Thrashers Bombshell: Owners have wanted to sell since 2005

[edog37]

How do you know this?

I ask because this statement contradicts what is offered in the article.

who would want to buy it knowing they lost that kind of money? It's like buying a house in a depressed area..

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

who would want to buy it knowing they lost that kind of money? It's like buying a house in a depressed area..

Well, the article STATES that people were interested in buying the team and keeping it local.

 

[Dado]

Well, the article STATES that people were interested in buying the team and keeping it local.

I'm pretty sure I saw articles STATING there were WMD in Iraq, too.

I'd bet money Balsillie called these guys. That's one (or none, depending on how you count). No evidence at all of anybody else.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I'm pretty sure I saw articles STATING there were WMD in Iraq, too.

I'd bet money Balsillie called these guys. That's one (or none, depending on how you count). No evidence at all of anybody else.

Nice strawman, but calling what is said in the article false based on nothing is silly.

Based on that, I could just as easily say that the 130 million dollar loses are not nearly the amount that was actually lost in running the team (and Thrashers fans have said that ASG probably did this in order to get more money from their court case).


And I agree, Balsillie probably did call these guys. Which would be a good thing for the Atlanta Thrashers, because the NHL will sooner send Sidney Crosby to the KHL then allow Jim Balsillie to own an NHL team.

 

[David_99]

Well, the article STATES that people were interested in buying the team and keeping it local.

Does it say when though? (Didn't get a chance to read it yet) Were they interested 5 years ago? Before the team lost "130M"? If those same parties came back now that the team is available, would they still be interested in keeping it there? Hopefully yes. I guess we'll see.

 

[Viqsi]

I'm pretty sure I saw articles STATING there were WMD in Iraq, too.

I'd bet money Balsillie called these guys. That's one (or none, depending on how you count). No evidence at all of anybody else.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Does it say when though? (Didn't get a chance to read it yet) Were they interested 5 years ago? Before the team lost "130M"? If those same parties came back now that the team is available, would they still be interested in keeping it there? Hopefully yes. I guess we'll see.

Yes.

In fact, that is the basis of this new lawsuit that they are bringing up.

Allegedly, some screw up in the writing of their contract with Belkin caused the court case that has been on going for some time now. They were planning to sell it, and the main leg of their case (the new one) is that the previous case prevented the sale.

 

[headsigh]

That would have been a PR nightmare if they didn't make an attempt to sign those players.

To be fair, the signing of Johnson was a PR nightmare in itself. There were a lot of grumblings that that 100m could have been used in a pitch for a package of good players or even a left-field reach for LeBron James or Chris Bosh in free agency.

 

[Dado]

Nice strawman, but calling what is said in the article false based on nothing is silly.

I am not calling it "false", nor have I never called it "false".

I am saying your claims for the article are unsupported by any actual evidence, and are nothing more than unsubstantiated personal speculation.

 

[Dado]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Nor is it evidence of evidence.

 

[Viqsi]

Nor is it evidence of evidence.

...which is why I'm not speculating, merely advising you to cease doing so because there's no data with which to meaningfully do so.

 

[Dado]

...which is why I'm not speculating, merely advising you to cease doing so because there's no data with which to meaningfully do so.

Dude.

Please do me the courtesy of reading before casting aspersions.

I am not making claims - I am saying there are NO supportable claims because no actual evidence is in evidence.

Thanks.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I am not calling it "false", nor have I never called it "false".

I am saying your claims for the article are unsupported by any actual evidence, and are nothing more than unsubstantiated personal speculation.

Ok.

I am basing the my claim on the article.

Why do you think that the article is unfounded speculation? In a thread about the article, why should we assume the source material is unfounded?

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

To be fair, the signing of Johnson was a PR nightmare in itself. There were a lot of grumblings that that 100m could have been used in a pitch for a package of good players or even a left-field reach for LeBron James or Chris Bosh in free agency.

I'm not an NBA fan by any means, but it is correct that Joe Johnson is far from a marquee NBA player, right?

As in, the signing was a very bad overpayment.

 

[Dado]

Why do you think that the article is unfounded speculation?

Good grief, could we make this any more complicated? The *article* is not unfounded - it's (presumably) based on an actual interview. It's the interviewee's claim the article is reporting that is unsupportable, because there is no evidence the interviewee's claim is accurate.

You are, of course, free to believe it anyway. It may even turn out to be correct. But you should not then be surprised when people point out you're staking out a position based on exactly zero current evidence.

