View Single Post
12-21-2012, 03:12 PM
Fugu's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,783
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by atomic View Post
No actually it makes a lot of sense. Teams like the Rangers overpaying for players when there was no cap really hurt the league. Getting rid of 3 teams to keep 27 teams profitable makes sense as well. It is logical. there is no business doctrine that says you should do business with other companies to keep them highly profitable while hurting your own bottom line.

I think I could live without the Rangers, Canadians, and Maple Leafs in the league. And if it makes the league stronger everyone should be for it. It would probably lead to less labor strife in the future. But alas it is not possible as you said people paid a lot of money for those franchises they wouldn't go down without a fight.

No, it makes no business sense. You're giving up massive market share, along with the highest per customer return in the league. That goes against every business doctrine except one outlined by Marx (which may be an oxymoron to call it a 'business' doctrine).

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote