HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

NHL expansion plans

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-12-2012, 10:17 AM
  #1
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
NHL expansion plans

Jason Kay is the Editor-in-Chief of THN. He's tweeted about the NHL possibly awarding two expansion franchises to Canada, after the lockout.

This news comes a few weeks after Levin, told Seattle reporters that he's explored bringing an NHL team to Seattle and expects it'll have to be through expansion.


Not 100% surprising considering Bettman's fight againt relocation, the much higher fees paid for expansion and the pr beating that Bettman is taking north of the border.




https://twitter.com/JKTHN/statuses/256376786852667392
11 Oct 12
There's strong speculation the NHL could announce two expansion teams for Canada once CBA deal struck: Quebec & Toronto. More in Oct. 29 THN


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...2759--nhl.html
Thu, Sep 20, 2012
"I can tell you there are not teams for sale that are available to move," Levin told ESPN the Magazine on Wednesday.

Not the Coyotes? Or maybe one day the Islanders? "My understanding is that the Phoenix deal, [Greg Jamison] has come up with the money," Levin said. "The answer to the Islanders moving is never. They're not moving out of that market. No chance that's going to happen."

Instead, Levin's plan centers on expansion. And he's optimistic it won't be long after the CBA is settled that the NHL will turn to expansion as the next phase in growing the league. "I would think three years," he said.

The NHL's realignment plan, which was agreed upon during last December's board of governors meeting, certainly made it easy to plug in two more franchises. Levin thinks Seattle would be considered one of the front-runners to land a new team. "There's Quebec and Las Vegas that are also in there," he said.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 11:16 AM
  #2
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
If Levin wants a franchise, he'll say whatever Bettman wants him to say.

Bettman will, obviously, continue to insist that the Isles are not moving until the question of their permanent home is completely hopeless in 2015.

Why? Because the moment it is floated that Wang could sell to an owner wanting to move the Isles, Wang is shown the finger by *all* local pols. Whatever loyal fanbase the Isles have? Gone in a second. It's a deal-breaker. This is not friggin' Edmonton, where people can't find other things to do in the winter. People will not react well to blackmail.

Lots of quotes, zero critical thinking. This post gets a Biden-smile.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 11:36 AM
  #3
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
If Levin wants a franchise, he'll say whatever Bettman wants him to say.

Bettman will, obviously, continue to insist that the Isles are not moving until the question of their permanent home is completely hopeless in 2015.

Why? Because the moment it is floated that Wang could sell to an owner wanting to move the Isles, Wang is shown the finger by *all* local pols. Whatever loyal fanbase the Isles have? Gone in a second. It's a deal-breaker. This is not friggin' Edmonton, where people can't find other things to do in the winter. People will not react well to blackmail.

Lots of quotes, zero critical thinking. This post gets a Biden-smile.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Bettman's never insisted that the isles won't move. He has said several times, that Wang won't play in the Coliseum, beyond 2015.

One thing to keep in mind, is that in the Lighthouse proposal that Bettman supported, the isles would have had a $200m renovation and not a brand new arena.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 11:36 AM
  #4
blitzkriegs
Registered User
 
blitzkriegs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Beach & Mtn & Island
Posts: 9,060
vCash: 500
Owners get fees, market share, and franchise values. The players? Two more teams means new jobs and PA membership.

Think the league is hanging this out there to say "look, we can bring in more teams, ie more revenue and jobs, but not unless you meet certain conditions on sustainability of the business model to ensure franchises don't lose money"

Good for the league.

blitzkriegs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 12:48 PM
  #5
Twine Seeking Missle
Go monkey go!!!
 
Twine Seeking Missle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Suck-town
Country: United States
Posts: 7,892
vCash: 500
So the league is struggling and their solution is more teams? Ok. I get the expansion fee angle but... really?

If you listen to the owners (yea, I know), the whole reason we are yet again in the midst of a lockout is because there are a certain number of teams who are in the red. The league needs stability. Wouldn't it be smarter to contract at this point? Yes I realize the league never wants to lose markets but the quality of play will be that much better. Of course the PA would never allow all those jobs to be lost but expansion waters down the talent even more. You could make the argument that the rapid expansion in the early-mid 90's has put us in the position we are today. The hockey was just better in the late 80's/early 90's. Whether that is a result of too many teams or simply a change in style of play could be argued either way.

