serviceable debt on top of the $127 million price tag to buy the team and arena. Add on to that he's spent nearly $60 million on renovations at the arena and that the interest rate on the debt was most likely a standard 8-10% per year and we're easily at the $130 million debt mark that I've been quoting. In 2013, after refinancing the debt it's possible that the new interest rate on the loans was a more comfortable 6-8%.

That debt is for a team with an operating income of about $79 million in the last decade (quoting your number) which doesn't include important figures like taxes, depreciation and amortization.

Even if the new interest rate is now 5% (virtually unheard of for these types of business loans) from 10%, that's still roughly $6.5 million per year in interest payments on that debt.

Why is it so hard for you guys to admit that something about the financials of this team doesn't add up?

And his asset appreciated probably 400%...oops, you forgot about that

 

[SanderSen]

No, it means a firm like Price WaterhouseCoopers is entrusted with the liquidation of assets, and a deal is struck to maximize creditors payments. What it certainly does mean though is creditors do no get everything they are owed, and in the case of the sale of the sens, the creditors got a fraction of what they were owed.

For example, Bryden's initial attempt to buy the team out of bankruptcy was expected to write off 80% of the teams debt, I'm sure Melnyk got at least as good of a deal. Because the team was bought through bankruptcy, it also allowed Melnyk to accept or reject any existing commercial contracts, which he used to negotiate better deals for parking and food concession operators, along with ending the teams affiliation with tickmaster opening up a new revenue stream with capital tickets. The team Melnyk bought was instantly in much better shape than the one Bryden owned simply because of the process through which he acquired it. I'm really unsure why you'd contest this...

This is a bit simplistic. There are various options for statute protection and they all commonly get called "bankruptcy" as the general knowledge of statute protection laws in Canada is not very good and that includes the media. The Senators never went into bankruptcy, did not have a Trustee appointed and were never liquidated as termed under law. If that was the case the team would have likely left Ottawa and the whole enterprise disbanded to maximize the liquidation value.

The Senators went into protection under the Companies Creditors' Arrangement Act, which is a very different form of protection than the Bankruptcy Act and is a different law. They could have filed for protection under the Bankruptcy Act and had 30 days to pull together a deal and if that didn't happen they would have automatically entered into full bankruptcy which is a very rigid and formula driven process that would have been very ugly.

Under the Companies Creditors' Arrangement Act the court appoints a Monitor to oversee the proceedings and report to the court. and unlike a Bankruptcy Trustee, a Monitor does not take possession of the assets. A Stay of Proceedings is issued which stops creditors from taking action while the CCAA is in place. The Monitor oversees management and reports to the court. The objective of a CCAA is to obtain a Plan of Arrangement for creditors that is voted on by creditors and the CCAA allows for a lot more discretionary room compared to the rules under a bankruptcy proposal.

Under the CCAA Melnyk was the only one that was able to strike a deal that creditors approved. If creditors did not like the deal offered they could have rejected it and when the CCAA Stay of Proceedings ran out then the Senators would have slip into bankruptcy. Melnyk did not get to "accept or reject" any contracts he liked. He made a proposal in accordance with the laws and that would included concessions from creditors and there is no surprise he wanted a better deal from the rink and concessions. In the year before the CCAA filing the team lost $15-million but the arena made $18-million so no surprise he wanted to wrap them together, as is normal for many teams.

Bryden himself owed $100 million that he only paid $600,000 on and that debt was mainly accredited to the Senators. Nobody has done well from the Senators business operations.

Like Melnyk or not, but lets get the information correct. At the time he bought the team he was very welcome. Other credible sales options to keep the team in Ottawa did not exist that I know of.

Way to much scape goat flavour in this thread.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

And his asset appreciated probably 400%...oops, you forgot about that

Yes it did, and he could access that increased value in one of two ways, selling the team, or borrowing against the appreciated value.

It's like a house, and taking out a line of credit against it, and ten years later your house is worth more and the bank will allow you to increase your line of credit based on your house's current market value.

