View Single Post
Old
10-13-2012, 07:48 PM
  #662
fanofdo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PdashOw View Post
Fanofdo, your first point is well taken. Franchise value does not come up in the interview.

As for your second concern, I'm not sure how you expect me to verify whether or not Ciccarelli has received offers to keep the team in Sarnia. That stuff isn't public record. At some point, you do have to take their word on that. As for the rest, the OHL isn't going to comment on whether or not they'd allow a hypothetical move to a hypothetical place when the team isn't even actively (according to the owner) selling.

"Why" the franchise is losing money is addressed in that article to a certain extent (from the owners' perspective): they haven't had playoff success to bring in playoff dollars, and they have been running with a budget that was too high and is being lowered. Are there more factors? Probably. That's a big question.

Why they haven't experienced on-ice success wasn't really the point of the article, which was a discussion about economics, as I said earlier in response to Baldy. The two, while often coinciding, aren't always the case. You can have a losing hockey team that makes money, for example. The interview mostly stayed on economic topics.

To answer your final question, if a restaurant that drew ~3000 patrons/ night and had their servings broadcast on the radio and TV and was regularly featured in our paper was willing to talk about their finances, then yes, we probably would run something similar. The Observer does have a weekly business column where we cover issues such as opening and closing businesses.

If you have more issues with my reporting, feel free to send me a private message and I will address them if I can.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't care if you believe Ciccarelli or not, but I do believe this piece to be honestly reported and in depth. Perfect? Absolutely not. But genuine and as well verified as I could make it.
First off, I don't see where I was critical to your reporting. In fact let me say publicly right now, I see more effort from you to vary from the status quo than any previous reporter. I have no issue with your reporting as such, only that I am challenging that more could have been challenged in the article.

It was the owners that brought up finances - it should encompass everything, not just what they want to talk about and what I brought up should be basic knowledge. In fact, most of the world's stock markets are more about the increasing capital value of the asset rather than the dividend (something Mr. Ciccarelli well knows). Many businesses are comprised of several incorporated branches for tax reasons. I don't know the structure of the owner's holdings, only challenging the fact it is possible to have several holdings associated with the team and the arena - if that is the case, you really need to speak to all of the entities, not just a few (including the capital value increase of the asset). I agree that it isn't 'public knowledge', however it is very convenient that they say there are portions that are somewhat 'public'. Again, it is them that are 'crying poverty' (couldn't think of a better phrase), and I get the sense that they are hinting that they could use some help from the community - if they are we need more info.

"Why" the franchise is losing money is addressed in that article to a certain extent (from the owners' perspective): they haven't had playoff success to bring in playoff dollars, and they have been running with a budget that was too high and is being lowered. Are there more factors? Probably. That's a big question.

This is as you say is from the owner’s perspective – my point, and many other’s, is that these guys have “earned their success”. They have run the off ice portion of the business poorly and in fact is a significant part of the reason for dimensioning attendance. The parking lot incident is the worst, but goes to the point, if they had even a bit of understanding they never would have attempted such a stupid move. This is where I challenge you now and before (I understand you are the new guy on the block and have a boss), but why not challenge them? Poorly run off ice activities has NOTHING to do with bad luck injuries.

As for your second concern, I'm not sure how you expect me to verify whether or not Ciccarelli has received offers to keep the team in Sarnia. That stuff isn't public record. At some point, you do have to take their word on that. As for the rest, the OHL isn't going to comment on whether or not they'd allow a hypothetical move to a hypothetical place when the team isn't even actively (according to the owner) selling.

You don’t need their verification – look at the public record. The Steelhead’s franchise has been very available for the past few years, and not for a king’s ransom. If someone really legitimately wanted a franchise and wanted to move it, they could have. Cicarrelli’s are driving this franchise into the ground – and have used this veiled threat more than once. I am pointing out that if there was a decent building available and a willing owner, it would have been done by one of Metro Toronto teams. I am also pointing out that there is far too much support in this city for it to be without a franchise for long. A decently run team will be supported and profitable if it is run by competent owners.

If you have more issues with my reporting, feel free to send me a private message and I will address them if I can.

Nope – Someone posts it here and has a comment, I will comment here. As I stated, I do honestly mean it when I say you have done more than past reporters. I still don’t believe it goes far enough. It goes to your statement, “To answer your final question, if a restaurant that drew ~3000 patrons/ night and had their servings broadcast on the radio and TV and was regularly featured in our paper was willing to talk about their finances, then yes, we probably would run something similar. The Observer does have a weekly business column where we cover issues such as opening and closing businesses.” This is the real issue, this ownership has NEVER been legitimately challenged by the media. The reason is supported by your statement that, “their servings are broadcast on the radio and TV and was regularly featured in our paper.” I maintain that the relationship is too cozy and while you may want to dig deeper, you may have a boss that doesn’t. That’s why I will continue to challenge here.

fanofdo is offline