I can't see contraction ever happening. However, the smart thing to do would be to keep the league at 30 teams and move the struggling franchises to a more desirable location in terms of revenue/fan support. But of course that could never happen unless you get the owners of those struggling teams to sell in the first place.

I think I just went in a complete circle in every one of those points. Forgive me. Hockey was supposed to start last night and I am already in withdrawal.

Twine Seeking Missle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 01:01 PM
  #6
redbull
movin'on up
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blitzkriegs View Post
Owners get fees, market share, and franchise values. The players? Two more teams means new jobs and PA membership.

Think the league is hanging this out there to say "look, we can bring in more teams, ie more revenue and jobs, but not unless you meet certain conditions on sustainability of the business model to ensure franchises don't lose money"

Good for the league.
there might be some truth to this, especially given the timing and lack of real detail. Seems like a media fluff story (of course, this is all we have nowadays for hockey talk, aside from the KHL)


Bettman won't let the NYI leave that market. He'll save the new arenas for expansion, collect the expansion fee, as much as he can. I don't believe the league should add another 60 jobs though, because i don't think the talent base is there - BUT, I find that $$$ typically carries a lot more weight in these decisions.


There must be a county in that market that will approve a new building, an owner who'll see the potential with that market, that will step in at some point. It'll be interesting to see it play out because although "anything can happen", I'm certain Bettman wants as many teams in these large markets as possible. Not sure what's going on with Jersey. They've had a lot of on-ice success, not much in the stands or in profitability.

The Toronto rumour has been out there for a while and they recently approved an NHL arena just outside Toronto. That group has said NOTHING about an NHL team, which means that they've had some discussions already, just sticking to Bettman's rules.

Enough financial people, sports/multi-venue arena "experts" saying that a venue of that size makes zero sense unless you have a major sports franchise. Though it would be profitable with enough concert dates, etc, the real money would come from a pro sports team. So I do expect a team to move there, just not from the NY market that Bettman will try and protect.

I think the NHL is a mess behind the scenes, regarding the revenue/profit numbers for a a dozen or so NHL teams. Despite the "record revenues" Bettman does his PR thing with, I'm sure there are a lot of teams really struggling, and they need some cost control to stay alive.

I think the players should recognize this at some point and understand that lower salaries is probably a good thing for the game.

I really hate labour disruptions in pro-sports.

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 01:17 PM
  #7
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
https://twitter.com/JKTHN/statuses/256376786852667392
11 Oct 12
There's strong speculation the NHL could announce two expansion teams for Canada once CBA deal struck: Quebec & Toronto. More in Oct. 29 THN


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...2759--nhl.html
Thu, Sep 20, 2012
"I can tell you there are not teams for sale that are available to move," Levin told ESPN the Magazine on Wednesday.

Not the Coyotes? Or maybe one day the Islanders? "My understanding is that the Phoenix deal, [Greg Jamison] has come up with the money," Levin said. "The answer to the Islanders moving is never. They're not moving out of that market. No chance that's going to happen."
.
Those same words were once said about the Brooklyn Dodgers. Never say never.

Can't believe they'd consider expansion when the product is so watered down now. Money, money, money.

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 01:19 PM
  #8
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
This post gets a Biden-smile.

Cheers,

Dan-o
That's my Biden smile.

Uncle Joe schooled Eddie Munster last night.

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 01:22 PM
  #9
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twine Seeking Missle View Post
So the league is struggling and their solution is more teams? Ok. I get the expansion fee angle but... really?

If you listen to the owners (yea, I know), the whole reason we are yet again in the midst of a lockout is because there are a certain number of teams who are in the red. The league needs stability. Wouldn't it be smarter to contract at this point? Yes I realize the league never wants to lose markets but the quality of play will be that much better. Of course the PA would never allow all those jobs to be lost but expansion waters down the talent even more.
I can't see contraction ever happening. However, the smart thing to do would be to keep the league at 30 teams and move the struggling franchises to a more desirable location in terms of revenue/fan support. But of course that could never happen unless you get the owners of those struggling teams to sell in the first place.

