HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

The Official New Arena Thread: Part 3 "Hell In A Cell Match"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-21-2012, 01:45 PM
  #1
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,222
vCash: 8345
The Official New Arena Thread: Part 3 "Hell In A Cell Match"

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueChip01 View Post
OilersNow ‏@OilersNow

Bruce Saville: "If this arena doesn't get built, the team will be gone."
He also said the hockey team is not a good investment.

His group bought the team for 70mill and sold it for 200mill.

Seems like a pretty good investment to me.

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 01:50 PM
  #2
Diamondillium
DO YOU WANT ANTS!?
 
Diamondillium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,373
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
He also said the hockey team is not a good investment.

His group bought the team for 70mill and sold it for 200mill.

Seems like a pretty good investment to me.
These are rich people talking, 130mil is nothing and should be thrown away on will. Not worth the effort.


Diamondillium is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:03 PM
  #3
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
He also said the hockey team is not a good investment.

His group bought the team for 70mill and sold it for 200mill.

Seems like a pretty good investment to me.
Wonder how that investment looks when you include the yearly losses that they had to finance for a majority of the time they owned the team?

Krut is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:07 PM
  #4
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
Wonder how that investment looks when you include the yearly losses that they had to finance for a majority of the time they owned the team?
You mean losses that they could 100% write off against their capital gains?

Reimer is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:11 PM
  #5
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
You mean losses that they could 100% write off against their capital gains?
Are you their accountant? Even if that is true, you are talking for tax purposes. It isn't as if they get the totality of their loss returned to them.

Even if they were able to write off 100% of their losses, there are still much better places to invest $70 million (or $200 million) than in a hockey team.

Krut is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:14 PM
  #6
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,857
vCash: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
Are you their accountant? Even if that is true, you are talking for tax purposes. It isn't as if they get the totality of their loss returned to them.

Even if they were able to write off 100% of their losses, there are still much better places to invest $70 million than in a hockey team.
You wouldn't find too many investors complaining about making 130mil off a 70mil investment.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:20 PM
  #7
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
You wouldn't find too many investors complaining about making 130mil off a 70mil investment.
When you consider that they owned the team for 10 years in the pre-recession period, it isn't that great when you factor in losses in nearly every season that we have no knowledge of in terms of real size.

Krut is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:22 PM
  #8
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,857
vCash: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
When you consider that they owned the team for 10 years in the pre-recession period, it isn't that great when you factor in losses in nearly every season that we have no knowledge of in terms of real size.
But you said writing off 100% of their losses.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:23 PM
  #9
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Wow, Saville's really going out on a limb there.

Mandel mentioned yesterday that he's hopeful that we'll know the ultimate "once and for all" fate of the arena within the next two weeks. Fingers crossed that these goofs finally cross the t's and dot the i's.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:26 PM
  #10
Turrican*
Not a homer
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Stabmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlapse Vertigo View Post
Fingers crossed that these goofs finally cross the t's and dot the i's.
Moving the team!

Turrican* is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:27 PM
  #11
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
But you said writing off 100% of their losses.
Ya, which is for tax purposes. This wouldn't actually change the amount of money sunk into the organization to cover losses. Writing off a loss does not change the amount of money that was used.

Krut is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:29 PM
  #12
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,222
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
Wonder how that investment looks when you include the yearly losses that they had to finance for a majority of the time they owned the team?
Considering they tripled their investment and went to game seven of the Stanley Cup finals, I think they did ok.

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:29 PM
  #13
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,857
vCash: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlapse Vertigo View Post
Wow, Saville's really going out on a limb there.

Mandel mentioned yesterday that he's hopeful that we'll know the ultimate "once and for all" fate of the arena within the next two weeks. Fingers crossed that these goofs finally cross the t's and dot the i's.
And if in two weeks nothing happens then what? They don't have to hit the dirt til the spring of 2013 right? So what difference is there if they have everything agreed to in two weeks or a month from now?

I mean for **** sakes, how much planning does it take to have a guy take a shovel and scoop a shovel full of dirt?

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:30 PM
  #14
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreator View Post
Moving the team!
I wonder if Katz will change the colours on his Rexall Pharmacies? It would be pretty obnoxious of him to move the team and leave Edmonton with a daily reminder of the Oilers' colours.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:31 PM
  #15
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Moose Coleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlapse Vertigo View Post
I wonder if Katz will change the colours on his Rexall Pharmacies? It would be pretty obnoxious of him to move the team and leave Edmonton with a daily reminder of the Oilers' colours.
Ah they'll all be burned down anyway.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:32 PM
  #16
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
And if in two weeks nothing happens then what? They don't have to hit the dirt til the spring of 2013 right? So what difference is there if they have everything agreed to in two weeks or a month from now?

