Why $60 million to move Atlanta to Winnipeg?

[StoneColdFlower*]

What's this relocation fee business? Why should a potential investor be penalized for moving a franchise from a failed market to a viable that doesn't encroach on anybody else's turf? How does this crap encourage serious investors to treat the league with respect?

Click to read more...

 

[Melrose Munch]

This is the part of the deal.

 

[King Woodballs]

Teams have always paid a relo fee
Just goes up every time

 

[Winnipeg Jets]

So what I don't understand is.... is this price included in the speculated $110m selling price or is it on top? Seems like the owners of the Thrashers would get quite a small price for selling.

 

[King Woodballs]

110 for the team + 60 relo fee for 170

 

[kdb209]

What's this relocation fee business? Why should a potential investor be penalized for moving a franchise from a failed market to a viable that doesn't encroach on anybody else's turf? How does this crap encourage serious investors to treat the league with respect?

Because the potential investor does not own the rights to that new market. The NHL owns those rights - it owns the rights to all markets outside the home territories already granted to existing franchises - and can demand a relocation fee in return for those rights.

Under the precedent of Raiders II a League may demand a relocation fee equal to the value of the franchise in the new location minus it's value in the old location.

 

[Cornwall OHL]

Because the potential investor does not own the rights to that new market. The NHL owns those rights - it owns the rights to all markets outside the home territories already granted to existing franchises - and can demand a relocation fee in return for those rights.

Under the precedent of Raiders II a League may demand a relocation fee equal to the value of the franchise in the new location minus it's value in the old location.

So does this mean that Winnipeg wouldn't necessarily pay a relocation fee because the value of Atlanta should be high?

 

[atl thrasher344]

So does this mean that Winnipeg wouldn't necessarily pay a relocation fee because the value of Atlanta should be high?

No, no matter what, Winnipeg would pay a relocation fee if i goes down this year. It's to make up for the losses in Phoenix.

 

[Winnipeg Jets]

110 for the team + 60 relo fee for 170

Ah, thanks

 

[Ogopogo*]

What's this relocation fee business? Why should a potential investor be penalized for moving a franchise from a failed market to a viable that doesn't encroach on anybody else's turf? How does this crap encourage serious investors to treat the league with respect?

$60 million divided by 30 = $2 million per team.

Why not take a cash grab when you can?

 

[Dado]

110 for the team + 60 relo fee for 170

This has been announced, or are we playing with make believe numbers?

 

[New User Name]

Someone has to pay for Phoenix

 

[Jonas1235]

$60 million divided by 30 = $2 million per team.

Why not take a cash grab when you can?

It's actually 29 teams. Err...maybe 28...

 

[Whileee]

No, no matter what, Winnipeg would pay a relocation fee if i goes down this year. It's to make up for the losses in Phoenix.

Someone has to pay for Phoenix

I see. So the NHL's policy is that the relocation fee is established to pay for losses incurred from its ownership adventure in another market. Quite a precedent to step. In that case, I suppose the Coyotes fans can thank the TNSE for enabling the retention of their team in Glendale.

 

[seanlinden]

The NHL can charge whatever they want for a relocation fee... it's all up to whether the market is willing to pay it. If Atlanta has a buyer for $110m and Winnipeg has a buyer for $170m, then the NHL is fully within their rights to more, less, or exactly $60m. If they charge more than $60m, the team would stay in Atlanta. If they charged less than $60m, the team would move to winnipeg.

 

[dobiezeke*]

I see. So the NHL's policy is that the relocation fee is established to pay for losses incurred from its ownership adventure in another market. Quite a precedent to step. In that case, I suppose the Coyotes fans can thank the TNSE for enabling the retention of their team in Glendale.

One could speculate that the reason the league decided to continue the ownership of Phoenix for one more year with continued losses to the BOG was the fact that they knew they would be receiving 60 million in the near futue...

But that's just speculation

 

[Scandale du Jour]

One could speculate that the reason the league decided to continue the ownership of Phoenix for one more year with continued losses to the BOG was the fact that they knew they would be receiving 60 million in the near futue...

