View Single Post
03-10-2013, 05:07 PM
Fugu's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
I find the most persuasive evidence is the $300MM+ subsidy that the NHL cultivated to offset the reported $170MM franchise price. Sure, the NHL might be seeking more than market value but the league also fully delivered a mechanism to remove the burden of an inflated price. The franchise was essentially free to any potential owner who would put up the revolver to operate the team in Glendale. JIG looked for someone(s) willing to do that for about a year or so, couldn't make it happen.

Would it not be an even greater 'offset' if the team was transferred for $70 MM, a figure somewhat close to Reinsdorf's original offer (give or take a few million)?

I think the league in essence ran into problems with their own requirements, the personal guarantee from an owner, and sufficient liquidity to operate the team should revenues and subsidies fail to cover all costs.

I still think that the current league model forces operating costs to fall within a range that simply is too high for about a third of the current teams. If your starting point then is a team that's already in financial trouble, it's hard to achieve a league average fueled by the top teams, let alone surpass that revenue growth average. The model is forced spending, plain and simple.

Fugu is offline