I mean for **** sakes, how much planning does it take to have a guy take a shovel and scoop a shovel full of dirt?
Well, Mandel keeps saying "This thing should be half built by now." He's frustrated with the situation and The Katz Group is becoming increasingly (annoyingly) impatient... it's better if they fix this mess immediately instead of waiting even longer.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:33 PM
  #17
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Ah they'll all be burned down anyway.
Or graffitied a different colour.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:35 PM
  #18
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Considering they tripled their investment and went to game seven of the Stanley Cup finals, I think they did ok.
Sure, they did ok, but it probably still wasn't the best place the money could have been invested. That's likely what Saville was referring to.

I seriously doubt that making it to the finals once was enough to cover their losses from basically every other season they owned the team.

Krut is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:49 PM
  #19
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
Are you their accountant? Even if that is true, you are talking for tax purposes. It isn't as if they get the totality of their loss returned to them.

Even if they were able to write off 100% of their losses, there are still much better places to invest $70 million (or $200 million) than in a hockey team.
Because I know stuff about accounting and taxes means I'm their accountant. Might have been a better generalization to say are you an accountant.

Anyhow yes of course for tax purposes. As Liquor said they didn't take losses in every single year and as you said we have no idea how bog or little or even if there were losses in all the other years(likely not).

However your point does stand it isn't the greatest investment of $70M due to the ROI over 10 years. However in terms of "investments" into sports franchises it has to be one of the more successful ones especially if you consider only other NHL franchises.

Reimer is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:53 PM
  #20
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
When you consider the full purchase price of the team (and not just the up front money that EIG had to raise), consider inflation, consider the opportunity cost, and the various cash calls they faced throughout the EIGs time; it is quite nonsensical to act like this was some greatly lucrative investment for the EIG.

But I have yet to hear/see anybody explain to me where Edmonton will find a better offer than the one which Katz has on the table.

The fact is, there are cities who would gladly build the building by themselves just to get a team. I don't think Katz would move the team, but what's stopping him from deciding to sell the team and putting us right back where we were before he stepped up.

I support the way Mandel has handled these negotiations for the most part. He's trying to get the best deal he can out of Katz. I think he has been doing a fine job of that.

However, if he and city council don't realize that their job is to push Katz for the best deal they can get without losing Katz, they are taking a terrible risk.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
thome_26 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:54 PM
  #21
Blue And Orange
#KevinLoweMustGo
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Europe
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,212
vCash: 500
This arena dispute couldn't have come at a worse time (lockout).

If the arena deal falls through, I will lose faith in humanity and life.

Blue And Orange is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:59 PM
  #22
Reimer
Tambo Troll Face
 
Reimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue And Orange View Post
This arena dispute couldn't have come at a worse time (lockout).

If the arena deal falls through, I will lose faith in humanity and life.
Wow you have low expectations of humanity and life if this arena deal falls through. Have fun trying to enjoy the rest of life.

Reimer is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 03:02 PM
  #23
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Moose Coleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
The fact is, there are cities who would gladly build the building by themselves just to get a team. I don't think Katz would move the team, but what's stopping him from deciding to sell the team and putting us right back where we were before he stepped up.
He'd probably take a bath on the sale. Why would anyone pay $250M for the Oilers when the going rate for franchises is about $170M?

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 03:03 PM
  #24
Jimmi Jenkins
Tastes like Chicken
 
Jimmi Jenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 38,241
vCash: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
He'd probably take a bath on the sale. Why would anyone pay $250M for the Oilers when the going rate for franchises is about $170M?
Depends where you're putting it, in Ont or Que, you'd pay just a "bit" more then $170M

Jimmi Jenkins is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 03:04 PM
  #25
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer View Post
Because I know stuff about accounting and taxes means I'm their accountant. Might have been a better generalization to say are you an accountant.

Anyhow yes of course for tax purposes. As Liquor said they didn't take losses in every single year and as you said we have no idea how bog or little or even if there were losses in all the other years(likely not).

However your point does stand it isn't the greatest investment of $70M due to the ROI over 10 years. However in terms of "investments" into sports franchises it has to be one of the more successful ones especially if you consider only other NHL franchises.
True (even if I don't agree that they didn't take substantial losses at points), and sorry if I sounded hostile, I didn't intend it that way.

In addition to your last point, the success of their investment in a sporting scope was helped along quite a bit due to one-off factors that Katz won't realize with his investment unless the rink is built (or even if the rink is built). The EIG bought the team at a bottom basement price when the Oilers were basically the least attractive investment possible. Once the new CBA was ratified, along with the rising strength of the Canadian dollar, the investment became much more attractive, very quickly. Katz bought the team at a premium without hope for even an average return unless he sinks even more cash into a new rink. The EIG stepped in at the right time and got lucky, Katz is unlikely to see the same result.

Krut is online now  
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 09:41 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.