NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/13007905/commissioner-gary-bettman-says-nhl-begin-expansion-process-soon-june-owners-approval

I think the 'E' ball is in full motion. I definitely think that Quebec City is getting a team, for a few reasons.

1. Arena's just about done, in line with the expansion rumblings.

2. It's hard to say no when you look at Winnipeg's success.

3. And lastly, and most importantly to King Bettman, it serves as a distraction/choice of reason when also giving Las Vegas a team, which will ultimately be an epic failure.

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

[wildwing64]

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

So a 34 team NHL, assuming the Coyotes and Panthers survive beyond 2019.

[Evil G]

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/13007905/commissioner-gary-bettman-says-nhl-begin-expansion-process-soon-june-owners-approval

I think the 'E' ball is in full motion. I definitely think that Quebec City is getting a team, for a few reasons.

1. Arena's just about done, in line with the expansion rumblings.

2. It's hard to say no when you look at Winnipeg's success.

3. And lastly, and most importantly to King Bettman, it serves as a distraction/choice of reason when also giving Las Vegas a team, which will ultimately be an epic failure.

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

BUT THEN THE DIVISIONS WONT BE EVEN OH NO WHAT A DISASTER. /s

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

So a 34 team NHL, assuming the Coyotes and Panthers survive beyond 2019.

You sound surprised.

I think the best scenario is to wait and see ultimately what happens with the Coyotes and Panthers before expanding. I think that relocation is inevitable for both.

I'd move both teams now and cut losses, but I mean that's just too logical.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/13007905/commissioner-gary-bettman-says-nhl-begin-expansion-process-soon-june-owners-approval

I think the 'E' ball is in full motion. I definitely think that Quebec City is getting a team, for a few reasons.

1. Arena's just about done, in line with the expansion rumblings.

2. It's hard to say no when you look at Winnipeg's success.

3. And lastly, and most importantly to King Bettman, it serves as a distraction/choice of reason when also giving Las Vegas a team, which will ultimately be an epic failure.

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

BUT THEN THE DIVISIONS WONT BE EVEN OH NO WHAT A DISASTER. /s

They can put a team in Honolulu to even it out. Problem solved.

[monkeypower]

Obviously it would never happen but I feel if there was a Hawaii hockey team, they could have a really cool identity.

[Still MIGHTY]

No, 34 is too much for any league.

I think this was reported in an earlier stage but it makes the most sense. Two expansions, one or two relocations. 32 isn't great for the NHL, but it's manageable.

[FiddySicks]

Thought this would get more notice/traction in this thread.

From DarkJourney in the NFL Merry-Go-Round thread:

From Field of Schemes:

San Jose could be about to approve $100m+ in lease breaks for Sharks in exchange for diddly-squat

Posted on May 18, 2015 by Neil deMause

The San Jose city council is set to vote tomorrow on a lease extension for the Sharks on their current arena while talking about whether to build a new one. You can read the proposal here; its a bit convoluted and I havent made sense of it all yet, but Marc Morris of Better Sense San Jose has sent along his analysis, which is this:

1. The Sharks get immediate relief from previously obligated rent payments (total reduction is $7.25M = $2M for the Arena and $5.25M for the Ice Center, where the Sharks and their new AHL farm team practice).

2. Starting in 2018, the Sharks stop paying any rent at all (thats $0 per year) for the city owned Arena, down from roughly $5M per year.

3. The City in the short term kicks in $6M and then, starting in 2018, pays $2.6M for capital and modernization needs for the Arena. That of course will be financed by the $0 a year rent.

4. The Sharks get to spend a lot of this capital money for revenue enhancing improvements; for its efforts, the City gets precisely none of the enhanced revenue.

5. Just to rub it in, the agreement also explicitly prohibits the City from getting any new revenue from its own Arena, like maybe adding a ticket tax.

6. It appears that the City will take on the interest rate risk for the bonds on the Ice Center, making the current ultra-low rates the new baseline for the rent calculation. After all, theres little to no probability that rates will go up in the next 10 to 20 years.

7. And, although this never gets mentioned, the City will continue to pay over $10M a year in interest on the bonds that paid for construction of the Arena in the first place. In the best case, the net loss to the City from the Arena is over $8M a year.

Like I said, I havent done the math on this myself, but if Morris is correct, that could easily be more than $100 million in concessions that the city would be providing to the Sharks all for a team that doesnt have an immediate alternative option to play in, and which isnt even agreeing to a long-term lease deal in exchange. (Theyd have to stay put through 2025, but its unlikely they could get a new arena built much before then anyway.) Thats the kind of thing you might think youd want to have a hearing on, or even a financial study, before voting on whether to approve it, but thats apparently not the way the San Jose city council rolls.