:
I agree we won't see contraction.

Maybe one of the reasons we are reading about 2 potential Canadian teams, instead of 1 Canadian team and 1 US team, is because the Canadian dollar is very strong and the Canadian franchises are doing so well?

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 01:28 PM
  #10
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
Those same words were once said about the Brooklyn Dodgers. Never say never.

Can't believe they'd consider expansion when the product is so watered down now. Money, money, money.
Lucky for NYI fans, that there is a brand new, state of the art arena in Brooklyn.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...6141/index.htm
The unsentimental O'Malley, worried about the future of his ball club, had given clear, repeated warnings that he was not going to stay in Ebbets Field and that he needed New York City's official assistance to create a new, larger, more convenient stadium. Sullivan doesn't canonize O'Malley or dismiss the slick, devious side of the man's nature, but he argues persuasively that the major blame for the Dodgers' departure from New York lies more with the bickering, indolent and shortsighted leaders of the city government than with O'Malley's lust for the buck. " 'Leisurely' is the kindest description one can apply to the actions taken by New York officials," he writes. The people in Los Angeles who wanted the Dodgers worked hard and efficiently to overcome local opposition and to solve the complex problems that stood in the way. "Their counterparts in New York," Sullivan says, "were indifferent or hostile to measures necessary for keeping the team."

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 02:39 PM
  #11
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Lucky for NYI fans, that there is a brand new, state of the art arena in Brooklyn.
Well, let's assume what you all say is true. There's is no movement on a new or upgraded facility. That leaves Brooklyn, and two possibilities:

(i) Wang is tenant.

(ii) Wang sells to Prokhorov/Ratner.

I may be wrong, but I believe that (i) is not live, at least, except as a temporary option given movement toward a new or upgraded arena, for which there is (obviously) none. I could be wrong about this, but it just sounds implausible to me, knowing what we know about Wang.

So let's put aside Wang as tenant for a moment. Suppose he wants to work out a deal with Ratner/Prokhorov. Further, suppose that Bettman simply will not allow the Isles to move. That gives Prokhorov/Ratner *incredible* leverage if they want to buy the Isles. Wang would have to sell, or the equity in his franchise collapses. Or he would have to find a third party, and why would *they* pay more than Ratner/Prokhorov would?

Is it realistic to believe that Bettman would, push comes to shove, put Wang in this situation? Personally, I hope not. Wang might suck in some respects, but that would be completely uncalled for, and it would put the rest of the owners in the league on notice. I wonder if Bettman would survive it with his job.

Now, suppose Bettman is serious (which I doubt) that the Islanders will never move. That would put Wang in a horrible position, and it would put the Brooklyn ownership in a position where they can grab a franchise at a bargain-basement price.

While that would be horribly unfair to Wang, who has been a good soldier on the business end for years, it would be absolutely sky-is-the-limit wonderful for me. 30 games a year wonderful. And probably a new commissioner.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 02:44 PM
  #12
CDirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 429
vCash: 500
The the owners are gonna pull this needless lockout, piss off all the fans to the point where they are going to stay away for a long time, and their end game here is to add more teams?

Are they praying that the folks in these expansion markets are going to have no idea as to WTF is going on?

CDirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 02:50 PM
  #13
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,980
vCash: 500
The expansion is not a bad thing. It brings in more money for the league, lowers the cap (unless the two expansion teams do very well at the gate), allows for parity, true parity with the four division format, reducing travel time and cost, increases exposure and thus more revenue over TV (unless Toronto gets another team, which is ludicrous), but....

We have the talent level drop. Expansion drafts will hurt us.

As a condition, the expansion fees should go to shore up the finances of existing franchises, NOT to Bettman's senseless running of this league. For the sake of two teams bringing the cap down (to counter further NYR and TML's high hit on the cap figures), I think it's worth it. Just say no to Vegas. Talk about a stupid idea.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 02:51 PM
  #14
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
That's my Biden smile.

