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
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.

Mario Lemieux moves into $20-million Mont Tremblant home

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-25-2012, 11:11 PM
  #76
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
So basically you attribute a completely bizarre view to Gary Bettman and won't substantiate your claim in any way?
... is that "attribute" or "subscribe to"? Because tell ya what, its neither one. Gary Bettman is one sharp marble who I happen to respect. Theres no need to "attribute" any fictional quotes to the guy, nor do I employ the arts of ergodic literature in posting here though clearly thats your intimation, and dangerously thin ice to be circling on it be Freudian. Mr. Bettmans own words are recorded & writ large, available through a simple google search.

Killion is online now  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:15 PM
  #77
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Is there agreement at least that the Pens are probably making money and that franchise value has increased significantly?
... oh certainly and the Penguins aren't alone in that. I would guess close to 2/3 of the league is capable of turning a profit in a moderately successful season (6th-8th place in the conference). Another 1/6 of the league probably struggles to make a profit unless they go deep in the playoffs but have stable and committed ownership. There's literally maybe 5 teams in the league, if that, taking significant ($10+ million annually) losses and only 1 in serious trouble.

So why is lockout happening? Why do the rich owners, like the Leafs who make $100 million in profit annually, need that 7% reduction? Why are they so against taking any profits they might gain from that and adding it to the revenue sharing pool? Why is an immediate reduction needed? Why are rollbacks of contract rights needed?

In my opinion, the only reason this lockout is still ongoing is because the owners refuse to work with, rather than bully, the Players Association.

htpwn is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:27 PM
  #78
Burgs
Registered User
 
Burgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
What was the corruption that derailed the private deal? I'd guess something to do with the casinos and licenses?
There were three bidders for the new casino license in Pittsburgh. One of them, Isle of Capri, sweetened their bid by offering to pay 100% of the proposed 290 million dollar arena. The Penguins publically supported their bid, and it looked like a no-brainer to everyone since the other two bidders made no such full promise.

But out of the blue the smallest and least affluent of the bidders, Majestic Star, got the nod, amidst talk about affirmative action and/or bribery. So now the arena would have to be financed partly through (gambling) taxes in addition to direct payments by the Penguins and Majestic Star. And - surprise surprise - MJ defaulted on their promised payments and eventually declared bankruptcy not even 2 years later while the arena and casino were still being built.

Burgs is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:45 PM
  #79
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burgs View Post
There were three bidders for the new casino license in Pittsburgh. One of them, Isle of Capri, sweetened their bid by offering to pay 100% of the proposed 290 million dollar arena. The Penguins publically supported their bid, and it looked like a no-brainer to everyone since the other two bidders made no such full promise.

But out of the blue the smallest and least affluent of the bidders, Majestic Star, got the nod, amidst talk about affirmative action and/or bribery. So now the arena would have to be financed partly through (gambling) taxes in addition to direct payments by the Penguins and Majestic Star. And - surprise surprise - MJ defaulted on their promised payments and eventually declared bankruptcy not even 2 years later while the arena and casino were still being built.
Does that mean the Sports Authority and the Pens had to make up the difference then?

And thanks for the info.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 12:37 AM
  #80
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
... oh certainly and the Penguins aren't alone in that. I would guess close to 2/3 of the league is capable of turning a profit in a moderately successful season (6th-8th place in the conference). Another 1/6 of the league probably struggles to make a profit unless they go deep in the playoffs but have stable and committed ownership. There's literally maybe 5 teams in the league, if that, taking significant ($10+ million annually) losses and only 1 in serious trouble.

So why is lockout happening? Why do the rich owners, like the Leafs who make $100 million in profit annually, need that 7% reduction? Why are they so against taking any profits they might gain from that and adding it to the revenue sharing pool? Why is an immediate reduction needed? Why are rollbacks of contract rights needed?

In my opinion, the only reason this lockout is still ongoing is because the owners refuse to work with, rather than bully, the Players Association.
Well I doubt teams like Toronto are even asking the players to give up anything.

