The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Except only owners with a certain percentage must sell their interest before buying another team. And, I think GJ has a small interest in the Sharks.
I could be wrong. Thought the timing was interesting.
But it'll depend on the ownership % in Coyotes.
And he may be pressured to sell from Coyotes ownership to avoid (appearance of) conflict of interest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawker14
Compton pushed Jamison out of the CEO role, so I'd be shocked if he's backing Jamison's bid for Phoenix.
Guess we'll find out soon.
All speculation. Not clear (even now) who and/or which clique of owners required Jamison's ouster.
My guess is that Compton would prefer to be free(r) to run his technology company, rather than have to spend 1/2 day/week or more overseeing Sharks (et al).
With Plattner living/working overseas, will be interesting to see if there's a CEO/president coming in.
Does anyone know what percentage these two gentlemen had in the Sharks ownership group, and even better, what the estimated value of their interests would be?
It probably has nothing to do with the Coyote sale, but it could be some last minute capital GJ was alleged to need to raise to close the deal with the NHL.
Except only owners with a certain percentage must sell their interest before buying another team. And, I think GJ has a small interest in the Sharks.
I could be wrong. Thought the timing was interesting.
Well the rules are if you own 30% or more in one team you cannot own any portion of another team. Regardless if you make any kind of mangement decisions.
Uou are allowed to have stakes in upto 3 clubs, if they are all under 30% stake, and only one of them is greater than 10% stake.
However, you cannot own any portion of another team, if you have effective control of the franchise, regardless if you have any ownership stake in it or not.
My assumption is that Jamison would become the president of the Coyotes, if that's the case he would not be allowed to have an ownership stake in the Sharks, regardless of how little his stake is in either franchise.
Well the rules are if you own 30% or more in one team you cannot own any portion of another team. Regardless if you make any kind of mangement decisions.
Uou are allowed to have stakes in upto 3 clubs, if they are all under 30% stake, and only one of them is greater than 10% stake.
However, you cannot own any portion of another team, if you have effective control of the franchise, regardless if you have any ownership stake in it or not.
My assumption is that Jamison would become the president of the Coyotes, if that's the case he would not be allowed to have an ownership stake in the Sharks, regardless of how little his stake is in either franchise.
President, effective when? Certainly not this week. He probably has time.
Well the rules are if you own 30% or more in one team you cannot own any portion of another team. Regardless if you make any kind of mangement decisions.
Uou are allowed to have stakes in upto 3 clubs, if they are all under 30% stake, and only one of them is greater than 10% stake.
However, you cannot own any portion of another team, if you have effective control of the franchise, regardless if you have any ownership stake in it or not.
My assumption is that Jamison would become the president of the Coyotes, if that's the case he would not be allowed to have an ownership stake in the Sharks, regardless of how little his stake is in either franchise.
how did bell get around this? They own 37% of MLSE and 18% of the montreal canadiens.
President, effective when? Certainly not this week. He probably has time.
Just saying the implication was that the other two sold their share of the Sharks to get in on the Coyotes. I personally don't find it very plausable since Jamison did not, yet he too will have to at some point. Also it seems weird that he's been raising the capital for months to purchase the Yotes and yet hasn't freed up his share of the Sharks to put into the Coyotes.
Compton and Sclavos released the following joint statement today:
“It’s been a great 11 years being involved with the San Jose Sharks and the NHL but we feel this is the right time for us to step away and focus on other avenues. Although we are no longer involved with the ownership group of the organization, we remain among the team’s biggest fans and will continue to be ardent supporters of the franchise. We want to thank all Sharks fans for their years of unbridled passion and continued support of the team.”
Does not sound like they'll be "jumping ship" to Coyotes ownership from that.
Sharks pundit "infers" why Plattner bought out partners (now sole owner?).
Quote:
Here’s what you know about Hasso Plattner, the Sharks’ new owner: He ranks 27th on Forbes’ list of billionaires. Everything else is trivia in comparison.
Here’s what you can infer from him buying out Kevin Compton and Stratton Sclavos to become the team’s sole owner: He watched the NHL try to immolate itself this autumn, saw how few owners actually got to have a say in the process, and decided he needed to be one of the guys in the room.
Of course, there are a lot of things you can infer from Plattner buying out Compton and Sclavos, but that’s the item that stands out. Men worth that kind of money tend not to see the amusement in the business not actually producing business, and the lockout was in that way completely nonsensical.
...
In short, Plattner is signaling he wants to be a player in the new NHL, and he is free of most of the encumbrances of the current ownership power structures in the league. Put another way, Jeremy Jacobs isn’t going to bully him, no matter how much he might want to.
So, fall out from lockout? Hmmm.
As a semi-retired guy, could be he might push for a more significant role in the BOG (i.e., Executive Committee, chair of EC?).
Last edited by LadyStanley: 01-30-2013 at 07:04 PM.
Doubt it. In response to a letter I sent during the lockout, Compton called me. We talked more than four minutes.
I got the feeling that cash calls were not an issue (and in general that the Sharks ownership was not that supportive of the lockout, but went along with the "unanimous" vote of the ownership to impose it).
I infer that the prestige of being a NHL owner was part of the perks.
However, if Plattner was so single minded to get "sole" ownership, I think that Compton would step aside, for more of a supportive/fan role. (Perhaps take up the role of chairman of the organization's charity.)
I think people don't realize just how much Hasso Plattner is worth ($7.2B).
He is the second wealthiest individual owner in the NHL - behind only David Thomson ($17.5B), but ahead of Philip Anshutz ($7.0B) and over 2x the net worth of Terry Pegula ($3.1B).
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks/...arts-and-more/
Blog on Plattner. Introduced to Russian hockey in 1960s (B&W TV in Berlin), came to Sharks game in 1993 and saw 2/3rds of the famous KLM line. Talks about his hobbies and (non) involvement with day-to-day runnings of team. A bit more personal than business (but included to get an idea of the man).
“We still want to have a championship team and win the Stanley Cup. That’s clearly the number one objective of a sports club, otherwise you should not be in the sports business.”
Plattner also wants to make sure the Sharks, who claimed a loss of $15 million last season, have a sustainable business model. He has no fantasies of turning a major profit, though.
“The financial situation is not better this year than last year,” he said. “On the other hand, I said this to the employees, don’t worry. My credit line is good enough, if you look it up.
“That doesn’t mean that we spend money foolishly. We have to work hard. Thanks to Kevin and Stratton, they did a lot of improvements. Unfortunately, this situation threw us back a little bit. We move forward. The biggest surprise, or probably reward, because the team is playing so well – the fans are back from day one. That was a concern in our financial modeling.”
The Sharks have routinely spent near the salary cap ceiling for many years now, and Plattner doesn’t expect that to change, although there is uncertainty around every team in the league how the new CBA will play out as the ink has barely dried on the 10-year deal.
Speaking in a German accent and with a tone that seemed to be both deeply serious yet a bit carefree, Plattner said: “As we say in hockey, we want to go deep. That is the mission. If anybody is asking if there is any change in the strategy or ambition – no.”
The Sharks’ newly constructed board consists of Plattner, minority owner Gary Valenzuela, co-founder of Sun Microsystems and Bay Area resident Scott McNealy, and Partner/CFO of Hasso Plattner Ventures, Rouven Westphal.
"This situation" I think he means the recent NHL lockout.