Uncle Joe schooled Eddie Munster last night.
I was hoping he would use some Yiddish words like drek or schtuss. An 'oy vey' instead of "Oh God". 'Shmegegge' would have sent me right over the edge.

'Stuff' and 'malarkey' were pretty good, though.

(My father's side is Irish, and my mother's is Jewish).

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 02:56 PM
  #15
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
Well, let's assume what you all say is true. There's is no movement on a new or upgraded facility. That leaves Brooklyn, and two possibilities:

(i) Wang is tenant.

(ii) Wang sells to Prokhorov/Ratner.

I may be wrong, but I believe that (i) is not live, at least, except as a temporary option given movement toward a new or upgraded arena, for which there is (obviously) none. I could be wrong about this, but it just sounds implausible to me, knowing what we know about Wang.

So let's put aside Wang as tenant for a moment. Suppose he wants to work out a deal with Ratner/Prokhorov. Further, suppose that Bettman simply will not allow the Isles to move. That gives Prokhorov/Ratner *incredible* leverage if they want to buy the Isles. Wang would have to sell, or the equity in his franchise collapses. Or he would have to find a third party, and why would *they* pay more than Ratner/Prokhorov would?

Is it realistic to believe that Bettman would, push comes to shove, put Wang in this situation? Personally, I hope not. Wang might suck in some respects, but that would be completely uncalled for, and it would put the rest of the owners in the league on notice. I wonder if Bettman would survive it with his job.

Now, suppose Bettman is serious (which I doubt) that the Islanders will never move. That would put Wang in a horrible position, and it would put the Brooklyn ownership in a position where they can grab a franchise at a bargain-basement price.

While that would be horribly unfair to Wang, who has been a good soldier on the business end for years, it would be absolutely sky-is-the-limit wonderful for me. 30 games a year wonderful. And probably a new commissioner.

Cheers,

Dan-o
Wang's a good soldier....hehe....good one.

You leave out the obvious: Wang can re-up and work on the NVMC as he has been, after adding all new seats he can get the County to continue to pay for its neglect and repair the condensors (two of them broken of four), improving the ice, he can spend out of pocket if league revenue sharing comes and address the luxury box issue (since he makes money and will get the tax credit as lessor of NVMC), and he can improve the arena experience. And do this as lessor, not the lessee where he is in a brand new stadium making little revenue streams from the building and reliant on his tenancy filling the arena on his dates.

We agree Bettman has to go, though. His record running the league into three work stoppages and insane payroll hikes has been catastrophically bad.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 03:43 PM
  #16
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
Well, let's assume what you all say is true. There's is no movement on a new or upgraded facility. That leaves Brooklyn, and two possibilities:

(i) Wang is tenant.

(ii) Wang sells to Prokhorov/Ratner.

I may be wrong, but I believe that (i) is not live, at least, except as a temporary option given movement toward a new or upgraded arena, for which there is (obviously) none. I could be wrong about this, but it just sounds implausible to me, knowing what we know about Wang.


Cheers,

Dan-o
I don't think we can sit 3 yrs from 2015 and say, local ownership will come down to Wang or the Ratner group.

There are too many unknowns....will the developer who wins the HUB bidding, have interest in buying the NYI? Will Peltz be in the mix? Will Bettman or NY pols reach out to other potential owners, like D'amato reached out to Wang in 2000?




Quote:
So let's put aside Wang as tenant for a moment. Suppose he wants to work out a deal with Ratner/Prokhorov. Further, suppose that Bettman simply will not allow the Isles to move. That gives Prokhorov/Ratner *incredible* leverage if they want to buy the Isles. Wang would have to sell, or the equity in his franchise collapses. Or he would have to find a third party, and why would *they* pay more than Ratner/Prokhorov would?

Is it realistic to believe that Bettman would, push comes to shove, put Wang in this situation? Personally, I hope not. Wang might suck in some respects, but that would be completely uncalled for, and it would put the rest of the owners in the league on notice. I wonder if Bettman would survive it with his job.

Now, suppose Bettman is serious (which I doubt) that the Islanders will never move. That would put Wang in a horrible position, and it would put the Brooklyn ownership in a position where they can grab a franchise at a bargain-basement price.

