Nashville Predators Being Sold?

[jkrdevil]

True JKR. It is obvious that Balsillie wants to know for sure whether he can move the team before he agrees to pay way-too-much for the Preds.

If this sale does not end up going through because of blocking from the NHL BOG or Bettman, then they just made a big mistake.

Leopold will not get anywhere close to the 238 million for the Preds now. Because of this, franchise values across the league (and likely expansion fees) have dropped considerably.

Thus the effect it has on franchise values will be minimal and it may not be worth it from a league prospective if he is going to invade another teams territory (and possible sue to do so) and be a pain in the ass owner a la Al Davis.

Again, I doubt "invading" the Leafs' or Sabres' territory will be an issue. Gary Bettman oversaw and approved of the Ducks setting up shop in the Kings' backyard. If that was ok then, it would be extremely hypocritical of the NHL to use the territorial excuse now.

As for the Al Davis comment, as a Chargers fan I'll be the first to say that Al Davis is indeed an a$$, and that his continued antics and tired persona are a stain on the NFL's image.

Yet I can't help thinking that Balsillie taking the Al Davis route will be good for the NHL. Lets all face it. Zer0dotcom was right. If any other Commissioner was handling their sport the way Bettman is handling the NHL there would be an uproar. Yet there isn't due to a lack of interest in hockey, so Bettman gets away with whatever he wants.

What we have here is a ex-NBA executive who has stripped away as much tradition as he can. He has no passion for the game, he doesn't understand hockey or its fans. Why he was even considered a candidate back in 1992 is beyond me. Maybe the NHL needs someone like Jim Balsillie to shake things up. He loves the game, he wants it to succeed, and he has deep pockets. He understands what hockey fans want. He may be just what the NHL needs. If we can't get rid of that rat-faced bastard known as Gary Bettman we can at least hope for an owner who get him to realize he needs to change his policies.

There is a difference between the Los Angeles and the Buffalo. Buffalo is a much smaller market. As is Buffalo doesn't make money unless they go deep in the playoffs and that is with selling out every game. I don't know for sure but I would venture a guess that they rely on parts of Southern Ontario for support. They were one of the teams that help prevent Hamilton from getting an expansion team in 1991 (Which was before Bettman). Putting a team in their territory or just outside that would significantly hurt them and their chances to be successful long term. The league would be putting in a new team at the expense of another. Then there are the possible territorial rights fees to the Leafs that could leave a Hamilton team unprofitable as well.

Does any team make a large profit anymore? Buffalo sold out every game and only turned a playoff because of the playoffs. If a team sells out every game and leads the NHL in Merchandise sales, how could any team turn a big profit.

I'm sure local tv money contributes a bit which is usually based on subscriber fees thus making market size an issue.

My point was that a team in Hamilton might negatively effect Buffalo's attendance severely hurting their chances of turning a profit unless they spend to the cap floor only which isn't good for the league.

[CC97]

The only legitimate gripe I can see the Leafs making is that they will no longer be able to sell LeafsTV in the Hamilton area, thus losing some money with that.

Their merchandise sales, attendance, corporate interest, tv deals, etc. will not be effected enough that they would ever notice.

The Sabres would hurt more than the Leafs only because they do advertise into Southern Ontario and may lose the right to if a team moves into the area - in the past the Sabres have held "Canadian on Par Night" in which Canadian currency was equal to American currency at games... however due to increased interest in the Sabres on the south side of the Niagara River, as well as increased security at the US/Canada border I can see support from Southern Ontario dwindling with or without the Predators in Hamilton. Starting in the 2008/09 season fans will need a passport to go to a Sabres game... that's going to effect attendance from here more than anything.

[zer0dotcom]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

[DEAD!]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

.... the Red Wings? .....

[STL FANATIC]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

What are you even getting at?

Yes, there's a team who's region of fans covers both America and Canada...

There's no striking point to be found so far as I can tell there...

