HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XIII: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-21-2009, 03:50 PM
  #976
2525
OFFSIDE NOT OFFSIDES
 
2525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: here
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,289
vCash: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
All I see is "it's okay when Balsillie does it, not okay when anyone else does it".

Face it, if this was a US owner trying to move a team out of Canada, you guys would be all over that misdeed like flies on potato salad.
I think if a Canadian team lost as much as the Yotes, had terrible attendance and a lousy TV deal, then most Canadians would say sorry, you don't deserve it.....as would most Americans.

And I'll say it just for you.....Bettman wouldn't be doing cartwheels to keep them.


Last edited by 2525: 08-21-2009 at 03:59 PM.
2525 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 03:50 PM
  #977
Arthur Rimbaud
Registered User
 
Arthur Rimbaud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
Anyone: Is this the case?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
4. On certain other occasions, the NHL has not removed the individual:

- Melnyk, although his legal troubles have just recently concluded, IIRC, and it remains to be seen what will happen,
By that, I mean:

The NHL has not announced any action regarding Melnyk's legal situation, but it may?

If so, I think there will be those who suggest that Melnyk's press release about Basillie could be seen as connected to possible repercussions resulting from his own situation.

I think they're going to say he's doing the NHL a favour.

Arthur Rimbaud is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:00 PM
  #978
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox X Mulder View Post
I think if a Canadian team lost as much as the Yotes
Please don't be talking about "I think I'll pay myself millions of dollars and call it losses" losses to me, thanks. Moyes has poisoned that claim permanently.

Quote:
And I'll say it just for you.....Bettman wouldn't be doing cartwheels to keep them.
You may believe whatever you like. He did do cartwheels for the Oilers and all the Canadian owners have given him credit for allowing the Oilers, Senators, and Flames to succeed where they are. I still trust their word a lot more than yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Rimbaud
If so, I think there will be those who suggest that Melnyk's press release about Basillie could be seen as connected to possible repercussions resulting from his own situation.
I think its being overanalyzed. Balsillie wasn't rejected due to his stock misdeeds, or at least it wasn't one of the primary reasons.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:03 PM
  #979
2525
OFFSIDE NOT OFFSIDES
 
2525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: here
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,289
vCash: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
Please don't be talking about "I think I'll pay myself millions of dollars and call it losses" losses to me, thanks. Moyes has poisoned that claim permanently.

2525 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:05 PM
  #980
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox X Mulder View Post
Roll your eyes all you like, it happened.

I wonder how many more "losses" will be exposed.

"We lost all this money, look! Well, okay, yeah sure we paid extra for office buildings I personally own that we didn't need, but that's it! Er, other than shifting the personal services contract to Gretzky to the team just before bankruptcy was declared, but nothing else! Um, other than using my personal airline at an inflated rate, but that's it! No more! Cough other than paying myself millions because I 'needed the money' at the time. That's it, really, honest!"

Moyes pillaged the franchise. Fact.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:08 PM
  #981
RR
Registered User
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaym3000 View Post
I think JB was convinced he had a deal with purchasing Nashville and knew he had to prove market viability to get the ok on relocation. Hence the ticket drive which never used the term Nashville Predators on teh tickets as some have stated. You guys are making way too much of a big deal about this - oh I forgot, that was the intention of the NHL and you have fallen hook, line and sinker. This is all a smokescreen. JB's character is just fine. The NHL DOES NOT want another team in S. Ontario - that is it. Just think about it.
I see. So "he thought" he had a deal and decided to run ads saying the Nashville Predators may be going out of business very soon and moving to Hamilton, then started taking ticket deposits for the Hamilton Predators.

IOW, if you owned a business and I thought we had a deal that I could buy it and move it, you'd be OK with me announcing you may soon be out of business in your market? Bet your employees, customers and community would love you for that, especially when it turned out to be false.

And you also wouldn't mind if I started to advertise that you may be going out of business and I was moving your business to my town? And I was so confident in this getting done (because I thought we had a deal) that I began to accept monies in advance in my new market for the inevitable arrival of the business you still own? And you don't see the mixed messages that sends and the harm it would do if the deal never went through?

