Jump to content

Photo

2 Toronto Businessmen Intersted in Partially Owning the Devils?


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 mxm262

mxm262

    Albany Devil

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:21 PM

Everyone in the area is such a die hard Leaf fan. I highly doubt the fans that they claim can't go to Leaf games because of the demand for tickets is going to just all of a sudden stop being a fan of the team and switch to a new team.


Oh, the irony
  • 0

#42 Aitchmack

Aitchmack

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 07:58 PM

You clearly don't follow European sports. :P


Ha, I know what you mean. I live in the UK & am also a soccer fan. My soccer team was even owned by Bernie Ecclestone & Flavio Briatore of F1. Probably the only two people to make a profit out of running and selling a team! I think all sports investors go in with the intention of turning a profit but very few ever manage to achieve it.

A new franchise in Toronto would have no problem attracting die hard Maple leaf fans imo. Mainly youngters that can't get Leaf tickets that'll do it so they can stick it to their dad & brothers when their team beats the Leafs. Just plain old human nature.
  • 0

#43 njdevsftw

njdevsftw

    Senior Devil

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 781 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:58 PM

I live in the UK & am also a soccer fan. -- I think all sports investors go in with the intention of turning a profit


Dude, seriously.. You think Abramovich bought Chelsea to make money??! ..?! How bout Sheikh Mansour in Man City?!? :D Granted these are the most grotesque examples, but you see the same thing in varying degrees in all the major soccer leagues in europe. Manchester City spent £314,900,000 (roughly $515,500,000) purchasing players the last 4 (!) years. That's roughly the same as Man United have spent over the last 25 years.. It's simply not possible to justify that kind of spending from a business perspective, even if you have an elaborate 300 year long business plan. :P

No sir. European sports, all though I guess soccer (and russian hockey) sticks out as the worst examples, is a playground for the richest men in the world. Many of these guys are clearly not looking to make money, but to have fun playing "Football Manager" with real life teams.

You do realize Samuel Eto'o makes around $29M a year playing soccer in a sh!tty ass russian club noone had even heard of two years ago? :P Yes, that's roughly the same as the combined salaries of Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin.

Edited by njdevsftw, 28 February 2012 - 09:02 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#44 Aitchmack

Aitchmack

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 04:26 AM

Dude, seriously.. You think Abramovich bought Chelsea to make money??! ..?! How bout Sheikh Mansour in Man City?!? :D Granted these are the most grotesque examples, but you see the same thing in varying degrees in all the major soccer leagues in europe. :P

You're right about that. It never ceases to amaze me how mega successful businessmen lose all sanity once they've bought a team in their chosen sport.


You do realize Samuel Eto'o makes around $29M a year playing soccer in a sh!tty ass russian club noone had even heard of two years ago? :P Yes, that's roughly the same as the combined salaries of Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin.


Yes, I know. The obscene amounts of money has pretty much ruined football in the UK in my opinion (I know I'm in the minority on that one) and is a big factor in why I've all but given up being interested in it and switched to watching hockey.
  • 0

#45 DaneykoIsGod

DaneykoIsGod

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,187 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:07 AM

In addition, one problem with the salary cap that needs addressing is the fact that teams would be actively against a 2nd Toronto team because of the revenue it would generate.


I'm not sure how exactly it works in the NHL, but wouldn't revenue sharing make a revenue monster market like Toronto v2.0 a good thing for other teams?
  • 0
Posted Image

"I don't like those Rangers fans from New Jersey." - Jim Dowd

#46 njdevil26

njdevil26

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,336 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:22 AM

Oh, the irony


Care to expand on your really informative post?
  • 0

#47 lucifer91

lucifer91

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 874 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:30 AM

I'm not sure how exactly it works in the NHL, but wouldn't revenue sharing make a revenue monster market like Toronto v2.0 a good thing for other teams?


Not if they are a cap floor team
  • 0
Posted Image

#48 DaneykoIsGod

DaneykoIsGod

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,187 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:46 AM

Not if they are a cap floor team


But wouldn't the added money from revenue sharing help a cap floor team reach the cap floor?

It might be a moot point because I'm pretty ignorant to revenue sharing numbers and whether they really add up to anything substantial at all. The way the press plays it out, you'd think revenue sharing from the Yankees alone practically keep several small market MLB franchises afloat. While the NHL doesn't have anything that comes remotely close to what the Yanks pull in, I'd imagine that (if the NHL's revenue sharing setup is anything consequential at all) a second Toronto team would be financially beneficial to small market teams.
  • 0
Posted Image

"I don't like those Rangers fans from New Jersey." - Jim Dowd

#49 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,466 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:58 AM

Adding a high revenue team would increase the cap ceiling and floor more than revenue sharing would distribute.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#50 mxm262

mxm262

    Albany Devil

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 10:01 AM

Care to expand on your really informative post?


relax dude

You don’t see the irony in talking about the difficulty for people to switch to second team in large market with an original 6 team and generations of loyalty behind it?
  • 0

#51 DaneykoIsGod

DaneykoIsGod

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,187 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 10:10 AM

Adding a high revenue team would increase the cap ceiling and floor more than revenue sharing would distribute.


Ah, gotcha. Thanks.
  • 0
Posted Image

"I don't like those Rangers fans from New Jersey." - Jim Dowd

#52 Exit56

Exit56

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 836 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 10:28 AM

relax dude

You don’t see the irony in talking about the difficulty for people to switch to second team in large market with an original 6 team and generations of loyalty behind it?


I didn't think it needed further explanation either, fwiw :)
  • 0

#53 Chuck the Duck

Chuck the Duck

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 29 February 2012 - 10:31 AM

Without the Islanders getting a new building in the next few years, they're out of the NY market (I just don't see them moving to the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, where the capacity for hockey is a little over 15,000). If that happens, then I think the NHL would do everything in their power to keep the Devils here in order to continue to rake in the big TV contract and sponsorship money from having a 2nd team in the NY market.

Based upon the current status of the Devils lease at the Rock, and the TV contract with MSG, as others have already said, it would be prohibitively expensive to move the team in the foreseeable future for any new owner. The team would have to go into bankruptcy, and have it purchased and moved out of that procedure before it could conceivably happen.
  • 0
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users