[KevinMcD]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

I don't think they rely on Canadians, I believe Larry Quinn said 10-15% of their season tickets are from Canadian fans. They help, but they don't rely on the Canadians.

[IceCap]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

I don't think they rely on Canadians, I believe Larry Quinn said 10-15% of their season tickets are from Canadian fans. They help, but they don't rely on the Canadians.

So if they don't rely on Canadian fans, then there shouldn't be a problem with putting a team in Hamilton, or even Kitchener-Waterloo/Cambridge, which is outside of the Sabres' territory, right?

[zer0dotcom]

^ Yeah, lets take away the Canadian fans and let an American team be supported by just the American fans in the area. See how strong that market really is in it's 'home market'

[McCall]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

?

[STL FANATIC]

^ Yeah, lets take away the Canadian fans and let an American team be supported by just the American fans in the area. See how strong that market really is in it's 'home market'

Why the tone?

The Sabres home market is part of Canada...

People are acting as if somebody said hockey belongs to America or something...

[jkrdevil]

So wait...there is an American team out there that depends on Canadian fans to sell tickets? Hmmmmm

I don't think they rely on Canadians, I believe Larry Quinn said 10-15% of their season tickets are from Canadian fans. They help, but they don't rely on the Canadians.

That's pretty substantial for a team where profitability is close each year. I never said a majority of fans were from Canada just that there is enough for them to fight a Hamilton expansion team. 10-15% is enough.

[zer0dotcom]

Hears what I thought of when hearing this stat:

1/ part of the discussion about Nashville possibly moving is that the whole purpose of having a franchise in Nashville is to expand the game, get more American fans. Here we have Buffalo, a long time team who depend on Candian fans in order to sell tickets. Does that mean that there are not enough hockey fans in Upstate New York to fill the arena?

So, one could say that some markets just can't grow a home fanbase. Saying that Ontario is Home market for the Sabres is admitting that there aren't enough American fans to support that team. If there were, then there would be a lower % of Canadian fans going down there, because there would be fewer tickets on sale.

2/ That Hockey fans in Ontario (don't kid yourself and think it's only Southern Southern Ontario crossing the border) are willing to travel in order to see NHL hockey. THey do it now even with the Leafs, so any arguement over the Leafs losing fans is unsubstancial becasue they already travel to the States to see hockey since getting tickets in Toronto is next to impossible. I thnk the team has a problem when they rely on fans to come in from another country for support.

Normally I'd suggust a hypothetical test of having a set fo games were you deny entry to any fans coming from canada and see how ticket sales are affected, but with the new Passport Laws coming soon, we just might see how great an effect this has on the team.

---

Basically, just trying to expand on a point I've been beating around back in these threads, maybe some American Sports fans just aren't hockey fans. Much of the arguement made over Nashville's support ahs been they're a new market, you gotta give them time, you gotta cut them some slack.

If the Buffalo Sabres are relying on fans to come from another country because fans from their home state don't, it says that maybe support for ice hockey isn't that strong in some areas. Yeah you want to grow the game, but you have to know when to fold your hand before you're in too deep. How much money should Leopold lose in order to grow a market?

[jkrdevil]

Hears what I thought of when hearing this stat:

1/ part of the discussion about Nashville possibly moving is that the whole purpose of having a franchise in Nashville is to expand the game, get more American fans. Here we have Buffalo, a long time team who depend on Candian fans in order to sell tickets. Does that mean that there are not enough hockey fans in Upstate New York to fill the arena?

So, one could say that some markets just can't grow a home fanbase. Saying that Ontario is Home market for the Sabres is admitting that there aren't enough American fans to support that team. If there were, then there would be a lower % of Canadian fans going down there, because there would be fewer tickets on sale.

2/ That Hockey fans in Ontario (don't kid yourself and think it's only Southern Southern Ontario crossing the border) are willing to travel in order to see NHL hockey. THey do it now even with the Leafs, so any arguement over the Leafs losing fans is unsubstancial becasue they already travel to the States to see hockey since getting tickets in Toronto is next to impossible. I thnk the team has a problem when they rely on fans to come in from another country for support.