 

[Micklebot]

Like Melnyk or not, but lets get the information correct. At the time he bought the team he was very welcome. Other credible sales options to keep the team in Ottawa did not exist that I know of.

There were other interested parties for sure. Peltz was putting together a bid without Bryden after deciding he wasn't comfortable with the limited partnership scheme Bryden had come up with (which actually got approval from the creditors before Peltz pulled out). That initial plan was setting the price significantly higher than what Melnyk paid (rumoured at ~175 mil vs Melnyk's ~130).

back to the topic or Sens debt when Melnyk bought the sens, I found a source for the estimated amount, ~50 mil. So that's about 13% of the $375 number floated above.

The overall point though was never the intricacies of bankruptcy protection, but rather that the claim that Melnyk was saddled with franchise the same crippling debt and used his personal fortune to save the team from it is misleading.

The debt burden he took on when he purchased the team was more than manageable, if it wasn't, he likely wouldn't have bought the team and other parties like Peltz, and those wanting to relocate wouldn't have had interest either. The reasons the team was financially unstable under Bryden simply do not apply now, so using past owners inability to make things work as proof this market is to blame and not how the franchise is currently run simply doesn't make sense.

 

[Sensung]

In the year before the CCAA filing the team lost $15-million but the arena made $18-million so no surprise he wanted to wrap them together, as is normal for many teams.

Way to much scape goat flavour in this thread.

Thanks for the background information. Nice to have some details, even if it comes with an obvious bias.

I found the quote in red quite telling and actually supports the case against Melnyk. When it was convenient, he wanted the businesses to be treated as a whole.

When he wants to claim losses, he (and his supporters) cite losses for the TEAM and ignore the rest of the business.

As Micklebot pointed out, the actual debt transfer appears to have been a mere fraction of what you claimed and puts the blame for the current debt/financing picture squarely where it belongs...at Melnyk's feet.

As for the scape goating in this thread, I'd submit that it has been aimed at the fanbase and supported by a twisting of the facts to fit a "poor Eugene" agenda.

 

[slamigo]

And his asset appreciated probably 400%...oops, you forgot about that

Asset appreciation means nothing. Absolutely nothing unless you sell the asset or borrow against it. The value of the franchise is not money in Melnyk's bank account. AND, it is only potential. Asset appreciation is NOT KNOWN until the asset is sold. Anything else is an estimate and then usually for borrowing against the asset.

And player salaries have escalated dramatically since Bryden owned the team. People think that a $70-80M cap is nothing. In small market Ottawa, that's a huge number. Especially when the team takes in Cdn dollars and pays out USD.

 

[Sensung]

Asset appreciation means nothing. Absolutely nothing unless you sell the asset or borrow against it. The value of the franchise is not money in Melnyk's bank account. AND, it is only potential. Asset appreciation is NOT KNOWN until the asset is sold. Anything else is an estimate and then usually for borrowing against the asset.

And player salaries have escalated dramatically since Bryden owned the team. People think that a $70-80M cap is nothing. In small market Ottawa, that's a huge number. Especially when the team takes in Cdn dollars and pays out USD.

And the #MELNYKOUT movement is begging him to cash in on his asset...

 

[slamigo]

Also, people MUST understand that the arena and the team are separate businesses. HOWEVER, the CBA accounts for whether or not an NHL team is the owner of the arena, primary occupant, second or even tertiary occupant, or paid to manage the building on behalf of arena ownership. There is no hiding of money. It is accounted for.

 

[slamigo]

And the #MELNYKOUT movement is begging him to cash in on his asset...

And if that happens, Melnyk will be replaced by another owner entity that will be faced with the exact same issues that will need to be resolved.

 

[Sensung]

And if that happens, Melnyk will be replaced by another owner entity that will be faced with the exact same issues that will need to be resolved.

Issues that can and likely will be changed by a different owner.

