Sportsnet: Two companies proposed to buy the NHL in yesterday's meeting

[Jarqui]

How about antitrust law?

There is no law that says in effect that they have to remain structured as they are forever. Whether they dissolve and reform, sell and some buy back in later or get stock options as part of the deal or sign a short term CBA and move on with restructuring, it is difficult to convince me that they have absolutely no legal alternatives of the nature we are discussing. All they have to do is just be careful on how they go about any of the alternatives such that it is within the law.

Antitrust does have it's limitations. The overall significant drop in union workers in the US supports the fact that there are limits to how much the unions can cling to the laws of the land in order to continue their existence. There is a point in time where a business person has to have the right to say "Enough! There has to be a better way. The union can't dominate or ruin my business. I need a divorce from the union." We're discussing those legal options. The particular entity that they own can't divorce but the owner and their assets sure can. The MLS is a precedent of a legal employee-employer arrangement that the NHL assets could migrate to as an option. The owners have rights and freedoms to lawfully conduct business and manage their assets as they see fit to as well.

It might be fine and dandy to get all worked up over the poor, down trodden, $1.3 mil/yr philosophical organized NHLers and their quiver of legal options but the other side has rights too. These entities are not married forever. It may well be time to drive a stake through the heart of the NHLPA - in fact, it may be overdue.

 

[KingsFan7824]

NHL game day analysis on CNBC's Power Lunch, and Neil Cavuto on Fox News...sounds like fun.

At one time, hockey was a game, was it not?

 

[arnie]

Lets assume that somehow hell freezes over and the NHL owner unite to accept an offer which is much higher than this one. How does that affect the Players? With it being one employer rather than 30 could they price set the franshices all they wanted. no one can call u for callusion of you got a monoply.

It changes everything. The players lose much of their bargaining power. Since it is a single business, the owners could set salary scales for every players and make salaries the same for every team because it wouldn't be collusion. Agents could not play teams off against each other because there would be no bidding up prices for free agents. The owners could "transfer" players around at will, so they might end up places they wouldn't want to go. If they act up and get cut, then they can't simply find another team. It goes on and on. It would really hurt the players big time and give the league far more power.

 

[RangerBoy]

That's how the Kings owner Phillip Anshwantz(spelling)owns almost the entire league

 

[alecfromtherock]

Would that be a certified cheque worth $3,000,000,000 or in gold bars?

16 ounces per pound X 27.5 pound Fort Knox brick of gold X $436/oz = $191,840 per Gold Brick

$3,000,000,000/$191,840 = 15,638 gold bricks

The NHL has reported a $1.8 billion loss over the past 10 years and you have 2 groups that want to outright buy that business?

US$100,000,000 would leave all owners with a hefty profit(granted their team would no longer belong to them, but Super Mario would finally get the money he is owed )

That is not to say all of the owners would just be pushed aside if they did agree to selling all of their franchises, 30 Directors would be needed at the corporate office to run the teams for this new business.

Can the PA somehow spin this as a reason to be even more entrenched then they currently are?

If there is no change in the lockout by D-day(draft day July 1, 2005) then it might hold more weight

 

[SENSible1*]

The NHL just fired a cannon warning shot over the deck of the good ship NHLPA.

They want to get a deal done with the PA, but they have other options, like this one, that are devastating to the PA's power base.

Time to get down to business Bobby and accept the deal you are being offered is significantly better than your other options. In fact, I'm sure the NHL could be convinced to sweeten the non-cap/linkage issues if the PA would finally show a willingness to address the financial issues facing the league.

 

[Charge_Seven]

ok smart guys, answer this question,

What if this actually happens, does it help, hurt? What can we expect about salaries. Helps or hurt small market teams, canadian teams and southern teams. If they buy all the teams, does that mean individual owners are gone? Does the NHL exist after that?

I don't see the Leafs ownership selling for $100,000,000. What's that to the Leafs? five years of total earnings under the old system? If they get a cap in place the Leafs will earn $40,000,000 in a year. No way $100,000,000 is a done deal to them.

 

[oil slick]

How about antitrust law?

Which antitrust law?