Normally I'd suggust a hypothetical test of having a set fo games were you deny entry to any fans coming from canada and see how ticket sales are affected, but with the new Passport Laws coming soon, we just might see how great an effect this has on the team.

---

Basically, just trying to expand on a point I've been beating around back in these threads, maybe some American Sports fans just aren't hockey fans. Much of the arguement made over Nashville's support ahs been they're a new market, you gotta give them time, you gotta cut them some slack.

If the Buffalo Sabres are relying on fans to come from another country because fans from their home state don't, it says that maybe support for ice hockey isn't that strong in some areas. Yeah you want to grow the game, but you have to know when to fold your hand before you're in too deep. How much money should Leopold lose in order to grow a market?

It's a bad argument because the Sabres issue is less about nationality and more about proximity. It has more to do with the size of the market (which is very small) than the percentage that are hockey fans. Because it is a small market it needs to draw from every portion of it which includes Canada. Just because part of Buffalo's territory lies beyond an imaginary man made border doesn't mean it isn't part of the radius that makes up it's territory. That's like saying New Jersey and Connecticut aren't part of the New York Yankees market.

Similarly the Bills may move after Ralph Wilson is no longer the owner because of the market size of Buffalo, which has been steadily dwindling in population. It has nothing to do with a lack of interest in football just how small the market has become.

[Brian in Boston]

Again, I doubt "invading" the Leafs' or Sabres' territory will be an issue. Gary Bettman oversaw and approved of the Ducks setting up shop in the Kings' backyard. If that was ok then, it would be extremely hypocritical of the NHL to use the territorial excuse now.

Comparing the Kings and Ducks sharing the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside Metro Area with the Maple Leafs, Sabres and a relocated Predators team sharing Greater Toronto/"The Golden Horseshoe" is a case of comparing a metro area with 17.8 million residents living in it to a metro area with 8.1 million residents living in it. Plain and simple.

Metro Los Angeles is home to 17.8 million residents. "The Golden Horseshoe" is home to 8.1 million residents. As a result, one problem that Bettman and the NHL Board of Governors apparently have with a third team setting up shop adjacent to Toronto and Buffalo's spheres of influence most likely focuses on market size as well as proximity.

Further, all of the talk about Canada's position as the "traditional" home of hockey is immaterial in the world of modern professional sports. Is that "right" or "fair"? Who the hell can say? However, to think that the movers and shakers in the modern pro sports marketplace give a rat's backside about the "traditions" of ice hockey is naive at best, self-delusional at worst. The suits who run the NHL, as well as the majority of businessmen running the league's individual franchises, look at Canada and see a nation of 32,777,304 total potential consumers. That's 3,354,843 fewer potential consumers than live in the State of California alone. That's just 9,917,336 more potential consumers than live in the State of Texas alone. It's a figure that represents fewer than double the potential customers that live in the State of New York alone. The suits are more interested in continuing to play to the U.S. market because that is where the potential growth is greatest... and by hook or by crook, the suits are convinced that they can someday capture a greater market share in the United States. Meanwhile, the populace of Canada is seen by the NHL suits as an audience they already hold captive... with or without additional Canadian-based franchises. They're attitude is that they're not going to bend over backward in order to "preach to the choir". For what it's worth, the Canadian populace plays right into the assumptions of the NHL suits. For all of the grumbling about being unhappy with the status quo in Gary Bettman's NHL, when push comes to shove there isn't any indication that the Canadian fan base is going anywhere.

By the way, Mr. Balsillie's arrogance undoubtedly played a major role in the kibosh being put on his proposed purchase of the Predators. Mr. Balsillie hadn't, in fact, purchased the Predators when he moved forward with signing an exclusivity agreement with Copps Coliseum and taking season ticket deposits for a Hamilton-based NHL franchise. These moves came in spite of the fact that Commissioner Bettman had announced that any discussion about moving the Predators from Nashville to Southern Ontario was premature at best, misguided at worst. In short, Mr. Balsillie "counted his chickens before they'd hatched"... and thumbed his nose at the NHL's commissioner and board of governors while doing so. Hardly the sort of behavior that is likely to inspire your potential business partners to embrace you.

