Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Monahammer]

There is no cold hard economic reality that shows the flames need to move or are losing money.
There is a very real economic reality that sinking public funds into an arena used 1/3 of the year is a terrible, terrible waste.

I will be heartbroken to see the flames leave, but the health of the city trumps our love of hockey. If you believe anything else you're a psychopath.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Corral

How many times does it have to be said that Rogers has an informal veto on any move out of Canada by an NHL franchise. If Bettman and his buddies like their TV billions, they will do as Rogers tells them.

And who cares what Francis says on 630 CHED? Why is he even speaking with them?

The more important question is who actually cares what Francis says at all.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Locke

Once again, I think we have to look at the track record to determine how this will likely go.

Whenever anyone brings up 'Relocation' I dont think they remember all the other cases where a team was moved.

No team has ever been moved unless it was a failing team.

Look at a case like Edmonton. Did they move the team? No, they forced a sale to a local owner who would keep the team in Edmonton.

Look at Phoenix, I dont even know who owns them anymore but the League was their custodian for a while. Didnt move the team, found a local owner.

I think ownership in Tampa has been a bit of a shuffle, as with Carolina and Florida.

The League's MO is to keep the team rooted where it is and if the current owner is unhappy or has to sell they start by looking at other potential local owners and usually try and make sure the owner commits to keeping the team in its current City.

This is why Relocation threats ring hollow.

If the Flames come to the conclusion that they simply cannot operate in Calgary anymore the League's Modus Operandi is to find someone who can, rather than moving the team.

Yea but with the exception of the Oilers none of those teams had a 35 year old building. I'd love it if there was a billionaire Flames super-fan who was willing to buy the team and personally finance a new arena but that person doesn't exist. No one will touch this franchise and keep it in Calgary without a building deal.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Even if the Mayor were actually adamantly against the Flames goals he sits on a City Council with 15 votes. The Flames offer, I understand, was unanimously voted against. The Mayor is also not literally sitting at any negotiating table. Surely there's enough supposedly "pro business" or "pro-Flames" Councillors to force a vote on the Flames' proposed structure, or something close to it. The fact that 15 saw it as unreasonable really has little to nothing to do with Mayor Nenshi.

People who buy the narrative that negotiations have broken down because of Nenshi are delusional. I suppose if they tell themselves it's only one guy being a dick, they don't have to face the reality that a whole bunch of people in positions of responsibility in this city, from analysts to planners to every member of council, do not believe the offer made by Flames ownership is anything close to being a good deal for citizens.

If the pro sports model requires billionaires ruthlessly pumping taxpayers for subsidies, then pro sports can eff off to cities full of rubes who like being pumped.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Corral

How many times does it have to be said that Rogers has an informal veto on any move out of Canada by an NHL franchise. If Bettman and his buddies like their TV billions, they will do as Rogers tells them.

And who cares what Francis says on 630 CHED? Why is he even speaking with them?

"Informal Veto" is quite the oxymoron. Can you provide any evidence that Rogers would have any say whatsoever in franchise relocation? Their deal with the NHL is for exclusive broadcast rights of all NHL games in Canada, not just the Canadian teams.

[nik-]

It's an assumption. Just like the Flames are moving is an assumption.

It's really just a battle of the assumptions.

[cKy]

Originally Posted by hansmoleman

Haven’t read the other thread and don’t plan on it.

Do you not use a computer because bill gates gets richer every time you buy one? Of course these owners want to make money, that’s how they got to be owning a friggin hockey team. If the Flames leave I will blame guys like you and Nenshi.

So if the Flames left, would you be saying 'Boo Urns'?

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by nik-

It's an assumption. Just like the Flames are moving is an assumption.

It's really just a battle of the assumptions.

Sure, except the Flames owners have a lot more control over whether the team leaves than a broadcast corp with a contract already signed until 2025.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Sure, except the Flames owners have a lot more control over whether the team leaves than a broadcast corp with a contract already signed until 2025.

Unless there's a Canadian team clause in that contract. And they really don't. They have a ton of control over whether they sell the team. The team moving is another story.

[Ashasx]

tbh Rogers might love to get out of that contract

[stang]

Alberta Oilers.

Let that sink in.

[MacDaddy77]

Originally Posted by stang

Alberta Oilers.

Let that sink in.

Not a F'ing chance!!!! I'd stop watching hockey before cheering for the Oilers

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Can you provide any evidence that Rogers would have any say whatsoever in franchise relocation? Their deal with the NHL is for exclusive broadcast rights of all NHL games in Canada, not just the Canadian teams.

I have no idea what the details of the deal are but I also think Rogers would be crazy to not negotiate some sort of protection against a team moving. I doubt they have any sort of “veto” over what the league does but it would make sense for there to be some financial implications, I also wouldn’t be surprised if there were a clause that paid the league more money from Rogers if they were to add another Canadian team during the agreement. The deal they signed was for the broadcast rights in Canada, both sides are well aware that the total number of teams in Canada would obviously impact viewship and the value of those broadcast rights.

[DiracSpike]

I'd be surprised if the Flames had even a 5% market share of hockey fans in this country. They're not even the most popular team in the Province and it's not close. I really doubt one small market team moving would trigger any kind of renegotiation (because that's what it would honestly take for the BoG to deny) on a multibillion dollar deal that's signed until 2025, especially when the broadcast rights aren't just for Canadian teams, but for all teams.

It really speaks to how dire the situation here is that people's best argument against why the team wouldn't move is a hail mary clause in a tv contract that no one's ever actually seen.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Corral

How many times does it have to be said that Rogers has an informal veto on any move out of Canada by an NHL franchise. If Bettman and his buddies like their TV billions, they will do as Rogers tells them.

And who cares what Francis says on 630 CHED? Why is he even speaking with them?

The Rogers deal was signed in 2013 for 12 years. If this things drags as long as people think it will, around 2022, then 2025 is pretty much right around the corner. Rogers won't have much of a say at that point.

Besides, I think the big reason there is a lot of the wait-and-see-approach, is because not many people know what Calgary will be like by 2022. If a pipeline never goes into the ground, the corporate scene may be vastly different.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by stang

Alberta Oilers.

Let that sink in.

Oooh, I like it.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by stang

Alberta Oilers.

Let that sink in.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

It really speaks to how dire the situation here is that people's best argument against why the team wouldn't move is a hail mary clause in a tv contract that no one's ever actually seen.

If that were the best and only argument presented I would probably agree with you. I don’t think the league would ever handcuff themselves which is why I mentioned any such clause would probably work both ways, but with that being said if there are financial implications from their broadcast deal with Rogers then the league would certainly take it into consideration when looking at relocation options.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I'd be surprised if the Flames had even a 5% market share of hockey fans in this country. They're not even the most popular team in the Province and it's not close. I really doubt one small market team moving would trigger any kind of renegotiation (because that's what it would honestly take for the BoG to deny) on a multibillion dollar deal that's signed until 2025, especially when the broadcast rights aren't just for Canadian teams, but for all teams.

It really speaks to how dire the situation here is that people's best argument against why the team wouldn't move is a hail mary clause in a tv contract that no one's ever actually seen.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...eneration-sex/

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Take that jets!