You need to stop trying to minimize this. This was no "viability" study.

RR is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:09 PM
  #982
Arthur Rimbaud
Registered User
 
Arthur Rimbaud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
I think its being overanalyzed.
Couldn't agree more. That's why I'm amazed that no one's picked up on it. There were no shortage of finger-pointers at Gillette and Leipold being the ones who went after Basillie after the character and integrity vote and so on.


Last edited by Arthur Rimbaud: 08-21-2009 at 05:15 PM. Reason: wrong tense used
Arthur Rimbaud is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:11 PM
  #983
2525
OFFSIDE NOT OFFSIDES
 
2525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: here
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,289
vCash: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post

You may believe whatever you like. He did do cartwheels for the Oilers and all the Canadian owners have given him credit for allowing the Oilers, Senators, and Flames to succeed where they are. I still trust their word a lot more than yours.
Cartwheels? He agreed to allow a group to buy the Oilers, hardly spending the money he is now to keep the Yotes in Phoenix.
The Sens and Flames? Give me a break.

What was the reason 4 of the 6 Canadian teams were in financial trouble? Was it lack of attendance? Was it lack of TV viewers?
How much did they get? (1.9 million Canadian) and for how long?
How much did American teams receive in revenue sharing 2 years ago? 90 million!!! How much have Canadian fans paid into revenue sharing?

Another team in Southern Ontario would be a resounding success, what's stopping him?

If you think Hamilton will get a team before KC, you're dreaming...oh wait, maybe now it'll happen, after all the crap of the last few months.

2525 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:27 PM
  #984
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Melnyk discussing Balsillie court document

http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?cont...21_115123_3296

billy blaze is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:31 PM
  #985
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Rimbaud View Post
Couldn't agree more. That's why I'm amazed that no one's picked up on it. There were no shortage of finger-pointers at Gillette and Leipold being the ones who went after Basillie prior to the character and integrity vote and so on.
Sure there were. I've been pointing out Leipold's inconsistencies for a while now. Also, he wasn't very popular on the Preds board during the sale to Freeman et al. Boots has had several threads dedicated just to him. The questioning of the ethics of certain NHL owners is hardly a new thing around here. Hardly.

 
Old
08-21-2009, 04:37 PM
  #986
nye
Registered User
 
nye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Siberia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGG View Post
Slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? Can the BOG reject owners because of their background? Race? Gender? Clothes? Appearance? Hairstyle? Spouse?

The key point here is these criteria have to be applied to every prospective owner, and I would suggest the "character and integrity" clause has not ever been applied to anyone other than JB. If the NHL loses, that will be why - they seem to pull out that one very subjective clause only when it is convenient.

Should the NHL be able to reject the ownership bid of someone who is known or suspected of being of bad character, yet who is clean in a legal sense? Should the NHL be able to reject Al Capone as an owner?

nye is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:39 PM
  #987
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Sure there were. I've been pointing out Leipold's inconsistencies for a while now. Also, he wasn't very popular on the Preds board during the sale to Freeman et al. Boots has had several threads dedicated just to him. The questioning of the ethics of certain NHL owners is hardly a new thing around here. Hardly.
But of Balsillie's examples of "misconduct owners", how many had provable claims of misconduct about them before they became owners?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nye View Post
Should the NHL be able to reject the ownership bid of someone who is known or suspected of being of bad character, yet who is clean in a legal sense? Should the NHL be able to reject Al Capone as an owner?
Al Capone was convicted of quite a number of different things.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:45 PM
  #988
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
But of Balsillie's examples of "misconduct owners", how many had provable claims of misconduct about them before they became owners?



Al Capone was convicted of quite a number of different things.
before or after- what's the difference- should the same standard not be used for all?

