HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Friedman Speculates on Teams Believed to be Hardliners

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-31-2012, 06:45 PM
  #76
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,330
vCash: 515
Of the big teams rumored while the pressure on Philly with Snider and comcast is noted. I would think both Boston and Chicago remain in the hardline ranks. Wirtz is believed by many to fit into these ranks even though it might not make a lot of sense to outsiders looking in. Obviously Jacobs is hardline.

A curious one would be the New Jersey Devils. One would think they would be hardline if they weren't on the verge of bankruptcy. Can they really afford a lost season? But the ideals outside of that would seem to fit them especially chasing the revenue sharing with Florida, Anaheim, and NYI.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 06:55 PM
  #77
PanthersHockey1
Avs Bandwagon
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UF & Boca Raton
Country: United States
Posts: 5,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
Yes, and the economics suggest that you shouldnt have a team. Thanks for making my point.
Yup the same economic principles that applied to the annihilation of Quebec City and Winnipeg in the 1990's. Don't talk in absolutes-Combining arrogance and ignorance often spells disaster.

PanthersHockey1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 06:57 PM
  #78
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
No, the owners (including the owner of your team) wanted a 30 team league. They made that decision when they accepted the expansion fee from each of the new teams. If you want these teams gone then your owner will have to participate in buying those franchises and then folding them.

The teams that are "hardliners", and we really don't know who they are, because Snider has been a hawk in the past as has Jacobs, and even Ilitch to some extent, are not all failures. Most likely they understand the economic reality of the situation.

Thankfully, fans from big market teams, that for some reason love to pay top dollar for the crap sandwich their GM serves up year after year, don't have much of a say in all this.
Well they could stop revenue sharing and just watch them die. At least they save the buyout.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:10 PM
  #79
Pump n Dump
Registered User
 
Pump n Dump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
No, the owners (including the owner of your team) wanted a 30 team league. They made that decision when they accepted the expansion fee from each of the new teams. If you want these teams gone then your owner will have to participate in buying those franchises and then folding them.
Why would they have to do that when they can be moved?

Pump n Dump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:15 PM
  #80
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Well they could stop revenue sharing and just watch them die. At least they save the buyout.
Unfortunately for some folks in the great white north, it doesn't work like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fifty Fifty View Post
Why would they have to do that when they can be moved?
What if the owner doesn't want to move them?


Last edited by KINGS17: 10-31-2012 at 07:23 PM.
KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:18 PM
  #81
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Well they could stop revenue sharing and just watch them die. At least they save the buyout.
Funny thing about being the minority when a vote is taken, you lose. They can't just stop revenue sharing if there are enough owners who think revenue sharing should continue - and there always will be.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:20 PM
  #82
Pump n Dump
Registered User
 
Pump n Dump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
What if the owner doesn't want to move them?
Then the owner can suck it up.

Pump n Dump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:22 PM
  #83
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,330
vCash: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Unfortunately for some folks in the great white north, it doesn't work like that.
Or very fortunately if you look at the last lockout, since it was done in a large part to save Canadian franchises. I guess we forgot about that in 8 short years.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:24 PM
  #84
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post

What if the owner doesn't want to move them?
Well then no prob just suck up the losses.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:24 PM
  #85
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fifty Fifty View Post
Then the owner can suck it up.
That might work on the playground, but I doubt that it carries much weight in a court of law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Well then no prob just suck up the losses.
The problem for you and the NHLPA is that there are too many teams in this position, so they will win the day eventually.

The players will end up taking less, and revenue sharing will be increased.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:26 PM
  #86
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
That might work on the playground, but I doubt that it carries much weight in a court of law.
What? The owners will complain they are losing money and the other kids won't give me theirs.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:33 PM
  #87
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER
GO LEAFS GO
 
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHill Seeker View Post
if this is true, Frankly it's a joke. Teams like the Habs, Leafs, NYR, Canucks, etc should be in positions of power instead of being held hostage..
Considering those teams are some of the NHL's major and best markets, I find it hard to believe they don't have as much say compared to someone like Jeremy Jacobs.

LEAFS FAN 4 EVER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:34 PM
  #88
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
What? The owners will complain they are losing money and the other kids won't give me theirs.
No, more like the employees have been told by the owner of a business (their boss) that the business is losing money and that they will have to take a pay cut if they want the business to stay in the black so they can all keep their jobs.

EMPLOYEES

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:40 PM
  #89
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,605
vCash: 50
So who wants to speculate on which players are ready to break ranks?

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:45 PM
  #90
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,330
vCash: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
Yeah and look at the teams in the red year after year and look where they're located.
Isn't the team located geographically at the very most northern point, the team that your screen names player is on in the red? Yeah well they claim to be, they also would have been killed within the last 10 years if people didn't decide they were worth saving.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:46 PM
  #91
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
So who wants to speculate on which players are ready to break ranks?
None, because there is no picket line to cross.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:47 PM
  #92
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Jamison is still BOG, read the fine print. He will have to give up the Sharks if he buys the Coyotes but hasn't yet.