Hope that helps.

 

[Aaronxxx]

who would want to buy it knowing they lost that kind of money? It's like buying a house in a depressed area..

and no one EVER does that

 

[jimmythescot]

and no one EVER does that

99.9% of the population would say that they have to have a house. Nobody would ever say "I have to own a hockey team."

 

[edog37]

Well, the article STATES that people were interested in buying the team and keeping it local.

Perhaps before they stated the monetary losses...

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Perhaps before they stated the monetary losses...

No, the 130 million was between when the ASG and now, so they were losing money when they wanted to sell it. EDIT: Though they only owned the team for about a year before Belkin wanted out, so the majority of the money was lost during the court case (and after potential buyers were talked with).


But most people don't buy hockey teams to make them money in the short term. The majority of owners already have multiple steady buisness ventures to support them should the team lose money.

Examples- Peter Karmanos and Compuware, Mike Illitch and Little Caesars, and the list goes on.

Most owners, knowing that they will lost money from operating costs, still take on franchise so that it will grow in value, and then sell that for a profit.

Right now, the Thrashers are worth 158 million. The league average of an NHL franchise is 219 million (calculated from the numbers on that list). So, a person can purchase the Thrashers and keep them as they grow in value.

I'm not saying any of this will happen to the Thrashers. I am explaining why people buy sports teams (other than the intrinsic value of owning a sports team). It's not just short term gain that is a factor!!

 

[Jesus Christ Horburn]

Even if ASG can find a local owner to buy the team, they cannot play at Phillips unless they negotiate a lease with ASG first, correct?

 

[Magnus Fulgur]

Over 17,000 tonight.

Which is great, even if that's "sales" as opposed to "attendance" (it looked more like 14-15k in the stands). Tomorrow ATL plays TB at home on the same day that there's some NFL action going on and the local ECHL team has a home game at 4:30 and sucks up 4-5,000 fans.

If the Thrashers' attendance is good tomorrow...how can you possibly even think about moving the team (despite all the past horrific issues)? Especially since they're outdrawing the NBA Hawks of late!

 

[Jeffrey93]

But who could want to seek to relocate it elsewhere, with the NHL/contracts having full authority saying "not without our say so"?

This isn't Phoenix-this team can only relocate with the blessing of the NHL. The NHL has absolute leverage in this situation.

In theory no team can move without the blessing of the NHL. The NHL hasn't ever blocked a move though...so take that however you want.

If nobody is buying the Thrashers in Atlanta....there is no choice but to let the current Owners sell to somebody that will move them. At the time of the sale the NHL will approve the owner AND their relocation application.

 

[Brominator]

In theory no team can move without the blessing of the NHL. The NHL hasn't ever blocked a move though...so take that however you want.

If nobody is buying the Thrashers in Atlanta....there is no choice but to let the current Owners sell to somebody that will move them. At the time of the sale the NHL will approve the owner AND their relocation application.

NHL blocked the Blues move to Saskatoon. The Coyotes potential move to Hamilton was also blocked, albeit in a different way. It's possible that the NHL has blocked other moves too, behind closed doors.

The rest of your post is valid though. Obviously, if no owner comes forward in Atlanta, the team will move.

 

[btn]

Which is great, even if that's "sales" as opposed to "attendance" (it looked more like 14-15k in the stands). Tomorrow ATL plays TB at home on the same day that there's some NFL action going on and the local ECHL team has a home game at 4:30 and sucks up 4-5,000 fans.

If the Thrashers' attendance is good tomorrow...how can you possibly even think about moving the team (despite all the past horrific issues)? Especially since they're outdrawing the NBA Hawks of late!

Dude, game is in Tampa today.

 

[Fourier]

I'd say at least 85% of USA hockey fans were behind Winnipeg and Quebec and thought it was completely and totally wrong for those two cities to lose their teams.

Who or what outlets were saying the NHL had out-grown Canada in support of Colorado and Phoenix taking the Diques and Jets?
I find it preposterous that any statement about the NHL's need to move into large US markets in warm weather climates were made OUTSIDE of expansion.

Hell, I bet the Coyotes and Avs FANS feel bad that their team came via relocation instead of expansion.


But hey, if you'd like to think that the 300 million of us down here just plot and scheme ways to steal the sport of hockey from Canada, have at it.

You did not even have to look to the US to find such comments. These were commonplace in the Toronto media.