Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
The eventual outcome may be binary (as is the case with just about anything), but there are plenty of scenarios C, D, E, F, etc.. This would be better shown with a flow chart, but here's a quick and dirty of what needs to happen before we get to EE's binary 0 option.
Scenario C - city doesn't move off of their last offer; CSEC decides to:
i. build now with offer
ii. continue to own team, try again in ~3 years
iii. try to sell team (because the league won't let them move to option iv before this):
a) if they don't get the value they want, reconsider options i. & ii. & maybe iv.
b) if they get the value they want, they sell team, and new ownership considers i. & ii. & iv.
iv. attempt to move team
a) with a tangible threat of team moving, city's offer improves (revert to step 0)
b) no improvement of city offer, NHL BOG refuses move based on sound business reasons (revert to i. or ii. or iii.)
c) no improvement of city offer, NHL BOG approves move against general business interests, but in order to make a statement that they are will continue to extort taxpayers as necessary.
Option iv-c is the only one we need to worry about.
|
You conveniently omitted option iv-d:
d) no improvement of city offer, NHL BOG approves move BECAUSE OF general business interests.
This has been the case with every franchise move so far. When the Whalers, Jets, Nordiques, North Stars, and Thrashers relocated, it was because there was no viable business case for leaving them where they were. You blithely assume that there will always be a viable business case for leaving the Flames in the Saddledome. That assumption needs to be questioned.