Leipold's interest is making money. If he makes more with a hawkish stance and a lockout, it may be worth the temporary loss. And, Minny is very close to being a money printing machine even with the big contracts, even more so with a owner-friendly CBA. It is not as simplistic as you portray with Jacobs being the best case in point for an owner making out yet maintaining a hawkish stance.

Your best bet to find stances of individual governors is to watch what they say when there isn't a lockout (Leonsis). Look for quotes regarding employees around their other businesses (Jacobs).
Jamison is no longer on the BoG - the Sharks representative is now owner Kevin Compton.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks/...d-predictions/

Quote:
Havlat officially out of opener, Niemi skating in early practice, new governor ó and predictions
POSTED BY DAVID POLLAK ON OCTOBER 6TH, 2011 AT 9:42 AM |

...

*****Short note in todayís print edition that Iíll repeat here: Kevin Compton is the new Sharks rep on the NHL board of governors. Compton likes to keep a low profile, but is the most visible of a behind-the-scenes ownership group.

Greg Jamison had held onto his membership on the NHL board after stepping down as CEO, but his involvement with a group looking into purchasing the Phoenix Coyotes pretty much required the change here.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 07:58 PM
  #93
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,857
vCash: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Under his watch though
As i pointed out, not really. One of the two re-locations was going to happen regardless. The Northstars were as good as gone before Bettman's first day as commish, nothing he could have done would have stopped it.
The second relocation one was pure economics exacerbated by Winnipeg not building a new arena. FWIW, there had been issues in this regard as far back as the 80s.
The expansion franchises (aside from Columbus) were going to happen regardless of who was at the helm of the league. They had already been agreed upon. As much as people like to vilify the guy, Florida and Anaheim can't be attributed to Bettman without some serious mental gymnastics taking place.

Quote:
a few of these teams as well have had inflated declarations of value to the public concerning resales.
not doubting you on this one. I'd actually be interested in seeing a source if not multiple sources.

Quote:
Stern would not have let so many franchises flounder around for so long.....
You'd be wrong about that. Charlotte has been a total gong show. The Kings are struggling badly. New Orleans has been struggling badly for about 5 years now, even going as far as being owned by the NBA for a few seasons until this summer. Coincidentally the New Orleans sale was the season after they signed a new, more favorable (to small markets and owners in general) CBA. Essentially, as bad as the claims about the profitability of many NHL teams are, they were worse with the NBA under their old CBA. There was talk of 22 teams losing money in a league with a much stronger TV contract then the NHL had. It's not an NHL-specific issue, even the allmighty NFL has teams which have had significant issues in this regard recently (Minnesota, Jacksonville).


Last edited by DaveG: 10-31-2012 at 08:09 PM.
DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:06 PM
  #94
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
So basically, mostly the markets Gary was responsible for introducing to the league, and the 1 team he has owned for 3 years......
Quote:
While the players believe Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is calling the shots, an educated guess at the final group includes but may not be limited to Anaheim, Columbus, Florida, the Islanders, Phoenix, St. Louis, Washington and Dallas
I've bolded all of the teams that Gary introduced into the league.

Buck Aki Berg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:13 PM
  #95
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,446
vCash: 500
It's clearly a speculation but he doesn't really provide reasons why he thinks that's the case. He isn't obligated to provide those reasons but it does prevent me from putting much stock into his speculations.

Ari91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:40 PM
  #96
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,023
vCash: 500
You don't have to pay attention, but Friedman's reputation is solid. He's right behind Bob McKenzie and Pierre LeBrun (who represent the gold standard).

His analysis is worth more than all the words written about the lockout on this forum to date. By a long shot.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:45 PM
  #97
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Jamison is no longer on the BoG - the Sharks representative is now owner Kevin Compton.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks/...d-predictions/
Thanks.

I missed the update as he was both doing the Coyote's pursuit and was still BOG for a time while not CEO of the Sharks.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:53 PM
  #98
Hugo Sham
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 10,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
Considering those teams are some of the NHL's major and best markets, I find it hard to believe they don't have as much say compared to someone like Jeremy Jacobs.
100% agree with this but who knows what is going on in backroom dealings + each team has one 1 vote, so there are FAR more have-nots who will stick together in mutual interest

Hugo Sham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 08:59 PM
  #99
stuffradio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
Considering those teams are some of the NHL's major and best markets, I find it hard to believe they don't have as much say compared to someone like Jeremy Jacobs.
We all know how Bettman works. NO matter how successful your team is, it's Bettman's way. He only has his close buddies he listens to like Snider.

stuffradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 09:15 PM
  #100
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanthersHockey1 View Post
Yup the same economic principles that applied to the annihilation of Quebec City and Winnipeg in the 1990's. Don't talk in absolutes-Combining arrogance and ignorance often spells disaster.
You mean to say the Canadian dollar being worth 65 cents.

The fact that there was no salary cap and no revenue sharing had nothing to do with either team being moved.

Both however likely will cause more teams to move in the future. If you create a system where a business has to spend money beyond the amount of money it can generate in revenues, you are doomed for failure. Thats what the NHL has created.

The CyNick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 07:48 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.