As for the Al Davis comment, as a Chargers fan I'll be the first to say that Al Davis is indeed an a$$, and that his continued antics and tired persona are a stain on the NFL's image. Yet I can't help thinking that Balsillie taking the Al Davis route will be good for the NHL.

Let me see if I have this straight: NFL owner Al Davis is an "a$$" for behaving the way he does, but Jim Balsillie behaving in much the same manner is "good for the NHL"? It doesn't make any sense, but at least you're up-front in embracing the double-standard.

Bottom line? Mr. Balsillie has nobody to blame but himself should his pursuit of the Predators fail to come to fruition.

[IceCap]

^ Yeah, lets take away the Canadian fans and let an American team be supported by just the American fans in the area. See how strong that market really is in it's 'home market'

Why the tone?

The Sabres home market is part of Canada...

People are acting as if somebody said hockey belongs to America or something...

You, jkr, the NHL....

[IceCap]

That's like saying New Jersey and Connecticut aren't part of the New York Yankees market.

Last I checked New Jersey and Connecticut were part of the United States of America, just as New York City is. Unless I missed something in the last twelve hours Canada and the US are still two separate countries independent of one and other.

For the record, very few fans from southern Ontario go to Sabres games because they're Sabres fans. They just want to see NHL hockey and can't get tickets to see the Leafs play. With increased border controls seeing the Sabres play will also become a hassle. So why not give these Canadian fans a true "home" team to go and support as an alternative to the Leafs?

Again, I doubt "invading" the Leafs' or Sabres' territory will be an issue. Gary Bettman oversaw and approved of the Ducks setting up shop in the Kings' backyard. If that was ok then, it would be extremely hypocritical of the NHL to use the territorial excuse now.

Comparing the Kings and Ducks sharing the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside Metro Area with the Maple Leafs, Sabres and a relocated Predators team sharing Greater Toronto/"The Golden Horseshoe" is a case of comparing a metro area with 17.8 million residents living in it to a metro area with 8.1 million residents living in it. Plain and simple.

Metro Los Angeles is home to 17.8 million residents. "The Golden Horseshoe" is home to 8.1 million residents. As a result, one problem that Bettman and the NHL Board of Governors apparently have with a third team setting up shop adjacent to Toronto and Buffalo's spheres of influence most likely focuses on market size as well as proximity.

Further, all of the talk about Canada's position as the "traditional" home of hockey is immaterial in the world of modern professional sports. Is that "right" or "fair"? Who the hell can say? However, to think that the movers and shakers in the modern pro sports marketplace give a rat's backside about the "traditions" of ice hockey is naive at best, self-delusional at worst. The suits who run the NHL, as well as the majority of businessmen running the league's individual franchises, look at Canada and see a nation of 32,777,304 total potential consumers. That's 3,354,843 fewer potential consumers than live in the State of California alone. That's just 9,917,336 more potential consumers than live in the State of Texas alone. It's a figure that represents fewer than double the potential customers that live in the State of New York alone. The suits are more interested in continuing to play to the U.S. market because that is where the potential growth is greatest... and by hook or by crook, the suits are convinced that they can someday capture a greater market share in the United States. Meanwhile, the populace of Canada is seen by the NHL suits as an audience they already hold captive... with or without additional Canadian-based franchises. They're attitude is that they're not going to bend over backward in order to "preach to the choir". For what it's worth, the Canadian populace plays right into the assumptions of the NHL suits. For all of the grumbling about being unhappy with the status quo in Gary Bettman's NHL, when push comes to shove there isn't any indication that the Canadian fan base is going anywhere.

