Quote:
Originally Posted by Loyal and True
I don't understand. You think the NHL is salivating over the $5M profit in the 19th market?
That is a rounding error on any TV deal.
Flames can sit around in their 35 year old building and more or less break even as the building ages further for as long as owners want to play. That's Ken King paraphrased. They can sell whenever they feel they have had enough.
Eventually the city will need a new arena (with or without Flames in town) and they will figure out how costly it is, and how important it is to have an anchor tennant.
|
Excellent post. In the nutshell, that's what so many people simply can't comprehend. With the exception of the top five teams in hockey super-markets, most NHL team owners don't NEED to own their franchises. They do it for various personal reasons including, yes, vanity. In case of the Calgary Flames, the owner group always wanted to have and preserve NHL hockey in Calgary even when it didn't make any financial sense to do so. This is a well-known fact and not a made-up PR item. When they are told, in essence, that it has a zero net value to Calgarians, they understandably get a little pissed.