I believe a person who has been charged with securities fraud would always be one to tell the truth….lol
Speculation: Theory as to why Eugene Melnyk backtracked on LeBreton
- Thread starter ChelFan31
- Start date
I believe a person who has been charged with securities fraud would always be one to tell the truth….lol
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
Hypothetical reasons why a hypothetical team owner would lie about his intentions to sell the team? Sure.
1) the team has already been sold, but due to the terms of the sale he can't talk about it until it has been finalized and publicly announced by the buying party.
2) he is in negotiations to sell the team, and the buying part requests to stay anonymous until the deal is completed. (This is very common in some sales of privately owned -ie: no stock/public shares- businesses)
3) he has had serious offers to buy the team, but is playing hardball with potential buyers by negotiating through the media and trying to up the price. Publicly stating he won't sell the team might lead to a better offer from potential buyers who feel as though he would sell if he got a good enough offer.
4) publicly acknowledging the fact that he is interested in selling the team may hurt his bid with the NCC, who may see public negotiations to sell the flagship of the Lebreton land bid as too unreliable and move on from the RendezVous bid to the one that came in 2nd place.
5) he has multiple offers on the team, and he is playing chicken to see who will flinch first.
I mean, there are probably others, but these are the first ones to come to mind.
Stylizer1
Teflon Don
Technically yes but New Yorkers don't refer to Brooklyn or Queens as Long Island. Long Island are the suburbs after Queens.
stempniaksen
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 11,166
- 4,492
And take out MacArthur's salary (or 80% if you'd prefer) and we fall out of the top half of the league.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
No, it is certifiably not. You should check the estimated salary expenditures on Capfriendly instead of Estimated Cap hits, but since I know you won't, here it is in handy table format. You'll find Ottawa way down the list at 21st, which may be generous as insurance is covering 3.8 of MacArthur's salary. Though I don't have the patience to go through and remove similar salary from other teams, that would drop us to 24th if other teams around us don't have similar situations.
| Rank | Team | Cap Hit | Salary |
| 1 | Washington Capitals | $ 75,361,209.00 | $ 84,417,500.00 |
| 2 | Boston Bruins | $ 74,989,555.00 | $ 83,860,834.00 |
| 3 | New York Islanders | $ 72,882,840.00 | $ 82,832,500.00 |
| 4 | Minnesota Wild | $ 75,717,027.00 | $ 80,890,000.00 |
| 5 | Toronto Maple Leafs | $ 80,838,996.00 | $ 80,815,000.00 |
| 6 | St. Louis Blues | $ 76,299,391.00 | $ 80,447,500.00 |
| 7 | Philadelphia Flyers | $ 73,083,489.00 | $ 79,863,540.00 |
| 8 | Chicago Blackhawks | $ 78,222,819.00 | $ 79,792,500.00 |
| 9 | Dallas Stars | $ 73,889,724.00 | $ 79,407,500.00 |
| 10 | Detroit Red Wings | $ 78,299,239.00 | $ 79,011,667.00 |
| 11 | Vancouver Canucks | $ 75,192,289.00 | $ 78,535,833.00 |
| 12 | Pittsburgh Penguins | $ 74,104,591.00 | $ 78,069,988.00 |
| 13 | Tampa Bay Lightning | $ 72,498,209.00 | $ 78,037,738.00 |
| 14 | Los Angeles Kings | $ 71,728,827.00 | $ 77,083,333.00 |
| 15 | New York Rangers | $ 72,515,865.00 | $ 76,659,167.00 |
| 16 | Buffalo Sabres | $ 69,170,718.00 | $ 76,388,532.00 |
| 17 | Anaheim Ducks | $ 72,529,570.00 | $ 76,190,000.00 |
| 18 | Nashville Predators | $ 72,114,453.00 | $ 76,158,932.00 |
| 19 | Montreal Canadiens | $ 67,952,058.00 | $ 75,025,000.00 |
| 20 | Calgary Flames | $ 72,661,961.00 | $ 73,917,167.00 |
| 21 | Ottawa Senators | $ 74,101,672.00 | $ 73,567,500.00 |
| 22 | San Jose Sharks | $ 70,065,386.00 | $ 73,127,500.00 |
| 23 | Edmonton Oilers | $ 66,939,742.00 | $ 70,815,833.00 |
| 24 | Florida Panthers | $ 67,741,227.00 | $ 69,962,733.00 |
| 25 | Winnipeg Jets | $ 68,334,851.00 | $ 69,156,666.00 |
| 26 | New Jersey Devils | $ 67,311,735.00 | $ 68,810,834.00 |
| 27 | Vegas Golden Knights | $ 66,817,830.00 | $ 68,382,500.00 |
| 28 | Columbus Blue Jackets | $ 69,852,307.00 | $ 68,350,000.00 |
| 29 | Colorado Avalanche | $ 65,109,674.00 | $ 63,305,000.00 |
| 30 | Carolina Hurricanes | $ 59,523,252.00 | $ 60,635,833.00 |
| 31 | Arizona Coyotes | $ 58,605,629.00 | $ 58,019,444.00 |
GrantLemons
Church of FYOUS
Melnyk would totally lie about not selling the team. He also may not be lying in his mind. When he says "I would never sell the team" he may be more referring to the fact he would never voluntarily sell the team. But depending on the way it shakes down, he may be forced to sell the team if he doesn't have the cheese for the new arena.