 

[Hoek]

Sounds interesting. Copying MLS would definitely lead to much better control of salaries. My only problem is that it would allow the league to take over some of the management of the teams. By far the worst example of this is when MLS forced the Tampa Bay Mutiny to make a bad trade: Roy Lassiter (our best goalscorer) for Roy Wegerle (a hack), just to push their D.C. market even further. What a load of crock that was and certainly helped lead to the demise of the Mutiny. I just hope they wouldn't start doing the same thing, moving all the good players to big markets in search of a TV deal and such. Then again I think MLS has stopped doing things like this, but something to be wary of.

 

[Jarqui]

I don't see the Leafs ownership selling for $100,000,000. What's that to the Leafs? five years of total earnings under the old system? If they get a cap in place the Leafs will earn $40,000,000 in a year. No way $100,000,000 is a done deal to them.

I'm sure the offer is not a flat $100 mil per team. That just so happens to be how it averaged out. The offer would recognize the individual values of the franchises or it has zero chance of flying in the wake of the Ducks sale for $50-60 mil because the majority of owners will think their individual piece of the pie is worth a little more. Some would be outraged and rightfully insulted at the thought of Carolina or Nashville getting the same as the Leafs or Wings (for example).

 

[GKJ]

My only problem is that it would allow the league to take over some of the management of the teams. By far the worst example of this is when MLS forced the Tampa Bay Mutiny to make a bad trade: Roy Lassiter (our best goalscorer) for Roy Wegerle (a hack), just to push their D.C. market even further. What a load of crock that was and certainly helped lead to the demise of the Mutiny. I just hope they wouldn't start doing the same thing, moving all the good players to big markets in search of a TV deal and such. Then again I think MLS has stopped doing things like this, but something to be wary of.

I think this is what would happen. People think small market teams can't survive now, they would almost become AHL teams if this were to happen. Zero tolerance on GM's to keep salaries under control, because I don't think there would be a salary cap, unless they just by maybe like half the league.

I don't think people want to see Jarome Iginla traded for Jed Ortmeyer.

 

[no13matssundin]

I don't think people want to see Jarome Iginla traded for Jed Ortmeyer.

Speak for yourself! Jed is the Future of the Seattle Flames!!

 

[Game_Misconduct]

I'd be surprised if the US government let such a deal go through.

Why? Major League Soccer is already doing it.

 

[rekrul]

Sounds interesting. Copying MLS would definitely lead to much better control of salaries. My only problem is that it would allow the league to take over some of the management of the teams. By far the worst example of this is when MLS forced the Tampa Bay Mutiny to make a bad trade: Roy Lassiter (our best goalscorer) for Roy Wegerle (a hack), just to push their D.C. market even further. What a load of crock that was and certainly helped lead to the demise of the Mutiny. I just hope they wouldn't start doing the same thing, moving all the good players to big markets in search of a TV deal and such. Then again I think MLS has stopped doing things like this, but something to be wary of.

yep exactly, seems like carefull what you wish for type of seniero. Fans of big TV markets NY/LA/Chi plus Tor might get better trades because it will spike the TV ratings. Sidney Crosby would definalty be a Ranger or King or Leaf, not sure if thats what I want.

 

[CGG]

It's not all doom and gloom for the players. Each team would still have a president and a GM looking out for their own team's best interests. Good luck getting a Sutter to first approve and then defend the Iginla for Ortmeyer trade, they would get crucified by fans everywhere. Free agents would still be in demand by multiple teams and get into bidding wars, except there would be a team-by-team budget, presumably, more or less like a salary cap. They'd still have to negotiate a cap (and probably a floor) with the NHLPA. 29 teams would be pissed if Crosby automatically got assigned to the Rangers "for the good of the league".

It's bizarro world, that's for sure, but it is basically the 100% revenue sharing solution that players seemed to be in favor of.

 

[Hoek]

Originally Posted by Epsilon
I'd be surprised if the US government let such a deal go through.

Why? Major League Soccer is already doing it.

Well I guess it should be pointed out that MLS was able to argue that they can't really compete with the salaries offered abroad for soccer players so I think that gave them a little leeway as far as implementing the strict controls that they wanted to have in North America. The old NASL crashed and burned when they thought they could pay foreign stars competitively..