 

[topshelf15]

All this talk about debt....We wouldnt have any of it if we had grown the team properly....We are sandwiched between two of the leagues oldest and biggest earning franchises....Us constantly trying to win with nickels,while the others play with dollars is never going to cut it in a entertainment buisness.....The goal for the team has to be gaining,as it always should have been... More fan support,MORE PEOPLE INTERESTED IN A THE TEAM = MORE MONEY...EM was sold this team at a bottom basement price....

He has done very little to grow the team ,and has shown over and over again..That he has little interest in investing for the now... To gain in the future...This franchise needed a visionary that could see what an emerging market like Ottawa could bring,instead we got a billionaire that wants his money right now all the time....

 

[Ice-Tray]

Well, as Winnipeg, Vegas, and overwhelmingly Seattle have shown, you don't need an owner to beg a solid fanbase. Fans shouldn't be blaming EM for not convincing them that they should go to watch NHL games.

EM can be distasteful, and I have a feeling that he's going to take a page out of most owner's books now and work from the background (thanks to some solid advice no doubt), but the fan base is weak, and has no one to blame but itself.

The Sens have been one of the best Canadian teams for over a decade, maybe THE best, have the cheapest tickets, and yet smaller cities like Winnipeg and Edmonton crush Ottawa when it comes to fan devotion to the team. Throw in Calgary, Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto and it's easy to see that Ottawa is a distant seventh.

There are a lot of excuses; owner sucks, arena is far, Toronto and Montreal have lots of fans, but in the end it's just a lot of noise, because from the outside looking in Ottawa barely deserves a team based on fan support. There is one guy on here from Ottawa that questions the strength of the fanbase, and he its constantly shot down by a bunch of excuse makers, most of whom don't ever go to more than a game or two a year, if at all.

Sucks to look in the mirror, but you wouldn't find this whinny entitled attitude, accompanied by not buying tickets, in any other Canadian market, and several other markets would love to take your team and treat it properly. Like most things, it's easier to blame others and talk loud, rather than to look in the mirror and see that YOU have work to do. Easier to blame the owner and demand that he shell out 10 million a year for EK and run a cap team, while you refuse to attend games because it's cold out.

A downtown arena will hopefully remove a major excuse from the fanbase repertoire and thus lead to more fan support, more revenue, and a bigger budget.

EM has work to do, and he has started by the looks of things, but you all have work to do as well. An NHL team is not a right, we're lucky to have one, and yet Ottawa fans seem to be taking it for granted. I should remember not to judge the fanbase as a whole based on the loudmouths in here, but the attendance numbers speak for themselves, Ottawa is a weak hockey market when compared to all of the other Canadian cities, stronger when compared to Florida.

 

[philb613]

Well, as Winnipeg, Vegas, and overwhelmingly Seattle have shown, you don't need an owner to beg a solid fanbase. Fans shouldn't be blaming EM for not convincing them that they should go to watch NHL games.

EM can be distasteful, and I have a feeling that he's going to take a page out of most owner's books now and work from the background (thanks to some solid advice no doubt), but the fan base is weak, and has no one to blame but itself.

The Sens have been one of the best Canadian teams for over a decade, maybe THE best, have the cheapest tickets, and yet smaller cities like Winnipeg and Edmonton crush Ottawa when it comes to fan devotion to the team. Throw in Calgary, Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto and it's easy to see that Ottawa is a distant seventh.

There are a lot of excuses; owner sucks, arena is far, Toronto and Montreal have lots of fans, but in the end it's just a lot of noise, because from the outside looking in Ottawa barely deserves a team based on fan support. There is one guy on here from Ottawa that questions the strength of the fanbase, and he its constantly shot down by a bunch of excuse makers, most of whom don't ever go to more than a game or two a year, if at all.

Sucks to look in the mirror, but you wouldn't find this whinny entitled attitude, accompanied by not buying tickets, in any other Canadian market, and several other markets would love to take your team and treat it properly. Like most things, it's easier to blame others and talk loud, rather than to look in the mirror and see that YOU have work to do. Easier to blame the owner and demand that he shell out 10 million a year for EK and run a cap team, while you refuse to attend games because it's cold out.