tl;dr is I don't believe Melnyk for a second. He could deny he's selling it until the day before he sells it and then say to the media "I had no choice but to sell it blah blah blah". The guy is a lying sack. Still hoping there will be something coming in the new year with regards to the sale of the team. It seems so stupid for Melnyk to keep it at this point, especially with the Islanders new arena being fully privately funded. It gives even more leverage to the city in terms of the arena negotiations, and how much cash they ask for from Melnyk/OSEG/whoever owns the team.
How the hell is he going to cough up even $500M for a new arena, when he can't even afford cleaning staff for CTC?
tl;dr is I don't believe Melnyk for a second. He could deny he's selling it until the day before he sells it and then say to the media "I had no choice but to sell it blah blah blah". The guy is a lying sack. Still hoping there will be something coming in the new year with regards to the sale of the team. It seems so stupid for Melnyk to keep it at this point, especially with the Islanders new arena being fully privately funded. It gives even more leverage to the city in terms of the arena negotiations, and how much cash they ask for from Melnyk/OSEG/whoever owns the team.
How the hell is he going to cough up even $500M for a new arena, when he can't even afford cleaning staff for CTC?
Wondercarrot
By The Power of Canadian Tire Centre
- Jul 2, 2002
- 8,321
- 4,276
im going to go with him being a proven liar and disreputable character.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
Uhm... you`re tldr; is longer than your initial para...
After compiling the salary numbers, it got me thinking; not only do we have among the lowest salaries in the league, but we're also among the oldest teams in the league. Not a great combo at all.
GrantLemons
Church of FYOUS
Hamilton needs 250 million to make the arena NHL ready. And if you have been to the arena (I have) its a joke. The current arena could not even get the memorial cup.
Making Hamilton's FirstOntario Centre 'NHL-ready' would cost $250M
coladin
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2009
- 11,900
- 4,623
Considering the revenues and attendance issues, this chart puts his spending in a favourable position, wouldn't you say? Oilers are at capacity. Same as San Jose (historically, haven't checked this year). Calgary is usually up in capacity. and Montreal, has 21K strong to pay their players, and a whole gigantic market. And yet, Sens are right there.
If we were supported like the Habs and Oilers, Dorion would set his budget higher. Maybe people are hired. More scouts. more front office.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
Is it realistic to expect support like Edmonton or Montreal when half the businesses can't buy season tickets to wine and dine their clients here because they cater to gov't or are gov't themselves? Or is this just your continued crusade to attack Ottawa fans?
Montreal's salary is down because the decided against signing Markov, or replacing him. They historically spend more. Edmonton has to leave room for McDavid's monster extension, they'll be far higher when that kicks in. Both also don't have skeleton crews elsewhere.
The thing is, other teams, with some exceptions, will spend more when the time is right. We keep saying that, but it all seems to be subterfuge. Coming off a conference final appearance, what do we do in our offseason? Let Methot go, replace Kelly with Thompson. Not really a big add to push us to the next level and inspire fans to buy tickets, is it? MacArthur then fails his physical (which they seem to have suspected was coming) so now with 80% of his salary paid by insurance, do we look for a replacement? Nope. More reason for the fan base to fill those seats after an offseason of every media source out there telling them that last season was a fluke. Add to that, the team decides a good way to build excitement around the new season was to tarp off 1500 seats. Hope your season ticket wasn't in that section, because if it was, you have to choose a different seat now...
This team has done very little to create a buzz around the team. They had a great run last year, and instead of build on it, they threw cold water on it every chance they got. You want to blame the attendance numbers on fans, fine, but there is plenty of blame to be shared by the decisions made by this team.