I want to become a cop, yet I have a conviction on my record so I am voted down,
my neighbour becomes a cop, he has a clean record, the police dept hired him, while a cop he commits the same crime I did before I applied to become a cop. Should the police dept. disqualify him from being a cop?

billy blaze is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:45 PM
  #989
ShootThePuckCoyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 2,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nye View Post
Should the NHL be able to reject the ownership bid of someone who is known or suspected of being of bad character, yet who is clean in a legal sense? Should the NHL be able to reject Al Capone as an owner?
How about OJ Simpson before the robbery stuff? People are not convcited all the time of things there is little doubt they are guilty of. I wouldn't want a judge to tell me I had to take him regardless of my feelings because he wasn't convicted.

ShootThePuckCoyotes is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:47 PM
  #990
ShootThePuckCoyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 2,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billy blaze View Post
before or after- what's the difference- should the same standard not be used for all?

I want to become a cop, yet I have a conviction on my record so I am voted down,
my neighbour becomes a cop, he has a clean record, the police dept hired him, while a cop he commits the same crime I did before I applied to become a cop. Should the police dept. disqualify him from being a cop?
That is just not the right arguement. Cops are supposed to be held to a higher legal standard because the are cops. Of course he should be disqualified.

ShootThePuckCoyotes is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:50 PM
  #991
Arthur Rimbaud
Registered User
 
Arthur Rimbaud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Sure there were. I've been pointing out Leipold's inconsistencies for a while now. Also, he wasn't very popular on the Preds board during the sale to Freeman et al. Boots has had several threads dedicated just to him. The questioning of the ethics of certain NHL owners is hardly a new thing around here. Hardly.
Sorry! My mistake: that should have read after. Apologies.

Arthur Rimbaud is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:51 PM
  #992
ShootThePuckCoyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 2,208
vCash: 500
Here is another example that might help. A few years ago we were in the process of hiring a women at work when one of our clients informed us that he knew her and she has sued four different employers of sexual harrassment. Do you think we hired her? Hell no....who needs that headache.

ShootThePuckCoyotes is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 04:55 PM
  #993
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Lying to criminal authorities is a crime unto itself, and a very serious one. It boggles the mind that you'd think it is some kind of technical offense.
It boggles the mind that you would have the chutzpah to suggest that I think it is some kind of technical offense.

You are crossing the line here, bud.

GSC2k2* is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:03 PM
  #994
bbud
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
then why are the Texans in Houston, bbud?
They had someone wanting to spend money on teh expansion franchise and unlike NHL they said yes , i still think NHL may be a harder sell in Houston over Edmonton though .

bbud is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:14 PM
  #995
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 15,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
That's fine, mouser, but did anyone really expect that Balsillie, once rejected on these grounds, would just say accept a public statement against his character and integrity?

That's what's being argued, namely that he's fighting back and pointing out that there are character and integrity issues (whatever that means) within the league itself.

Either you uphold character and integrity requirements, or it's bluster. Some would suggest that having failed the character/integrity litmus test AFTER becoming an owner somehow frees them of any responsibility of showing character/integrity themselves. Can you really have it both ways?
Legally, yes they can have it both ways. Judge Baum even acknowledged as much during one of the early hearings when Freeman tried to push the "character issues" of existing/past NHL owners. Baum drew an analogy to his days as a practicing attorney saying "it's a lot easier to reject a lawyer from becoming a partner in the legal firm than it is to kick them out of the firm once they've achieved partner status" [paraphrased]. The fact that some owners had character/integrity issues identified after becoming owners doesn't nullify the league's right to review and reject prospective owners for character/integrity issues the league identifies beforehand.

If the NHL's right to review and approve prospective owners is upheld, for JB to successfully challenge would probably take something like:

a) Demonstrate that the league doesn't really care about existing owner integrity, so it's not an important criteria. Would be a hard case to make as the NHL can document multiple owners that were disciplined by the league for issues. There's also evidence that the NHL has expanded the prospective owner reviews in recent years to specifically avoid having more problem users in the fold. The "partner" analogy also applies--it's not incongruous or hypocritical for the NHL to treat owners and non-owners differently. The options available to the league to do so are very different.

b) Demonstrate that the NHL has previously approved owners with character/integrity issues the league was aware of beforehand. Again very difficult. The NHL would hinge their position not on the option backdating, but on JB's actions with the NHL and individual members. Can anyone come up with an example of a current/past owner who committed transgressions against the NHL or member clubs prior to being approved as an NHL owner?

mouser is online now  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:18 PM
  #996
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSC2k2 View Post
It boggles the mind that you would have the chutzpah to suggest that I think it is some kind of technical offense.

