News   Jul 17, 2024
 515     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
 1.5K     2 
News   Jul 17, 2024
 624     0 

Globe: Second NHL Team for Toronto?

Could you legally not put that Starbucks there though? I can think of a few examples of chains in Toronto that have stores very close together. I guess it depends what "close" means, right?

My understanding is that Starbucks HQ has the ultimate right to decide what is the optimal density in a given area. So a potential franchisee has every right to argue to Starbucks that they would make money by locating another franchise in a given area, but the final choice would rest with the company.

Then again, most of this is legally happening in Arizona and the US has some pretty wacky franchise law.

Its a complicated question, but franchise law is a different kettle of fish from normal competition laws. It certainly isn't as simple as TML has a local monopoly, ergo it is an anti-trust situation.

Exactly. There are like six Starbucks within walking distance to each other in Yorkville. There are at least two which are less than a minute walk from each other (Yonge, north of Bloor (former Britnell Bookstore) and one in the Hudson Bay Centre, across from Shoppers Drug Mart)

Starbucks evidently feels that is an appropriate density, or else they wouldn't be there. If the BoG agrees that it benefits from a second team in S. Ontario, then it will happen.
 
Exactly. There are like six Starbucks within walking distance to each other in Yorkville. There are at least two which are less than a minute walk from each other (Yonge, north of Bloor (former Britnell Bookstore) and one in the Hudson Bay Centre, across from Shoppers Drug Mart)

I don't think Starbucks are franchises (at least in Canada)....so there is only one owner, the Starbucks corporation so they can put them wherever they like.
 
The whole situation on Balsillie move explain.

http://tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie/?id=277696

So let's see if we can navigate our way through this maze that is the Phoenix Coyotes, Chapter 11 bankruptcy and Jim Balsillie's $212.5 million (USD) offer to purchase (conditional on the franchise being relocated to southern Ontario).

The first thing you need to know is that NHL commissioner Gary Bettman was in Phoenix today, ostensibly to put the finishing touches on an intent to purchase agreement from Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf, whose intention was to apparently keep the financially-troubled Coyotes in their current home of Glendale, which is also home to Reinsdorf's spring-training baseball facility (a mile away from the Coyotes' Jobing.com Arena). That offer was expected to materialize within the next few days.

We don't know a lot about the Reinsdorf deal but suffice to say it likely wasn't in the $212.5 million range.

In any case, today's events clearly caught everyone, from the Coyotes' staff to the NHL head office, completely off guard.

Coyotes' owner Jerry Moyes, who is in deep debt as a result of his ownership of the franchise, circumvented whatever offer to purchase might have been coming from Reinsdorf by filing for Chapter 11 (reorganization) bankruptcy with an Arizona court. This was obviously done because Moyes was aware that Balsillie was prepared to make an immediate offer to purchase the moment the bankruptcy was filed.

It would seem obvious that Moyes knew that Balsillie's offer of $212.5 million was far more than anything that was coming from Reinsdorf or anyone else who might be interested in keeping the team in Phoenix. As the team's largest unsecured creditor to the tune of more than $100 million - unsecured creditors only get proceeds from the sale after secured creditors are looked after – Moyes knew his best chance of getting remuneration was with a bankruptcy-induced sale proposal from Balsillie.

Balsillie's bid of $212.5 million is what is known as a ''stalking horse bid.'' All that effectively means is that Balsillie's bid officially kicks off an official auction process. If anyone chooses to outbid Balsillie, they must do so by at least $5 million. The bankruptcy court is obliged to accept the highest offer that provides the best financial relief to the secured creditors, which ironically includes the NHL as the second largest ($35 million). It is unfathomable to think anyone would make the $217.5 million offer to keep the team in Phoenix.

But where this starts to get confusing is the conditional aspect of the offer. Balsillie is only prepared to pay $212.5 million as long as the franchise is moved to southern Ontario.

And that is not something, it would appear, that Moyes or Balsillie can arbitrarily achieve on their own.

The question then becomes, can a bankruptcy court in Arizona mandate the NHL to relocate or transfer a franchise in order to satisfy the needs of the Coyotes' secured creditors?

It's an interesting legal question and without putting words in anyone's mouth – no one is commenting anyway – the safe bet is that Balsillie's group believes that's a possibility while the NHL doesn't believe a bankruptcy court can tell it how to conduct its affairs.