__________________
Kane One is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:20 AM
  #81
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
And what does this have to do with Mario spending 10-20m on a house? It would be one thing if we actually knew about his finances. But we don't. You do not know if that money came to him due to him owning the team. Or if it came to him due to his endorsements, or from his his playing career.

One can ***** that some tax money went into the arena (although I'll be honest... I just really don't care). Or that the arena (and other things) increased the teams value by 100m. But please don't imply that the NHL is looking for the players to take less, while Mario spending his personal money on a home is somehow relevant.

__________________
"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:28 AM
  #82
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
And what does this have to do with Mario spending 10-20m on a house? It would be one thing if we actually knew about his finances. But we don't. You do not know if that money came to him due to him owning the team. Or if it came to him due to his endorsements, or from his his playing career.

One can ***** that some tax money went into the arena (although I'll be honest... I just really don't care). Or that the arena (and other things) increased the teams value by 100m. But please don't imply that the NHL is looking for the players to take less, while Mario spending his personal money on a home is somehow relevant.

If they've increased their franchise value by $100 MM in less than a decade--- what is the problem? This isn't NYR, Toronto or Montreal we're talking about.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:23 AM
  #83
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
If they've increased their franchise value by $100 MM in less than a decade--- what is the problem? This isn't NYR, Toronto or Montreal we're talking about.
And Mario buying a house plays what part in this?

Riptide is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:03 AM
  #84
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
And Mario buying a house plays what part in this?
The Pens are doing well. He's doing well. Franchise value is up $100 MM.



Fugu is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:19 AM
  #85
MonsterSurge
Registered User
 
MonsterSurge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,387
vCash: 500
People are actually pissed off because Mario Lemieux bought a house and there's a lockout. *face palm*

MonsterSurge is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:25 AM
  #86
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterSurge View Post
People are actually pissed off because Mario Lemieux bought a house and there's a lockout. *face palm*

No to the former, yes to the latter.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:30 AM
  #87
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,293
vCash: 500
Michael Douglas has a home there too.

Kimota is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:43 AM
  #88
MetalheadPenguinsFan
Disco Is Dead!!!
 
MetalheadPenguinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,356
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
Even If I know he's got more money than what he won as a player , can't we all agree that if there's a kind of player that deserves to be obscenely rich and privileged , it is Mario Lemieux's kind?

Lemieux gave more to hockey than any active player will ever give.
Amen.

After everything he has gone through as well as achieved in life both on and off the ice, I say if he wants that house...he deserves it. He's persevered through more than most of us ever have or ever will and best of all he is a class act.

MetalheadPenguinsFan is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:47 AM
  #89
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Well I doubt teams like Toronto are even asking the players to give up anything.
The vote to lockout was 30-0. I doubt as well that teams like Toronto and New York are driving the bus (Boston on the other hand...) but both have signaled that they are more than willing to go along with the ride.

htpwn is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:49 AM
  #90
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 9,485
vCash: 500
How ****ing big is a $20 million dollar home? what is it, 400 rooms or something? ridiculous.

Man Bear Pig is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:52 AM
  #91
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
They spend TO the cap. They're not pocketing the difference. What part of that don't you understand?
I believe it's you that doesn't understand. If the players didn't give the Pens hometwn discounts the team wouldn't be able to be at the cap. The team would be over the cap. I never said anything about pocketing money because of the discounts.,

Confucius is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:15 AM
  #92
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire11 View Post
Saw this story last night... and even though I know you want to spin this is some greedy S.O.B., and use it as proof that the owners are the evil rich elite, this is a non-story.

Seriously, if Mario can afford to build a $20M home, good for him. In fact if the majority of players are smart with their money (and a lot of relatively mediocre players will earn more during their career today than Lemieux was able to earn), then they should have no problem building a dream mansion when they are 47.

