Egil said:When did the Sens borrow a bunch of money from the government? The only government loan the Sens recieved was to build a freeway interchange (which is now being used by other businesses in the area).
Without a TV deal, they would have to jack the ticket prices through the roof...nobody wants that!Hootchie Cootchie said:I have to question his stance, though. We recently passed the million mark, the city is experiencing an unprecendented growth rate, the economy is the most diversified in the country, so why do they need a cap to profit? I'm just asking. It seems like all the pieces are in place for a big-league city.
Go Flames Go said:We don't need em, if a deal today means a soft cap and no Edmonton Oilers I say lets sign that peice of paper right away.
The Iconoclast said:No, the Oilers would actually never do something like that. There is something in the west called "ethics" and the business owners out there know that if they screw the local population you are done in them thar parts. The Oilers community ownership would never consider somethin like that, or they would screw themselves out of all of the businesses at the same time.
Egil said:Icono, you my friend need a history lesson.
The start of the Ottawa Senators was really a large real-estate plan. The Corel Center was going to be built, surounded by a shopping mall, hotel with conference center, and a bunch of houses. The real estate was going to pay for construction of the Corel Center (which was, believe it or not, was to be 100% privately financed).
However, in came the Ontario Government, in the form of the Zoning Commision. They shot down EVERYTHING, except for the building (which they reduced from 20,500 to 18,500 capacity). But, by this point we already had the team, and the Civic Center simply isn't a viable NHL arena (10,500 capacity).
Anyways, after this zoning mess, the Senators manage to go ahead with construction of the Corel Center (along with paying for a freeway interchange, which is the ONLY public money in the entire project, and was at the time a loan). However, to gain the capital required to build the building, they have to sell ALL the parking, concessions, etc. to Ogden Corp., who agreed to fund the project.
So, the building gets built, and is being run by Ogden, and all seems well. It is still mired in debt (it was basically built entirely on credit), but things seem OK. But then Covanta (Ogden's parent company) declares bankruptcy, the money to pay the debt on the building from Ogden doesn't come, and Bryden has to scramble. Bakruptcy is declared, Melnyk comes in, and the debt on the building is gone.
Basically, while some locals did get screwed, it can ALL be traced back to the Ontario Zoning Commision, who broked the entire thing up.
Go Flames Go said:There has never been crying over on our side that we need to HARD CAP to live. Even Ken King soudned surprised when Edmonton made thoose remarks. Ken King and Uncle Sutter have always said we need the "right deal" that will work for us. Never have they said we need the hard cap for us to survive. Im sure with revenue sharing both Edmonton and Calgary will live and survive.
Do I want Edmonton gone? No.
We don't need em, if a deal today means a soft cap and no Edmonton Oilers I say lets sign that peice of paper right away.
The BOA is needed in hockey to keep it alive, and very could revive it.
How are the Oilers gonna say we cannot continue when there payroll is barley $30 million and they have to raise it to be in the payroll ranges range.
Go Flames Go said:There has never been crying over on our side that we need to HARD CAP to live. Even Ken King soudned surprised when Edmonton made thoose remarks. Ken King and Uncle Sutter have always said we need the "right deal" that will work for us. Never have they said we need the hard cap for us to survive. Im sure with revenue sharing both Edmonton and Calgary will live and survive.
Do I want Edmonton gone? No. The BOA is needed in hockey to keep it alive, and very could revive it. How are the Oilers gonna say we cannot continue when there payroll is barley $30 million and they have to raise it to be in the payroll ranges range.
We can afford to pay players in the $38 million range, and we loose only about $5-6 milion a season, a good revenue sharing plan plus taxes on a soft cap will erase that.
There is no need to raise payroll to the cap. The league has suggested a salary range which has a floor. No team can spend less than the floor which under the last league proposal would be in the neighborhood of 34 million.Hootchie Cootchie said:So because Ken King doesn't have the balls to speak out means the NHL is more viable in Calgary? Nice try.
This says otherwise.
Then go away. We don't need your sympathy.
Why is it necessary to raise payroll to the cap? I've heard this from others, and can someone explain to me why? (Preferably not you)
Go Flames Go said:The payroll ranges are 33 million to 38 million no team cannot be under the 33 million and over 38 million.
shnagle said:There is no need to raise payroll to the cap. The league has suggested a salary range which has a floor. No team can spend less than the floor which under the last league proposal would be in the neighborhood of 34 million.
Hootchie Cootchie said:Why is it necessary to raise payroll to the cap? I've heard this from others, and can someone explain to me why? (Preferably not you)
The Iconoclast said:We have no idea what those ranges are and to speak of them in factual fashion like you di is irresponsible. Think man!
I thought that was what I said. I simply stated that teams don't need to spend the cap but rather must spend the floor.Go Flames Go said:Edmontons payroll is $30 million, they will have to raise there salary to get into the range, otherwise the league will be dishingout escrow money to make sure the salaries being paid are at 51%.
shnagle said:I thought that was what I said. I simply stated that teams don't need to spend the cap but rather must spend the floor.
Go Flames Go said:What are you talking about? Look at the last NHL proposal this is what the range system would be in the first year. That was what was being offered.
The Iconoclast said:Oh, so you have been sitting in on the meetings have you? You have any idea as to what is going on behind close doors and what numbers are REALLY floating around? You are to the owners side of the argument what Wetcoaster is to the players side of the argument. One big source of disinformation and a big fertilizer spreader. I would advise you to focus on the concepts rather than the minutia of the details because we have no idea what is being offered up nor what is really important to either side at the moment. Unless you have a direct connection to Trevor Linden or Harley Hotchkiss' belly buttons, please stop quoting numbers like fact.
shnagle said:There is no need to raise payroll to the cap. The league has suggested a salary range which has a floor. No team can spend less than the floor which under the last league proposal would be in the neighborhood of 34 million.
Here is a copy of my original post where I clearly state that they do not need to spend the cap but rather the floor of aroung 34 million. Which part of that was unclear to you?