In fact, based on the press release issued by the NHL in the wake of the bankruptcy filing, it's clear the league questions even more than that.

The wording of the NHL press release suggests the league believes Moyes was perhaps not within his rights to file the bankruptcy claim and that he, by virtue of the NHL monies forwarded to the team since October, may not have been in control of the franchise. In any case, the league said it has now ''removed'' Moyes as an official of the club.

Clearly, the league is at odds with Moyes and vice versa.

We don't need to provide a history of Balsillie's relationship with the NHL, but twice he has attempted to purchase, and relocate, NHL franchises and twice he has failed to accomplish that. Balsillie has demonstrated he's committed to putting a second team in southern Ontario.

For now, the next big development would appear to be coming out of the bankruptcy court, which convenes on Thursday. Although it's quite possible the NHL will mount a legal challenge even before then to challenge Moyes' authority to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy

But let's assume the case does get to bankruptcy court. If the bankruptcy court deems that it cannot enforce the ''relocation'' aspect of the Balsillie offer, then it would be obliged to take the best ''unconditional'' offer. In other words, if someone else – Reinsdorf? – came in and made a lesser financial offer than Balsillie but attached no conditions on location or financing, that offer would ultimately have to be accepted.

But if the bankruptcy court deems it can enforce the ''relocation'' or ''transfer'' of the franchise from Phoenix to southern Ontario, then the sale to Balsillie can be accepted, although you would have to believe the NHL would legally challenge the validity of a court claim of that nature.

Whether the Coyotes' reportedly ''iron-clad'' lease with the city of Glendale is a factor is another issue entirely.

The potential for this to be a legal quagmire appears to be extremely high.

In the meantime, Balsillie will mount a massive and no doubt highly successful public relations campaign to add a seventh Canadian franchise. In fact, as soon as the story broke, Balsillie already had a website – www.makeitseven.ca – up and running. Balsillie will drape himself in the flag and with rampant backing from the majority of Canadian hockey fans, and probably the unofficial support of the NHL Players' Association, beat the drum for the NHL to endorse the move of a financially-troubled sunbelt franchise to a more revenue-friendly venue in the home of hockey.

Where precisely in southern Ontario Balsillie would put the Coyotes remains to be seen. In the past, it has always been Hamilton, but Balsillie's bid this time carefully omitted a specific location and only identified ''southern Ontario'' and an ''unserved'' market. How all that plays out in terms of the Toronto Maple Leafs and Buffalo Sabres remains to be seen.

The NHL, meanwhile, is likely to battle Balsillie on the issue of ''control.'' While the league will get destroyed in the court of public opinion in Canada, it is quite likely to exert what it perceives to be its legal rights on how it does business. That is, the league believes it ultimately controls who owns NHL franchises and where they are located.

To do that, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman will ultimately require the backing of the board of governors, but he has had it in the past. It remains to be seen whether he has it this time, but this has all the makings of a battle royale.

The battle lines are clearly drawn. While Bettman and the NHL will take a beating in that court of public opinion in Canada, one suspects this situation will ultimately be decided in a legal court.
 
My understanding is that Starbucks HQ has the ultimate right to decide what is the optimal density in a given area. So a potential franchisee has every right to argue to Starbucks that they would make money by locating another franchise in a given area, but the final choice would rest with the company.

Then again, most of this is legally happening in Arizona and the US has some pretty wacky franchise law.

Its a complicated question, but franchise law is a different kettle of fish from normal competition laws. It certainly isn't as simple as TML has a local monopoly, ergo it is an anti-trust situation.



Starbucks evidently feels that is an appropriate density, or else they wouldn't be there. If the BoG agrees that it benefits from a second team in S. Ontario, then it will happen.

ya, like I said, I don't know and a lot of people don't know. This has never happened before. You're right that the NHL is different, but what I was getting at was that it's not like Starbucks has a monopoly in the city. Second Cup, tim hortons, etc can all serve coffee here. Whereas when it comes to top tier professional hockey, only the Leafs are allowed. Does that make sense? I guess you could argue that other levels of hockey are allowed so really this isn't an anti-competitive monopoly, but I think there's something to that argument.
 
I don't think Starbucks are franchises (at least in Canada)....so there is only one owner, the Starbucks corporation so they can put them wherever they like.