While that would be horribly unfair to Wang, who has been a good soldier on the business end for years, it would be absolutely sky-is-the-limit wonderful for me. 30 games a year wonderful. And probably a new commissioner.


When Katz made his recent trip to Seattle, trying to strong arm the Edmonton City Council, we had some fans and media insisting that Bettman would not allow Katz to move the team, that he'd force Katz to sell to local ownership. It's funny how the relocation happy crowd, can't seem to grasp the isles are in a very similar situation: Bettman would look to local options, before allowng the team to be relocated.

We've seen the Thrashers owners pocket $110m for that franchise, we saw the Blues sold for $130m recently.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 03:55 PM
  #17
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I don't think we can sit 3 yrs from 2015 and say, local ownership will come down to Wang or the Ratner group.
3 years? Try 2.25 years. It could be 18 months by the time there's a labor agreement. Nothing has happened in 12 years. It's all just going to fly into place in 18 months?

If we need to hope on Al Friggin' D'Amato.. Oh, god, anything but Al Friggin' D'Amato. We've been dealing with Al Friggin' D'Amato's puppets for too f'ing long already.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 03:58 PM
  #18
scott99
Registered User
 
scott99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,106
vCash: 500
All we need is 1,000,000 Isle's fans putting up $200 each, and then we can buy the Isles, and for another $40 each, we can build the new arena.

scott99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 04:02 PM
  #19
Isles Junkie
Registered User
 
Isles Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott99 View Post
All we need is 1,000,000 Isle's fans putting up $200 each, and then we can buy the Isles, and for another $40 each, we can build the new arena.
I don't think there are 1 million Islanders fans.

Isles Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 04:27 PM
  #20
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I don't think we can sit 3 yrs from 2015 and say, local ownership will come down to Wang or the Ratner group.

There are too many unknowns....will the developer who wins the HUB bidding, have interest in buying the NYI? Will Peltz be in the mix? Will Bettman or NY pols reach out to other potential owners, like D'amato reached out to Wang in 2000?
and again....Bettman said historic teams are in no danger of relocation....it goes against the League's greater interest. Now figure how hard they tried to keep hockey in the desert.

I believe there are more potential buyers than we know, but.....none have or should go public. It goes against their interest (may drive up price due to standard economic law - demand increases price). But we all can assume Wang does not want to sell and Wang DOES want that Coliseum land still. Those are indisputable truths.

Now we also have to recall Wang has a former go to guy of his leading the bidding on the RFP, and that decision is coming very soon according to recent reports ("within 10 days").




Quote:
When Katz made his recent trip to Seattle, trying to strong arm the Edmonton City Council, we had some fans and media insisting that Bettman would not allow Katz to move the team, that he'd force Katz to sell to local ownership. It's funny how the relocation happy crowd, can't seem to grasp the isles are in a very similar situation: Bettman would look to local options, before allowng the team to be relocated.

We've seen the Thrashers owners pocket $110m for that franchise, we saw the Blues sold for $130m recently.
The Isles franchise might sell for $80-100M.....but the cable deal will cost a pretty penny. So the price isn't going to be too far from his purchase price, no matter what other NHL teams sell for.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 04:56 PM
  #21
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
3 years? Try 2.25 years. It could be 18 months by the time there's a labor agreement. Nothing has happened in 12 years. It's all just going to fly into place in 18 months?

If we need to hope on Al Friggin' D'Amato.. Oh, god, anything but Al Friggin' D'Amato. We've been dealing with Al Friggin' D'Amato's puppets for too f'ing long already.

Cheers,

Dan-o
From 2005 until 2011, Wang was pushing his Lighthouse project. He was not selling, when he needed the team for that project.

At this point, Wang does not look like he's in any rush to sell, with his financial losses down and the lease expiring in 2015.

And as why things would come together in the next 18 months, when they have not in the past 12 yrs...



1.LI pols have had little reason, to come up with a strong offer for Wang since Barclay's owners were downplaying hockey at their arena and Willet's Point has not even broken ground.