Back in Black
All Sports would be great if they were Hockey
the team's expenditures are in line with its revenues
personally I can't fault an owner for spending more than what comes in
if many here feel we should have an owner that consistently overspends against revenue...while I think that'd be great...I don't see it as realistic
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
Teams have ups and downs. Remember, those revenues Forbes estimated don't include nearly 17 million from the expansion fees either. 15th in Operating income, 21st in salary (as low as 24th if you remove MacArthur's insurance paid salary).
I just think if you're having attendance issues in the playoffs in a year you make it to the conference finals, you can't expect to rectify that by cutting loose your top pair Dman, tarping off 1500 seats and threatening relocation. Probably really didn`t help that MacArthur`s future was in question (though they kept that quiet) and Karlsson and Brassard were expected to miss training camp and potentially some games (not their fault). Add in stories like Chipperson`s and season ticket sales really look like a self inflicted wound to me.
I get a kick out of you....two weeks ago it was all about Wilbur and now you're quoting the Forbes numbers and throwing them at me
saying this
is putting a spin on it that isn't accurate and you are eloquent enough in English to know the difference
and he didn't really threaten relocation....read his words or listen to what he said....it was a hypothetical response to a hypothetical situation....if it becomes a disaster...you remember that part of it right? of course you do
you're becoming part of the negative spin problem
Gil Gunderson
Registered User
Most NHL teams don't make a profit, but they do fine.
We know he doesn't have the money to build a contender, and that's why we want him to sell.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
I get a kick out of you....two weeks ago it was all about Wilbur and now you're quoting the Forbes numbers and throwing them at me
saying this
is putting a spin on it that isn't accurate and you are eloquent enough in English to know the difference
and he didn't really threaten relocation....read his words or listen to what he said....it was a hypothetical response to a hypothetical situation....if it becomes a disaster...you remember that part of it right? of course you do
you're becoming part of the negative spin problem
Look, I can say you don't actually know his revenue, so you can't say they are in line with his expenditures, and then you can say that you're using Forbes estimates, and then I can say those are suspect, but for arguments sake, lets assume they are accurate, but I figured seeing as you clearly put value in them, I'd skip all that and assume that's what you meant when talking about revenues. The hope was to avoid this, because as I've said, they are a talking point, this is a message board, so if we are to talk, it's a starting point.
It's pretty niaive to think Melnyk brings up relocation as anything but a thinly veiled threat, but you know that, so why are you acting like you're part of his PR spin team?
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 35,255
- 9,671
You can't compare pro sports franchises to regular businesses.
These are luxury toys for the super rich. It's about ego and exclusivity of being in the club...not about bottom line profit.
Unless you are the Yankees, in the NFL (with thieir insane tv deal) or the Habs/Leafs, you can't count on making a profit regularly.
you try so hard to be an expert on everything. I'm not part of Melnyk's spin team. I just counteract bullshit when I see it.
last season you were qouting some stats on something or other and I told you flat out you couldn't statistically infer what you were implying from the stats. Around and around we went and you wouldn't give up. You were wrong and you clearly didn't understand the statistics behind the statistics you were quoting.
Now you're telling me "let's not for forget about the 17M in expansion fees" Let's be clear...it was me that was suggesting people read that material. That they read the footnotes. That they understand that material. I suggested you read it. So you went and read it. Good for you. Now you're throwing it at me? Wtf? Do you think I forgot what was in the document that I suggested you read? Point others at it if you like. Fill your boots. But don't push it at me suggesting "let's not forget..." I implored you to read it in the first place.
I can't necessarily disagree with you....it's just that kind of rich playboy isn't something we have a lot of in Canada let alone Ottawa.
Gil Gunderson
Registered User
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,694
- 33,294
Yes, you implored me to read it first, but of course, I had read it already, as well as in prior years where their explanation was very much the same. That's how I built my opinion on their methodology being flawed in the first place after all, but you suddenly thought I'd gone back and read it after I quoted a couple specific numbers from their write up. Funny how my criticism never changed one bit, but all the sudden you finally beleived I had read it.
You say you counteract bull but then try to use semantics to claim Melnyk wasn't threatening relocation, he was simply hypothesising about what might happen. No threat there. Just like when the mob comes along and offers protection for a fee, it would be a shame if your fine business didn't have protection. That's not a threat, they're just offering a service and hypothesising about what might happen to a business' store should they not purchase that protection....
of course you'd read it first already. there you are being right again.
funny though how initially you were just blindly criticizing the Forbes stuff in general terms with no evidence you read the material but now you're quoting from it.
I have no knowledge of when you read it. that's a fact. but I can say 2 weeks ago your posts didn't reflect you having any knowledge of what you were posting about and now they do. guess I must be presuming you have in the interim read the material.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - camp edition- Latest: ninetyeight