A downtown arena will hopefully remove a major excuse from the fanbase repertoire and thus lead to more fan support, more revenue, and a bigger budget.

EM has work to do, and he has started by the looks of things, but you all have work to do as well. An NHL team is not a right, we're lucky to have one, and yet Ottawa fans seem to be taking it for granted. I should remember not to judge the fanbase as a whole based on the loudmouths in here, but the attendance numbers speak for themselves, Ottawa is a weak hockey market when compared to all of the other Canadian cities, stronger when compared to Florida.

There's a lot to go through here is there a problem in the market yes. Is Ottawa viable marketplace most definitely. Vancouver has attendance issues and it's a way bigger city than Ottawa not to mention they actually have a very large private sector in comparison to Ottawa which relies on Public Servants to spend money. Vegas and Seattle have NO other professional sports organizations so this is a joke to compare them to us. Winnipeg's arena seats 15,321 so yeah it's a lot easier to pack that building and they went without a franchise for 20 years.

Anyways comparing Ottawa to those cities is kind of comical.

There are many issues in this market that have been beaten to death for the last few years, but to say that this is a shitty fanbase is just wrong.

 

[Ice-Tray]

There's a lot to go through here is there a problem in the market yes. Is Ottawa viable marketplace most definitely. Vancouver has attendance issues and it's a way bigger city than Ottawa not to mention they actually have a very large private sector in comparison to Ottawa which relies on Public Servants to spend money. Vegas and Seattle have NO other professional sports organizations so this is a joke to compare them to us. Winnipeg's arena seats 15,321 so yeah it's a lot easier to pack that building and they went without a franchise for 20 years.

Anyways comparing Ottawa to those cities is kind of comical.

There are many issues in this market that have been beaten to death for the last few years, but to say that this is a ****ty fanbase is just wrong.

More of the same excuses. Don't compare us to other cities, it's not fair... We're a good market, we're just hiding... Please.

You can't fill the stands but want the owner to fill the cap. You don't like comparisons because x,y,z, but that is all just noise. You either can support a team or you can't. This isn't just on the owner, it's on you. Blaming corporate boxes, government wages, and whatever else but most of YOU don't go to games because you don't want to. Ottawa is a small market that wants the owner to play big market while it stays home. I just don't see why fans don't want to be part of the solution instead of compounding the problem.

The numbers show the market is weak, hopefully a smaller downtown arena will help remedy that.

 

[Fandlauer]

Meh, I was a Melnyk backer until last year. I have multiple posts from years ago blaming Alfie entirely, hoping they don't retire his number etc. Fully behind this team and management with blinders in full effect.

Then when I moved back last year and spent more than two weeks begging the team to take my money and get my seasons tickets back, only to have nobody respond to my multiple emails and phone calls, and hear the owner complain that it's hard to sell tickets, and tarp off the friggin section I used to sit in before I left for a few years for work, there's just absolutely no way I can have any trust in ownership. If they had a "Buy now" option online, or had someone to pick up the phone or answer an email, they would have gotten my 2 grand this year. Instead I end up spending 20 bucks on a #MelnykOut billboard lol. Maybe that's an excuse, but I'm not fighting any harder than that to give someone my money.

 

[Micklebot]

I think the problem with the argument put forth by the "this fanbase doesn't show the same devotion" crowd is this; it's not the fanbase that's the problem. The fans we have are fantastic and every bit as passionate as any other teams fans. The issue is this market was already saturated with diehard Toronto and Montreal fans. Winnipeg, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton, none of them had that problem. So even if you argue only 20% or 25% of the population is a fan of an out of market team (surveys have suggested the actual numbers are much higher), that's still a huge hit compared to other markets. The problem in Ottawa isn't the fans of Ottawa, it's the teams inability to convert other teams fans. That's a marketing issue, not a fan issue.