2. It's only been the last several months that Barclay's Center opened and Barclay's co-owner started pushing for the Isles to play at Barclays. Wang had little leverage, with him saying he wanted to stay in NY and no other arena in NY available, except NVMC.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 05:34 PM
  #22
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
2. It's only been the last several months that Barclay's Center opened and Barclay's co-owner started pushing for the Isles to play at Barclays. Wang had little leverage, with him saying he wanted to stay in NY and no other arena in NY available, except NVMC.
Leverage? Leverage against who? Who cares? Face it. Pols won't care unless people do, and people don't. That's the element I think you've completely missed.

If the Isles are going to work in Brooklyn, it's because someone has a plan to make it work in a new way with new people. The Islanders as the Islanders, with the fan base it had, in Nassau County, is mostly dead. And Al D'Amato ain't no Miracle Max.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 05:45 PM
  #23
Steve55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Jason Kay is the Editor-in-Chief of THN. He's tweeted about the NHL possibly awarding two expansion franchises to Canada, after the lockout.

This news comes a few weeks after Levin, told Seattle reporters that he's explored bringing an NHL team to Seattle and expects it'll have to be through expansion.


Not 100% surprising considering Bettman's fight againt relocation, the much higher fees paid for expansion and the pr beating that Bettman is taking north of the border.




https://twitter.com/JKTHN/statuses/256376786852667392
11 Oct 12
There's strong speculation the NHL could announce two expansion teams for Canada once CBA deal struck: Quebec & Toronto. More in Oct. 29 THN


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...2759--nhl.html
Thu, Sep 20, 2012
"I can tell you there are not teams for sale that are available to move," Levin told ESPN the Magazine on Wednesday.

Not the Coyotes? Or maybe one day the Islanders? "My understanding is that the Phoenix deal, [Greg Jamison] has come up with the money," Levin said. "The answer to the Islanders moving is never. They're not moving out of that market. No chance that's going to happen."

Instead, Levin's plan centers on expansion. And he's optimistic it won't be long after the CBA is settled that the NHL will turn to expansion as the next phase in growing the league. "I would think three years," he said.

The NHL's realignment plan, which was agreed upon during last December's board of governors meeting, certainly made it easy to plug in two more franchises. Levin thinks Seattle would be considered one of the front-runners to land a new team. "There's Quebec and Las Vegas that are also in there," he said.
I REALLY hope the NHL actually moves Phoenix to Seattle and Columbus to Quebec. Less damage to the league.

Steve55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 06:18 PM
  #24
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
Leverage? Leverage against who? Who cares? Face it. Pols won't care unless people do, and people don't. That's the element I think you've completely missed.

If the Isles are going to work in Brooklyn, it's because someone has a plan to make it work in a new way with new people. The Islanders as the Islanders, with the fan base it had, in Nassau County, is mostly dead. And Al D'Amato ain't no Miracle Max.

Cheers,

Dan-o

I'm not calling D' amato Miracle Max. I am pointing out that he is the one, who reached out and bought Wang into the mix in 2000. Reaching out to find a potential owner, is something we could see Bettman or County pols do if Wang decides to sell.



Nassau County pols should care about the local ecomony and how losing the isles effects local businesses.

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/bu...all-businesses
Michael N’Dolo: We would estimate that a total of about $62 million of spending would be lost to the county.

Also, about 1,000 jobs, including those at hotels, restaurants and sporting goods stores. And that’s just the Long Island impact.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2012, 03:04 PM
  #25
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,406
vCash: 1300
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...0812--nhl.html
NHL expansion to Toronto, Quebec City after CBA is settled? Well, of course
By Greg Wyshynski | Puck Daddy – 2 hours 32 minutes ago
In the NHL's last proposal before the lockout started, the League offered a deal "in which the players get 49 percent of hockey-related revenue in Year One, 48 percent in Year Two, and 47 percent over the final four years," according to Mirtle.

Now why would the owners want that decline in the players' share over time? Could it be the Canadian television rights windfall coming to the League in 2014? Sure.

Could it be expansion to two lucrative Canadian markets during the term of the next CBA?

CREW99AW 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 03:16 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.