If this is the story that pro-PA people have to use for their ammo, that pretty much sums up how weak their argument is.
No, but you would be suprised at how many there is out there who genuinely seem to believe that almost a majority of owners are losing money on owning a NHL team...

Ola is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:17 AM
  #93
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayzinSmith View Post
1984-85: $250,000
1985-86: $400,000
1986-87: $650,000
1987-88: $650,000
1988-89: $1,600,000
1989-90: $2,100,000
1990-91: $2,000,000
1991-92: $2,338,000
1992-93: $2,408,000 + $ deferred
1993-94: $5,000,000 + $ deferred
1994-95: sat out, $ deferred
1995-96: $4,571,000 + $1,071,400 deferred
1996-97: $11,321,429
1997-98: retired + $2,000,000
1998-99: retired
1999-00: retired
2000-01: $1,400,000
2001-02: $5,250,000
2002-03: $5,250,000
2003-04: $5,250,000
2004-05: lockout
2005-06: $3,000,000

http://www.hockeydraftcentral.com/1984/84001.html
I recon he made alot of insurance money those years when "retired".

Ola is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:00 AM
  #94
iamjs
Unregistered User
 
iamjs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 9,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
No to the former, yes to the latter.
but, and this goes back to a comment that has been made several times over, this house has been in the works since 2009. Doing some quick calendar work, Fehr wasn't on the NHLPA's radar (as far as I know), nor was yet another lockout.

What was Mario supposed to do, say "yeah....with the lockout going on, this isn't probably a good time to put down a final payment. You guys might want to wait so there's no bad pub over this. You don't mind waiting for final payment, even though the place is finished and there's a written agreement, right?"

No, people want paid, especially when building a seven figure mansion whether it be $10m or $20m.

iamjs is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:20 AM
  #95
GuelphStormer
Registered User
 
GuelphStormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Man Bear Pig View Post
How ****ing big is a $20 million dollar home? what is it, 400 rooms or something? ridiculous.


I think it is a beautiful home. Jeesh, let the guy enjoy it. He's worked hard for it.

GuelphStormer is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 08:52 AM
  #96
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 34,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
The Pens are doing well. He's doing well. Franchise value is up $100 MM.
Of course they're doing well right now, they have the most marketable team in the league and a brand-new arena.

How were they doing before those factors came into play? And who stands to lose money if things turn sour, Mario or Sid?

tarheelhockey is online now  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:18 PM
  #97
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
The Pens are doing well. He's doing well. Franchise value is up $100 MM.
So you're implying that he only did this because his stake in the team (who's value went up) allowed him to do so?

Again, we do not know enough about his finances to say whether it's relevant or not.

Riptide is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:20 PM
  #98
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
No, but you would be suprised at how many there is out there who genuinely seem to believe that almost a majority of owners are losing money on owning a NHL team...
Except that Mario isn't the guy writing the cheques in Pittsburgh. That's why Burkle (sp) is there.

Riptide is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:39 PM
  #99
DreamBeaut
Registered User
 
DreamBeaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,981
vCash: 500
Fugu, what exactly is your reasoning behind belief that government funding of these buildings is wrong?

DreamBeaut is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:53 PM
  #100
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flaproosta08 View Post
Fugu, what exactly is your reasoning behind belief that government funding of these buildings is wrong?
Personal philosophy and political views mainly. I don't think government should get involved in enterprises that are run for-profit. If there's a greater public need being fulfilled, say schools or libraries, the costs of these may be prohibitive on a for-profit basis but the benefit to all citizens can be demonstrated. Peer-reviewed research also suggests that the economic gains given as justification for funding aren't really gains, but transfers of the economic activity from one zone to another. There are many examples of privately funded arenas that do very well, with the returns going fully to their owners/investors. I don't see that as a problem, and in fact, believe this model shows that there indeed is a real demand/need for a facility in that enough patrons will attend to cover the cost of building and operating it.

Fugu is offline  
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 10:59 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.