So the Sharks would pull a Red Wings and stop paying rent in 2018, all while essentially getting an extra $100 million out of the city, all the while trying to edge for a NEW arena?

A lot of things wrong with this, most of all that Tank needs a replacement. I mean, I guess they're talking about 10 years down the road. But besides it's sterility and brightness, the Shark Tank is a fine facility.

I'm pretty sure this is a sign from the city of San Jose showing just how scared $h!tless they are of losing the Sharks to San Francisco. I'm not sure the new arena for the Warriors is going to be big enough to fit a hockey rink, but you've gotta think the idea has at least been thrown around once or twice.

[gosioux76]

No, 34 is too much for any league.

I think this was reported in an earlier stage but it makes the most sense. Two expansions, one or two relocations. 32 isn't great for the NHL, but it's manageable.

I've never been a fan of the NHL's expansion practices, but they'd be leaving expansion fees on the table if they made Quebec City wait for a relocated franchise. QC and Las Vegas want a team so badly that they'd be willing to pony up those millions for a expansion team.

Plus, there are plenty of viable markets open should Arizona/Florida/Carolina/INSERT TEAM HERE pack up and leave. Here in Portland, a columnist with the Oregonian last year reported about Paul Allen's interest in the NHL, but only if it were a relocating franchise. He apparently wasn't interested in ponying up $100M in expansion fees for a new franchise. I'd suspect that's a common sentiment from other potential franchise owners.

[Lee.]

If it's only $100 million it would be miracle.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

No, 34 is too much for any league.

I think this was reported in an earlier stage but it makes the most sense. Two expansions, one or two relocations. 32 isn't great for the NHL, but it's manageable.

I've never been a fan of the NHL's expansion practices, but they'd be leaving expansion fees on the table if they made Quebec City wait for a relocated franchise. QC and Las Vegas want a team so badly that they'd be willing to pony up those millions for a expansion team.

Plus, there are plenty of viable markets open should Arizona/Florida/Carolina/INSERT TEAM HERE pack up and leave. Here in Portland, a columnist with the Oregonian last year reported about Paul Allen's interest in the NHL, but only if it were a relocating franchise. He apparently wasn't interested in ponying up $100M in expansion fees for a new franchise. I'd suspect that's a common sentiment from other potential franchise owners.

I thought the story was that Paul Allen wanted nothing to do with hockey.

[The_Admiral]

No, he was most certainly interested in the Coyotes at one point (I want to say pre-Glendale, maybe a second time recently?), but I think he's come to the conclusion that the NHL isn't really something he has to do.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I always thought the NHL would thrive in Portland. The Pacific Northwest is pretty much untapped other than Vancouver.

[Kevin W.]

Would having the Winterhawks there hurt them, though?

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I think it's a case where both teams get supported.

[gosioux76]

Trail Blazers president Chris McGowan has said publicly that Allen specifically asked him to explore the NHL possibility when it seemed like the Coyotes were in play.

Here's the story from Oregonian columnist John Canzano that describes Allen as ready and waiting for the NHL. LINK

[bosrs1]

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

So a 34 team NHL, assuming the Coyotes and Panthers survive beyond 2019.

Jesus 34 teams? How about they start weeding out the markets that have been struggling all these years and do some relocation. I mean right off the bat they have 2 teams that NEED to move.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Seattle is still in the background, but they seem to have too many arena issues. I could possibly see a 2 stage expansion- 1st stage (2017-18) Quebec and Las Vegas; 2nd stage Seattle and somewhere else (2019-2020).

So a 34 team NHL, assuming the Coyotes and Panthers survive beyond 2019.

Jesus 34 teams? How about they start weeding out the markets that have been struggling all these years and do some relocation. I mean right off the bat they have 2 teams that NEED to move.

[2001mark]

Toronto Marlies name new head coach, 34yr old Sheldon Keefe. Somewhat newsworthy around these parts as that AHL roster will be enough of a cog in the Leafs plan going forward.
Also - it's a job that now places Keefe on potential future NHL job openings lists.

re. Portland, I'd love to see that. Though I can't see them ahead of Seattle... unless that became a type of bidding war.

We do know the NHL doesn't mind places where not a lot of other teams exist - Columbus, Nashville, San Jose proper at the time, etc. Heck, it's a prime reason that Las Vegas has even been taken semi seriously.

[rams80]

No, Las Vegas has been taken semi-seriously because 1) The NHL has in the past proven to be this stupid and 2) The NHL won't shut up about Vegas.

[Sodboy13]

The Glendale City Clown Car is holding a special meeting tomorrow to discuss cancelling its arena lease and management agreement with Coyotes ownership. I'd say it's 50/50 that they somehow end up giving IceArizona more money out of this.

https://twitter.com/bruce_arthur/status/608463977664884736