 

[oil slick]

Well I guess it should be pointed out that MLS was able to argue that they can't really compete with the salaries offered abroad for soccer players so I think that gave them a little leeway as far as implementing the strict controls that they wanted to have in North America. The old NASL crashed and burned when they thought they could pay foreign stars competitively..

But people are still flinging out anti-trust arguments, and I'm totally unclear on what this means. Wouldn't it be tantamount to a company buying 30 small comanies? Maybe I'm being naieve?

 

[MisterUnspoken]

yep exactly, seems like carefull what you wish for type of seniero. Fans of big TV markets NY/LA/Chi plus Tor might get better trades because it will spike the TV ratings. Sidney Crosby would definalty be a Ranger or King or Leaf, not sure if thats what I want.

Crosy should be a Ranger, but then again I'm biased!

I think this whole plan is a great idea. I hope it happens. I love the way the MLS is run, I love the way NFL football is run -- one of those options works for me. I would imagine no teams would have to contract due to the ability to operate in a loss environment with the added profit from the big clubs.

I would say contraction would not happen unless for whatever reason the small market teams started to take a heavier loss than can be contained by the profit of the other clubs.

But I'm just a graphic designer/network admin, what do I know

 

[Hoek]

But people are still flinging out anti-trust arguments, and I'm totally unclear on what this means. Wouldn't it be tantamount to a company buying 30 small comanies? Maybe I'm being naieve?

I'm probably being naive too as I can't claim to be an expert on this, but I would think it's more like a company buying 30 McDonald's franchises (teams are just franchises of the league after all), instead of buying 30 entirely different companies.

 

[hockeytown9321]

Obviously, this isn't oing to happen, but I've thought all along that at some point, a major TV network will buy a percentage of every team for broadcast rights. That's more or less what NBC did with the XFL.

 

[Michael Morbid]

Another article about the companies that want to purchase the NHL.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_y...NlYwN0aA--?slug=ap-nhloffer&prov=ap&type=lgns

 

[txomisc]

It's not all doom and gloom for the players. Each team would still have a president and a GM looking out for their own team's best interests. Good luck getting a Sutter to first approve and then defend the Iginla for Ortmeyer trade, they would get crucified by fans everywhere. Free agents would still be in demand by multiple teams and get into bidding wars, except there would be a team-by-team budget, presumably, more or less like a salary cap. They'd still have to negotiate a cap (and probably a floor) with the NHLPA. 29 teams would be pissed if Crosby automatically got assigned to the Rangers "for the good of the league".

It's bizarro world, that's for sure, but it is basically the 100% revenue sharing solution that players seemed to be in favor of.

I don't see why they would still have to negotiate a cap with the NHLPA.

 

[mudcrutch79]

I think that the problem referred as anti-trust law is that the new owner of the league would effectively be buying a monopoly. In theory right now, teams compete with one another for consumers. In places like NY, where there are three teams, this is undoubtedly true. Were they to be owned by the same entity, the competition would disappear, and the new owners would have less of an interest in competing for consumers. I don't know what the position of the Tribunal in Canada would be, but s. 92 of the Competition Act would make this move subject to review under Canadian law, I believe.

I can't believe that there's any seriousness to this. Not to mention that $3.5 billion would be a bargain price.

 

[eye]

I think that the problem referred as anti-trust law is that the new owner of the league would effectively be buying a monopoly. In theory right now, teams compete with one another for consumers. In places like NY, where there are three teams, this is undoubtedly true. Were they to be owned by the same entity, the competition would disappear, and the new owners would have less of an interest in competing for consumers. I don't know what the position of the Tribunal in Canada would be, but s. 92 of the Competition Act would make this move subject to review under Canadian law, I believe.

I can't believe that there's any seriousness to this. Not to mention that $3.5 billion would be a bargain price.

How is this any different than running a McDonald's franchise? McDonald's has competition as will the NHL with the WHA, the JRNHLPA, other pro leagues and Europe as player alternatives.

 

[Epsilon]

How is this any different than running a McDonald's franchise? McDonald's has competition as will the NHL with the WHA, the JRNHLPA, other pro leagues and Europe as player alternatives.

The courts differentiate between any competition and reasonable competition. This is why Microsoft can be found to be a monopoly in breach of antitrust violations despite the existence of Apple, Linux, etc.