Seems pretty obvious that they didn't want a Conflict of Interest
The title gives the impression that the Leafs voted No but they abstained. It's subtle, but makes a huge difference.
Then why would LT want to vote no?
Unless Cox just made that part up....
Then why would LT want to vote no?
Unless Cox just made that part up....
I find Cox likes to speculate without mentioning he's speculating. Leaving a lot of his stuff in that gray area that he can get out of if he's proven wrong.
Nothing more than being respectful to a conflict of interest.
Cox and Shoalts getting into a bit of a twitter tussle on the issue.
Shoalts' article here Link says that conflict of interest was the reason, and LT was advised by Dale Lastman (his lawyer and fellow board member) to abstain.
Cox reiterated on twitter that it was not a conflict of interest issue.
Decide for ourselves I guess.
But it IS a conflict of interest. Both Bell and Rogers own the Leafs and were bidding on a TV deal. How did the Canadians vote? Does it say anywhere? Since Bell owns them, I'm sure they voted no. Does Cox say anything about that?
They abstained due to the fact that Bell owns part of the Leafs.
Nothing really newsworthy. They didn't vote against a company who owns half of MLSE.