Quebec locations are franchised (though not sure if they are all owned by separate franchisees, or if owned by a single franchisee). Also not sure if the in-store locations, like the one in Sears, or the Indigo/Chapters, are operated as, but all free-standing stores are certainly corporate-owned outside Quebec.
 
NHL acting like 'illegal cartel,' Coyotes owner charges

TORONTO and PHOENIX — The group backing Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie's bid for the Phoenix Coyotes unleashed its sharpest attack yet on the National Hockey League, alleging in a lawsuit that the league is operating like an “illegal cartel†by blocking Mr. Balsillie's effort to move the Coyotes to Hamilton.

“The NHL is excluding competition and restraining trade in [the United States and Canada] through the application of unreasonable restrictions in its constitution and bylaws, which are preventing the relocation of the Coyotes from Phoenix, Ariz., to Hamilton, Ont.,†said the lawsuit filed Thursday in Phoenix.

The suit also takes aim at Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, which owns the Toronto Maple Leafs, alleging it has colluded with the league for years to preserve “market power†in the Greater Toronto Area. Prohibiting relocation deprives hockey fans of “increased competition, lower prices, higher quality and more variety,†the suit alleged.

More.....http://sports.theglobeandmail.com/s...507.wcoyotesnews0507/GSStory/GlobeSports/home
 
What's really funny is watching the reaction to this story on both sides of the border. In Canada, this is the number one news story with 5 minutes devoted to it at the beginning of The National. In Phoenix, it's a non-issue, and doesn't even make the front page of the local newspaper. It's hard to see how a team would be less missed than the Phoenix Coyotes. Most people I've talked to down here have barely heard of them, let alone watch the games.

The vast parking lot of Jobing.com arena reminds me of that episode of The Simpsons with "Euro Itchy and Scratchy Land". The only people I know who went to a game last year were two Canadians - one of whom bought the cheapest tickets possible and then moved up to the front once the game started because no one was there. I know some other hockey fans who have complained to me that they wouldn't go out there because the arena is "too far" and "in the middle of nowhere". This is a pretty good indicator of the level of apathy for the Coyotes in this city, because Phoenicians drive 40 km to get anywhere and Phoenix is largely a sprawling collection of nothing.
 
I'm a bit late to this party (thread) but it is my understanding that Starbucks locations are corporate chains (the news about Quebec is new to me) and not franchises. Starbucks is certainly infamous for their market strategies as they are willing to open new chains and operate them at a loss, to prevent competitors from opening in those same locations.

As far as the Coyotes go, Balsille really has screwed up in the way he has dealt with the NHL (for the third time). If he was just a little bit more patient and accomodating of their rules, he probably would have had a team by now.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, the one smart thing that Balsille has done is wrap himself in the Canadian flag but I don't know if that will ultimately get him his shiny new toy.
 
I thought the National Car Rental Centre had the title

No...I am not sure why (it is at least the second time I have heard it here) people think Powerade Centre is funny......a corporate name is a corporate name (IMO) either they are all good or they are all bad...they are simply companies paying to have either their corporate name (GM Place, Bell Centre) or their brands' names (Minute Made Park, Powerade Centre) on display.

As for the issue of the NHL versus Mr. RIM.....it really is quite refreshing for a sports organisation (the NHL) to care about its fans and not so much about money. It is costing them money to keep the team in Phoenix (just as it cost them money to keep Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal and Vancouver going with the Canadian dollar stabilization fund) and letting the team be sold and moved would solve that problem for them. They, however, feel a responsibility to the people/fans of Phoenix....as they did in other cities....to try and maintain a club in the city it is located.....in an era where a common fan complaint is "it's all about the money", it is nice to see that it might not be all about the money.
 
Jobing.com arena - Worst arena name ever.

Across the street from Jobing.com is the University of Phoenix Stadium, home of the NFL Arizona Cardinals, and ironically named after an online university that doesn't have a sports program.

Nashville's Gaylord Entertainment Center (now Sommet Center) is probably the worst name ever... even worse than Jobing.com.
 
Last edited:
NHL suitors lining up
Mayor to meet group wishing to move Atlanta Thrashers

May 09, 2009
Ken Peters and Naomi Powell
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/563152

A Vancouver-based hockey group is interested in relocating the financially troubled Atlanta Thrashers to Hamilton, The Spectator has learned.

Mayor Fred Eisenberger is expected to meet with the second hockey group on Monday.