But that's just speculation

Actually, I heard rumors (from a friend who doesn't have inside sources so take it with a grain of salt) and I've seen on Twitter (from a journalist I didn't know about before) that the Coyotes will stay one more year in Phoenix before moving to Quebec City because Quebecor (futur Nordiques owners) can't get the CRTC to allow them to broadcast NHL games on their projected sport channel. RDS (Habs) has exclusive rights until the end of 2011-2012 for nationally televised games in French. Quebecor would only be able to broadcast games in Quebec City.

I have "sources", but they are not credible, so we can say that I'M also "speculating".

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Heh, so now we're speculating about speculative franchise relocations?

Gotta love it.

And, truth be told, I think that the NHL would be shooting itself in the foot if they charged that massive of a relocation fee. If the situation in Glendale should've taught the league anything, it's that burdening a team with too high of a setup cost can cause repercussions that hold a team back for years.

 

[Street Hawk]

Heh, so now we're speculating about speculative franchise relocations?

Gotta love it.

And, truth be told, I think that the NHL would be shooting itself in the foot if they charged that massive of a relocation fee. If the situation in Glendale should've taught the league anything, it's that burdening a team with too high of a setup cost can cause repercussions that hold a team back for years.

I agree. I remember many articles back when Ottawa and TB got their expansion teams, a lot of sports business people said that the NHL was making a mistake charging that high an expansion fee and also for asking the 2 clubs to pay all that in advance rather than part of it over the first 5 years of the club's operations.

NHL needs more of their markets to succeed. It's mostly Glendale's money that has been lost, as Gary was so happy to point out to everyone on a radio interview earlier this month.

 

[deckercky]

Maybe the NHL will throw the rights to the Jets (which are owned by the Coyotes which the NHL owns) in as a bonus for paying said relocation fee. I certainly hope so.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

Actually, I heard rumors (from a friend who doesn't have inside sources so take it with a grain of salt) and I've seen on Twitter (from a journalist I didn't know about before) that the Coyotes will stay one more year in Phoenix before moving to Quebec City because Quebecor (futur Nordiques owners) can't get the CRTC to allow them to broadcast NHL games on their projected sport channel. RDS (Habs) has exclusive rights until the end of 2011-2012 for nationally televised games in French. Quebecor would only be able to broadcast games in Quebec City.

I have "sources", but they are not credible, so we can say that I'M also "speculating".

This doesn't strike me as the sort of thing the CRTC would wade into - though it could be that so many people are saying so many things that it all melts into one big rumour.

So does this mean that Winnipeg wouldn't necessarily pay a relocation fee because the value of Atlanta should be high?

There is no "should" .. if the team is losing money, attendance is low, and tickets are cheap in comparison to other franchises, there's nothing to suggest that the value of the Atlanta market is high.

 

[King Woodballs]

This has been announced, or are we playing with make believe numbers?

we are playing the the speculated numbers brought up by nearly everyone in the media that has talked about it

 

[Kebekoi]

Actually, I heard rumors (from a friend who doesn't have inside sources so take it with a grain of salt) and I've seen on Twitter (from a journalist I didn't know about before) that the Coyotes will stay one more year in Phoenix before moving to Quebec City because Quebecor (futur Nordiques owners) can't get the CRTC to allow them to broadcast NHL games on their projected sport channel. RDS (Habs) has exclusive rights until the end of 2011-2012 for nationally televised games in French. Quebecor would only be able to broadcast games in Quebec City.

I have "sources", but they are not credible, so we can say that I'M also "speculating".

RDS have the monopoly in french for the Habs.

I don't think that it spans to a 2nd Quebec team.

 

[GKJ]

The team that's moving was probably losing money, and this is a way to get some back.

 

[MsMeow]

The team that's moving was probably losing money, and this is a way to get some back.

Or Winnipeg is being charged money that Phx has been losing. Gong show!