You are crossing the line here, bud.
What line's that?

Here's what you said:

"Samueli's conviction and JB's having confessed to and been found guilty of SEC and OSC offenses and agreeing to punishment in respect thereof is evidence of the result of plea bargaining by different prosecutors. It is objective evidence of nothing more."

That bespeaks a complete lack of understanding of the difference between crimes and civil violations. You described that difference as "splitting hairs" in one post and in the words above attributed the difference in their punishment as relating merely to plea bargaining -- missing completely the fact that a criminal agency settled with Samueli and a civil agency with no criminal authority settled with Balsillie. Samueli's a felon, Balsillie didn't commit a crime.

Your words further assert that there is nothing "objective" we can learn from one person pleading to a crime, the other to a civil violation -- which is simply nonsense. I was actually being kind and conservative in using the words "technical violation," since you plainly think Samueli's conduct was the same as Balsillie's -- you've said so at least two different ways.

Greschner4 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:19 PM
  #997
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Legally, yes they can have it both ways. Judge Baum even acknowledged as much during one of the early hearings when Freeman tried to push the "character issues" of existing/past NHL owners. Baum drew an analogy to his days as a practicing attorney saying "it's a lot easier to reject a lawyer from becoming a partner in the legal firm than it is to kick them out of the firm once they've achieved partner status" [paraphrased]. The fact that some owners had character/integrity issues identified after becoming owners doesn't nullify the league's right to review and reject prospective owners for character/integrity issues the league identifies beforehand.

If the NHL's right to review and approve prospective owners is upheld, for JB to successfully challenge would probably take something like:

a) Demonstrate that the league doesn't really care about existing owner integrity, so it's not an important criteria. Would be a hard case to make as the NHL can document multiple owners that were disciplined by the league for issues. There's also evidence that the NHL has expanded the prospective owner reviews in recent years to specifically avoid having more problem users in the fold. The "partner" analogy also applies--it's not incongruous or hypocritical for the NHL to treat owners and non-owners differently. The options available to the league to do so are very different.

b) Demonstrate that the NHL has previously approved owners with character/integrity issues the league was aware of beforehand. Again very difficult. The NHL would hinge their position not on the option backdating, but on JB's actions with the NHL and individual members. Can anyone come up with an example of a current/past owner who committed transgressions against the NHL or member clubs prior to being approved as an NHL owner?
Reinsdorf committed transgressions against the NBA, by suing them with regards to WGN and the Bulls TV rights.

Greschner4 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:22 PM
  #998
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,081
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Reinsdorf committed transgressions against the NBA, by suing them with regards to WGN and the Bulls TV rights.
How is that a transgression, especially since he was proven right?

You guys are confused. Becoming a member of a league doesn't mean someone gives up his legal rights. What YOU may view as a "transgression" certainly doesn't have to be the way the league does.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:23 PM
  #999
pfp
Registered User
 
pfp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 649
vCash: 500
How about we forget all the character issues. Should the NHL be forced to accept someone as an owner that they simply don't want to do business with. So long as he is not being turned away for reasons such as race, sex, religion , etc why should they be forced to accept him.

pfp is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 05:28 PM
  #1000
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirShagg View Post
How about we forget all the character issues. Should the NHL be forced to accept someone as an owner that they simply don't want to do business with. So long as he is not being turned away for reasons such as race, sex, religion , etc why should they be forced to accept him.
A bankruptcy case has to consider the best outcome for creditors. JB has been offering the best outcome thus far. If the NHL doesn't want JB's money, they can outbid him. Right?

Instead, they want to be able to pick and choose, and potentially having creditors subsidizing their preferences.

 
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.