Eisenberger wouldn't disclose any details of the second group, believed to be led by Vancouver developer Tom Gaglardi, or when the meeting would take place.

But an inside hockey source told The Spectator that Gaglardi is interested in moving the Thrashers to Hamilton, possibly in time for the 2010 season.

Gaglardi heads River City Hockey Inc., a group including NHL stars Jerome Iginla, Mark Recchi, Shane Doan and Darryl Sydor, which purchased the Kamloops Blazers of the Western Hockey League in 2007.

A source confirmed this week that Gaglardi, president of Northland Properties, the parent company of Sandman Hotels, is the key principal in the second hockey group interested in Hamilton. Gaglardi failed in his bid to buy the Vancouver Canucks five years ago.

Hamilton is suddenly a hot property for people looking at the possibility that some financially troubled NHL teams may be looking to relocate.

Gaglardi's group is Steeltown's second NHL suitor. There are now rumours of as many as five groups looking at Hamilton and Copps Coliseum for an NHL team.

City staff are already working on a proposed lease of Copps Coliseum to Waterloo billionaire Jim Balsillie, who hopes to buy and relocate the Phoenix Coyotes to the city for the 2009 season.

Balsillie, who has made a $212.5-million US offer for the bankrupt Coyotes, is battling the NHL for control of the franchise. That battle is being waged in a Phoenix courtroom.

Gaglardi has business ties to fellow Vancouver developer Nelson Skalbania, the former owner of the Edmonton Oilers, who was the driving force behind the relocation of the former Atlanta Flames to Calgary. It is unclear whether Skalbania is involved in the possible second relocation of an Atlanta hockey club north of the border.

One source said the Atlanta move to Hamilton would be permanent.

Gaglardi was unavailable for comment yesterday.

One source revealed that Gaglardi will argue his proposal has more NHL governor support than Balsillie's, which could be a convincing selling point for Hamilton politicians.

Eisenberger told The Spectator yesterday he expects by Tuesday the city should have a "clear picture" of its NHL strategy. That is just one day before a May 13 deadline for sealing a deal to lock up Copps Coliseum requested by Balsillie.

"By next Tuesday we will have a clearer picture of where we are. We're in the middle of discussions with Mr. Balsillie and his group and I will be meeting with the second group. We need to understand their intentions. It's fair to say I will be talking to that second group," Eisenberger said.

The mayor raised some eyebrows this week, however, when he refused to commit to a Balsillie request to have the lease approved by city council by May 13.

"They do have a deadline in mind. I'm not prepared to share with you what it is but they did indicate that end of June is when they expect the court proceeding to wrap up," he said.

But Balsillie spokesperson Bill Walker said his client's representative told the mayor in a Thursday meeting that his client wants a lease pact in place by May 13.

Balsillie is said to be quite upset that Hamilton is considering a second NHL relocation proposal.

There could be conflict next week. Hamilton Councillor Terry Whitehead will convene a meeting Monday morning of the city's NHL subcommittee to hear details from city staff about the proposed lease. Whitehead added the subcommittee may even ask for a Balsillie representative to appear before the group before a lease recommendation heads to city council for final approval.

How that plays with Eisenberger, who has stated publicly that he is the only Hamilton council member who can speak publicly about the Hamilton's NHL pursuits, is unclear.

A well-placed source in the business community, speaking on condition he not be named, said the frenzied climate around NHL hockey, Hamilton, Toronto and Vaughan has made it impossible to separate legitimate bids from possibilities and mere rumours.

He described five scenarios that continue to crop up in conversations, though he emphasized there is no way to know how solid some of them are, especially with many of the potential players simply testing the market before making commitments.

"I don't know what's real and not real," the source said.

Here are five scenarios circulating, in descending order of certainty:

* Jim Balsillie's well-publicized and confirmed bid for the Phoenix Coyotes.

* Property developer Tom Gaglardi leading a group from Vancouver that is coming to Hamilton this weekend in preparation for a Monday meeting with city officials about moving an existing NHL team other than Phoenix to Hamilton.

* A Toronto group offering to pay cash to establish a new NHL franchise in southern Ontario, possibly Vaughan or Hamilton.

* A Toronto group that wants to buy another troubled NHL franchise and move it to Vaughan, possibly setting up temporarily in Hamilton before moving to a new arena there.

* A third Toronto group that would buy and move a team to somewhere in southern Ontario.
 

Back
Top