What work would be required if I said I don't have a problem with unions that look after their workers and not themselves?
Just giving you the gears more than anything but with that being said I’m reasonably confident that you’d have a hard time coming up with a lot of examples of unions looking out for themselves instead of workers. Not sure we need to get into that in this thread but I’m happy to do so if you want to.
For what it’s worth though I agree with you and the general consensus here that any sort of fan union isn’t gonna fly in North American sports.
The Following User Says Thank You to iggy_oi For This Useful Post:
Dude you started at Fan Unions and have weaved your way to Take Back Alberta.
It doesn't appear the be a rational line of thinking.
I agree to take back Alberta thing was pretty random and without context to makes no sense. But I can't provide more context so it's kind of a dick move. Mea culpa there, no sarcasm
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to White Out 403 For This Useful Post:
I truly can't fathom taking sports (or myself for that matter) this seriously to actually think this would be a worthwhile use of my energy & time. what planet is this?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jiggy_12 For This Useful Post:
The Flames are from Calgary, and are part of Calgary's identity but they're owned by people with capital like every sports franchise.
It generally works because for the most part the fans and the owner want the same thing ... to win.
Even in Calgary right now I've never seen proof that Murray Edwards wants anything other than to win. Many just disagree on how that should be done.
We've seen owners that run teams into the ground in order to move a franchise or just because they're cheap ... that can happen. But it's more the plot for Slap Shot or Major League than something actually happening now. For the most part if you don't spend to the cap it's because your team isn't generating enough revenue, and that could be market or poor ownership creating a chicken/egg situation.
I would have to disagree with this belief entirely. The fans want to win, the owners want as much money as possible by whatever means necessary. If the flames lost every game last year but landed Bedard (and the windfall of cash that comes along with him), I highly doubt ownership would care at all.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.
I would have to disagree with this belief entirely. The fans want to win, the owners want as much money as possible by whatever means necessary. If the flames lost every game last year but landed Bedard (and the windfall of cash that comes along with him), I highly doubt ownership would care at all.
Of course they want to win. There's nothing more profitable than a championship team that generates consistent playoff and merchandising revenue.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
I would have to disagree with this belief entirely. The fans want to win, the owners want as much money as possible by whatever means necessary. If the flames lost every game last year but landed Bedard (and the windfall of cash that comes along with him), I highly doubt ownership would care at all.
I think that's just as much a blanket statement as saying owners want to win.
Luckily winning and making money are significantly linked.
If it's all about money and nothing else there are far better and less stressful investments out there. These guys didn't get wealthy from owning sports teams.
__________________
GFG
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
Of course they want to win. There's nothing more profitable than a championship team that generates consistent playoff and merchandising revenue.
If that were true, wouldn’t the owners try to build a championship team? The flames seem to operate on a “make the playoffs and anything can happen”, which isn’t a very champion style mindset.
Interestingly of the top 7 most valuable franchises, only 1 would be considered a “championship” team, while 3 would fall in a middling category and the last 3 are down right terrible.
The Dallas Stars actually dropped from 14th most valuable to 20th despite having a decent amount of on ice success in the playoffs recently.
If it's all about money and nothing else there are far better and less stressful investments out there. These guys didn't get wealthy from owning sports teams.
Disagree, what did Edwards pay for the team vs current value.
May not be the year over year balance sheet of revenue vs expenses, but team value is where they make their money.
__________________
I have Strong opinions about things I know very little about.
Disagree, what did Edwards pay for the team vs current value.
May not be the year over year balance sheet of revenue vs expenses, but team value is where they make their money.
His point is that all(?) owners of professional sports teams go into ownership having made their considerable money in other industries/businesses.
Nobody is buying a team without considerable wealth behind them.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
I don't really have an issue with this in theory. It would be great if there was a separate group with some influence that has different interests than the owner, whose primary goal is to generate revenue and increase the capital value of the asset. It's also perfectly reasonable, IMO, to say that fans have a stake in the team and are invested in it in an emotional sense, and should have more say in how that team is run... Leaving aside the totally apt comments about suddenly having ten thousand cooks in the kitchen each with a different idea about what to cook and how to cook it, the simple reality is that in Canadian markets, long term sustainable success is often the casualty of owners chasing this year's playoff revenue. Anything that puts pressure on them to behave otherwise, I am in principle in favour of.
All of that being said, what I don't see is how this proposed fan union would actually go about instilling itself with influence. How it would obtain the standing to actually affect or accomplish anything.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
His point is that all(?) owners of professional sports teams go into ownership having made their considerable money in other industries/businesses.
Nobody is buying a team without considerable wealth behind them.
Kinda goes without saying, rich people own sports teams, unless you're a packers fan you don't get to own a team.
Thinking just because an owner is rich he doesn't want a return on his investment is weird and I'd suspect wrong.
Getting Seattle to pay 650 million to join basically gives the benchmark for every team going forward. Their value is already $1.12 billion after a couple years, who cares about gate, $450 million net worth increase in two years is pretty good.
__________________
I have Strong opinions about things I know very little about.
Disagree, what did Edwards pay for the team vs current value.
May not be the year over year balance sheet of revenue vs expenses, but team value is where they make their money.
And if he sells it for a huge profit soon then yeah that would be the case.
If he doesn't though he risks the value going away and may not be in it for franchise value.
There's a vanity element that can't be ignored too.
If it's all about money and nothing else there are far better and less stressful investments out there. These guys didn't get wealthy from owning sports teams.
Oh? What other type of investment has more than 5x value over the last 13 years?
Using our principal owner as an example, the value of his main corporate holding (CNRL) has only gone up ~2.5x it's share price while dealing with much more stressful and concerning problems (rise of shale competition, landlocked supply, etc.)
There is no way you can say that the sports franchise has been more stressful or time consuming than running CNRL, and as far as investments go it seems to be performing exceptionally well. Did they get rich from ownership of hockey clubs? No. But it has made them much more wealthy.
Current ownership group interests began around 1981, when the team was purchased from Skalbania by a group including Harley Hotchkiss for $16 million. So, 16 million to ~1.14 billion over 22 years.