I understand the "preaching to the choir" argument, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the point zer0dot come and myself are trying to make. This isn't about preaching to the choir, this about a failed market. And again please spare me the "the NHL owners just want to grow to the game" argument. It's old, tired, and a flat out useless argument. The NHL has plenty of established NHL franchises in non-traditional hockey markets. Washington and LA from a long-term standpoint, and Tampa Bay, Atlanta, Carolina, Dallas, Anaheim, and San Jose as 90's expansion teams. The game has already grown. For the most part the NHL succeeded with establishing a group of franchises in non-traditional markets, good for them, they deserve a quaint round of applause.

So if the "grow the game" plan was an overall success why insist on keeping a team in a failed market like Nashville? So the NHL can pretend its on par with the NFL, NBA, and MLB? Garry Bettman might be that delusional, but I doubt the majority of NHL owners are.

Growing the game was an overall success, time to strategically retreat from the markets that didn't work. If that means moving the Preds to Hamilton, great. Given its proximity to two NHL markets, a team with a rich history and loyal fans, and a team that looks to be among the NHL's elite for years to come, Hamilton is still a serious relocation rumour. Why? Because the fans are there. Despite the area's smaller population, the region of southern Ontario alone has shown they have more hockey fans willing to pay for NHL hockey then the city of Nashville. In the end it's not about tradition, or Canada being the world's hockey hotbed, it's about fans willing to buy tickets. Even when attendance in Canadian markets dip they still do better then Nashville did with a winning club.

Again, it's about fans willing to buy tickets to the see the team play. Southern Ontario has those in spades, Nashville doesn't. That's the bottom line.

As for the Al Davis comment, as a Chargers fan I'll be the first to say that Al Davis is indeed an a$$, and that his continued antics and tired persona are a stain on the NFL's image. Yet I can't help thinking that Balsillie taking the Al Davis route will be good for the NHL.

Let me see if I have this straight: NFL owner Al Davis is an "a$$" for behaving the way he does, but Jim Balsillie behaving in much the same manner is "good for the NHL"? It doesn't make any sense, but at least you're up-front in embracing the double-standard.

Yes, I'll admit it's a double standard to a certain degree.

Look at it this way. The NFL is without question the most successful pro sports league to ever exist. Even a game between two non-playoff teams is an event. Al Davis' tired antics add nothing, if anything they detract from the NFL (suing a team because their logo kind of looks like yours? Come one). The suits at the top of the NFL know what they're doing, Al Davis is just the crazy guy in the background everyone needs to learn to ignore.

Yet the NHL isn't the NFL is it? A country with only six teams, a weaker currency, and a population 269,340,103 less then the United States provides 40% of the NHL's revenue. That's both a testament to Canadian hockey fans and a glaring statement about hockey's lack of support in the United States.

Gary Bettman has helped sink the NHL to a new low. Unlike the NFL's suits, the suits running the NHL are complete morons with no respect for the game, its history, or its fans. An owner who understands theses same factors and is willing to rattle the cages would be good for the NHL. By doing the very thing that makes Al Davis an embarrassment to the NFL Jim Balsillie would at least force Bettman to question some of his methods, which is the best we can hope for at the moment as long as he's kept in charge.

By the way, Mr. Balsillie's arrogance undoubtedly played a major role in the kibosh being put on his proposed purchase of the Predators. Mr. Balsillie hadn't, in fact, purchased the Predators when he moved forward with signing an exclusivity agreement with Copps Coliseum and taking season ticket deposits for a Hamilton-based NHL franchise. These moves came in spite of the fact that Commissioner Bettman had announced that any discussion about moving the Predators from Nashville to Southern Ontario was premature at best, misguided at worst. In short, Mr. Balsillie "counted his chickens before they'd hatched"... and thumbed his nose at the NHL's commissioner and board of governors while doing so. Hardly the sort of behavior that is likely to inspire your potential business partners to embrace you.

Bottom line? Mr. Balsillie has nobody to blame but himself should his pursuit of the Predators fail to come to fruition.

