Rogers Communications has acquired BCE’s 37.5% stake in Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment

[thinkblue]

Rogers to Buy 37.5% Maple Leaf Sports Stake From Bell for $3.5B

Rogers now owns 75% of MLSE, which is the parent company of Maple Leafs, Raptors and Toronto FC.

www.sportico.com

Click to read more...

 

[ACC1224]

Bell is out??
Not sure how I feel about this. Initial thought is this isn't good.

 

[rumman]

I guess Bell knows when to leave a party, I would gave preferred Rogers selling to Bell, but this can only be good for the organization imo. I have often said a single owner can only help even though it’s a publicly traded company, too many cooks spoil the broth and all……,

 

[Dekes For Days]

Gross. Concerning news.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays. Overall they seem more frugal than the Leafs have been recently. In past reporting over arguments between Bell and Rogers over the Leafs, the Bell side seemed more reasonable. Their TV programming is also worse than TSN and I’m guessing TSN may lose their regional games now.

Don’t think this is good news.

 

[ACC1224]

Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays. Overall they seem more frugal than the Leafs have been recently. In past reporting over arguments between Bell and Rogers over the Leafs, the Bell side seemed more reasonable. Their TV programming is also worse than TSN and I’m guessing TSN may lose their regional games now.

Don’t think this is good news.

Jays are 7th in payroll according to this.

MLB payrolls 2024: Full list of every baseball team from highest to lowest

For the second straight season, the Mets open 2024 with the highest team payroll. Complete list of the 30 teams.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Suntouchable13]

Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays. Overall they seem more frugal than the Leafs have been recently. In past reporting over arguments between Bell and Rogers over the Leafs, the Bell side seemed more reasonable. Their TV programming is also worse than TSN and I’m guessing TSN may lose their regional games now.

Don’t think this is good news.

Wrong. Jays have spent money. That's not the issue. Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays has nothing to do with the financial side.

 

[SprDaVE]

This won't change much of anything. It's huge news in terms of business news though.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Wrong. Jays have spent money. That's not the issue. Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays has nothing to do with the financial side.

“Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays” and “overall they seem more frugal than the Leafs have acted recently” are separate thoughts. But the Leafs have been the biggest spenders in the league on stuff outside the cap and I’m skeptical that will always be the case going forward.

 

[Peasy]

Rogers is a cancer to this country and Leafs won't win shit with them in charge.

Look at what theyve been doin with the Jays the past few years

 

[Evilhomer]

This won't change much of anything. It's huge news in terms of business news though.

Correct. Won't have any impact on the on-ice product. The only real ownership change that would be impactful would be moving from a corporate to an individual owner. but that won't ever happen here.

 

[SprDaVE]

“Rogers has not done a good job owning the Jays” and “overall they seem more frugal than the Leafs have acted recently” are separate thoughts. But the Leafs have been the biggest spenders in the league on stuff outside the cap and I’m skeptical that will always be the case going forward.

Rogers owned a 3rd of the Leafs already. The Leafs have spent max budget for 30 years. It won't change.

 

[ACC1224]

Correct. Won't have any impact on the on-ice product. The only real ownership change that would be impactful would be moving from a corporate to an individual owner. but that won't ever happen here.

Thankfully.

 

[TMLeafer]

Now they have a sports team monopoly (not like they didn't before).

 

[Evilhomer]

Thankfully.

Like everything else, it depends. Some individual owners are great, and some are not. The issue in Canada is that there are not a sufficient number of people with a sufficient amount of wealth to own significant professional sports teams. We are too small of a country.

 

[Niagara Bill]

Gross. Concerning news.

Why?

 

[ACC1224]

Like everything else, it depends. Some individual owners are great, and some are not. The issue in Canada is that there are not a sufficient number of people with a sufficient amount of wealth to own significant professional sports teams. We are too small of a country.

Obviously some would be good, others not but I think the odds of an individual owner becoming intrusive is greater than that of a corporate one.
Intrusive owners are rarely good.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Well there ya go folks.

Bell cared so much about winning the cup they sold their share in the team. Maybe this means they're gonna increase their stake in the Canadiens. I never could understand how it wasn't a conflict of interest them owning a piece of two teams.

Not to mention all those other teams arenas with their names on them.

I don't think this is good news. And if it isn't good news that must mean it's bad news. There's no such thing as neutral news.

Only sensationalism one way or the other.

Personally I hope they end up selling to an individual owner. Someone who is actually intetested in winning. Leaving a legacy behind fans can admire and respect him for.

Not just building a monolithic sports media monopoly empire.

 

[Niagara Bill]

Still need a Stanley.
We all know that both Bell and Roger's have little interest in real winning. Money is the only game. Risk is not allowed in the board room. Shareholders views are ONLY monetary.
So if success as a Leaf fan is what you want. Buy shares.

 

[SprDaVE]

Still need a Stanley.
We all know that both Bell and Roger's have little interest in real winning. Money is the only game. Risk is not allowed in the board room. Shareholders views are ONLY monetary.
So if success as a Leaf fan is what you want. Buy shares.

Let me tell you a secret. Winning = more money. Crazy, I know. It's in their interest to win.

 

[ACC1224]

Let me tell you a secret. Winning = more money. It's in their interest to win.

That's not a secret, it's common sense.

 

[Apex Predator]

Is my phone bill about to go up?

 

[Niagara Bill]

Obviously some would be good, others not but I think the odds of an individual owner becoming intrusive is greater than that of a corporate one.
Intrusive owners are rarely good.

Really! Tannebaum would be bad? In the end Ballard had same results as Bell.
Smythe won. Steinbrenner won, Man U won. Every NFL team is almost sole owners.
At least owners have no one else to blame and cannot hide.

 

[Peasy]

Let me tell you a secret. Winning = more money. Crazy, I know. It's in their interest to win.

Its all about risk assessment. Odds are winning are extremely low. Why put in a bunch of risk with such little chance of reward when you can remain status quo and continue to rake in the millions youre already getting.

 

[SprDaVE]

Its all about risk assessment. Odds are winning are extremely low. Why put in a bunch of risk with such little chance of reward when you can remain status quo and continue to rake in the millions youre already getting.

You can call it whatever you want based on what you think they are doing. I'm just saying that they want to win and winning means more money. Achieving the goal of winning is obviously a little more complex and harder to achieve.

Rogers now owning the team won't change the idea that winning = more money and spending money is typically how you achieve that.