You're probably right. That still doesn't effect Hamilton's superiority as a hockey market to Nashville, or the amount of money Jim Balsillie would have brought to the league. If you are indeed right about the reason Balsillie's deal was shot down, and I think you are, then the NHL's collective corporate leadership is even more inept then we all thought.

One more thing. I realize you and I have vastly different point of views on this particular subject, and that's fine. The bold word thing though is insulting. I may not agree with you on this matter but I'm not an idiot.

[DarkJourney]

I think the NHL in Hamilton would've worked whole heartedly. Mr. Basille just went about it the wrong way. He should've waited until the league approved the sale of the franchise and then he could start the season ticket drive. The fans in Hamilton were going to be there no matter what even if he had to wait a little longer to secure the franchise. I think Bettman doesn't what the Predators to relocate on his watch because it makes him look like a total failure for locating a club in Nashville to begin with.

[IceCap]

I think Bettman doesn't what the Predators to relocate on his watch because it makes him look like a total failure for locating a club in Nashville to begin with.

Probably, but in reality the Preds won't change his status as a failure as the NHL commissioner, wherever they end up.

[Brian in Boston]

Icecap79... whatever points you or I are trying to make on the issue of NHL relocation have absolutely no bearing on what the majority of the league's owners believe.

* Said owners believe that establishing additional NHL franchises in Canadian markets is "preaching to the choir". The NHL's suits look at Canada's population of 269,340,103 potential fans - and the 40% of league revenue that they generate - and see a captive audience whether the league chooses to locate more teams in Canada or not. In short, the rabid, historical support of Canadian fans for NHL hockey actually works against them in the modern era of pro sports. NHL owners know that despite sporadically grumbling over the course the NHL is now taking, Canadian fans aren't going anywhere. Therefore, NHL owners feel that they can pursue the course of action they deem best with regard to the league's business future without jeopardizing the league's bottom-line status in Canada.

* The NHL suits recognize the fact that the U.S. generates more than half of the league's revenues in spite of the sport of ice hockey not yet having as strong a hold on American culture as it could. This leads them to conclude that there's an enormous source of revenue to be had if they can grow the popularity of the sport in the United States. Success in "non-traditional" markets such as "Washington and LA from a long-term standpoint, and Tampa Bay, Atlanta, Carolina, Dallas, Anaheim and San Jose as 90's expansion teams" only serves as sign that such popularity can be achieved in the United States. So, they figure, why not continue to pursue it?

* NHL executives and owners aren't afraid to "strategically retreat from the markets that didn't work". However, their definition of market failure - as well as how long to give a market before it is considered a failure - most likely differs from our definition. Further, the majority of NHL owners are far more likely to favor shifting a franchise from one "non-traditional" U.S. market to another larger "non-traditional" U.S. market, rather than setting-up shop in a Canadian market.

* Just how "serious" a relocation site Hamilton/Southern Ontario is amongst the majority of NHL owners remains to be seen. After all, Hamilton has failed in previous modern era expansion and relocation attempts. This, in spite of all of the pluses you seem to feel the market offers the NHL. Currently, Hamilton/Southern Ontario's seriousness as a potential home to a relocated or expansion NHL franchise seems to be primarily the opinion of a single, deep-pocketed businessman by the name of Jim Balsillie, as well as the Canadian sports media and Canadian hockey fans. The fact remains that Mr. Balsillie, the media and the fans aren't calling the shots when it comes to determining where NHL franchises end up. NHL franchise location is determined by NHL executives and owners. That's the bottom line.

By the way, you read far too much into my use of bold and underlined text. It is not meant to be insulting, nor is it meant to imply that you are an "idiot". Rather, it is simply my method of emphasizing points that I feel are of particular importance.

[Suigi]

It's technically not a one-page bump, so I'm gonna go ahead and post this.

According to the National post (via TSN), Craig Leipold has a deal to sell the team...to William DelBaggio for $50M less than Balsillie's deal.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Kansas City Scouts.

Woooohoooo.