Will the team move from Nashville after the sale is finalized?
2007-06-09 01:39:35 · 10 answers · asked by P.I. Stingray 6 in Sports ➔ Hockey
Yes-Balsille paid 240 million for the predators which is about 100 million more than anyone who wanted them to stay in Nashville could come up with. By overpaying Balsille has curried favour with the other owners as has he has upped the value of their teams and the expansion franchise price tag. Those owners are the same people who sit on the NHL board of governors and have a vote on team moves. In the end Balsille can just do a Raiders/Colts job on the NHL if he so desires and there is no legal remedy.
The board of governors "approving" a move is just a gentleman's agreement that neither the competition board of Canada or nor US anti-trust law would enforce. Selling crackberries means never having to ask how much it costs, even when it comes to lawyers. In fact, the funds for such a legal battle would come from the now very solvent Predators organization. So instead of losing face, the board of governors would likely approve a sale up front, with Toronto and Buffalo having some objections that will be smoothed over with $. As far as the lease goes on the building in Nashville-contracts are made to be broken. It would be easy for Balsille to ensure low attendance in Nashville and thus make his case for a move, all he has to do is up the ticket prices to the league average. At present the Predators just give away a lot of tickets to make their 14 000 a game attendance figures. Have you ever heard of free NHL tickets in Ontario? Does Jeff S actually think the owners who pay their own way like subsidizing the teams that can't cut it?
2007-06-09 05:00:06 · answer #1 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The sale won't be finalized because the NHL knows that Balsillie will want to move the team. The league wants to develop the Nashville market. If they abandon it now, it will send a bad message to city councils across the country that when prospective owners in cities that are trying to gain entry into the NHL that it would be a poor investment of public funds to build or refurbish arenas.
The Oilers will leave Edmonton before any other team moves. Its just simple economics. No matter what commissioners or owners say the dollar is the bottom line - not sentimentality for the country where hockey was born. I'd like to see more Canadian cities represented in the NHL, but economics won't let it happen.
2007-06-09 06:55:52 · answer #2 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not necessarily. The Predators have a lease that is valid. If the team/city cannot make an average attendance of 14,000 per game, then the Preds will be able to be moved. The preds missed that average last season by like 200+ fans each game. So, relocation of this teamis in the hands of corporate sponsors and the individuals in the Nashville area.
2007-06-09 06:31:59 · answer #3 · answered by DeeDee 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If that was his plan then he would have probably had the current owner make the ball rolling for a move... Also, no moderate to big city markets have said anything publicly about a "major" professional sports team relocating to there or thinking about it. Its very difficult to keep these things quiet.
Now, that doesn't mean that Balsille is NOT thinking about it but it is not in the cards for the present. Also, the Predators have a big advantage of taking NHL collective funds (more than any other team and a move might jeopardize that).
2007-06-09 02:59:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
if he had his way and his lawyers are interpreting the contracts and attendance rules correctly, balsille would relocate tomorrow.. BUT, and this is the kicker, this all hinges on 2 factors.. 1-- nashville must meet 14,000 in PAID attendance; (which WILL be met --details at www.wsmv.com ,www.104.5thezone.com and www.wkrn.com) which the nashville chamber of commerce has ensured will happen if need be. although it appears the fans and FINALLY corporate tennessee have resoundingly stepped up in early june; factor #2 is the one balsille is banking on... he and his lawyers are under the impression that if the current owner DOES NOT activate the "cure clause" , this would be the season for relocation because it surpasses attendance benchmark time tables... HE IS GREATLY MISTAKEN and heres why-- the nhl states that after the third season of below league standard attendance averages, a new owner has the perogative to move a team IF there is a cure clause in effect OR there is no lease agreement.. NOW-- nashville has approximately 20 years left on the lease--no problem there... the problem is that if the current owner activates a cure clause this allows for a loop hole for relocation... the timeline is still unclear but falls between 1 to 7 years depending on attendance during those years.. my interpretation is that if this is activated and during that time attendance falls below 14000 there gone--and that is balsille's plan; (just look at the pitt deal).. he is hoping leopold activates the cure clause because it will break the lease and at the longest take 7 years to move the team.. but finally if the fans and corporate sponsors step up as they continue to do; neither will be a factor as long as we still have a lease; (nashville owns the arena and will obviously give a lease) balsille is hoping that attendance is low --- HE GOT THAT ONE WRONG.. balsille is hoping to maneuver around the lease-- CURRENT OWNER CONTROLS WITH THE CURE CLAUSE (in a round about way).. and lastly, balsille is hoping his lawyer has the correct years for attendance short falls correct as this would trigger immediate relocation--WRONG WRONG WRONG (this is why he leased copps coliseum) the future here relies on who has the best lawyers here and if the cure is activated.. dont be surprised if balsille backs out if his lawyer is wrong; but dont be surprised if he buys them ,( hell, if i had the money , i would) why else would you buy one of the best teams in the nhl at 100 million OVER their value and lease an arena 1200 miles away if you couldnt move them quickly... this one relies on the fans 10% and legality interpretations 90%... a lot of people miss the point and balsille is silent in this deal as not to screw it up like the last one... he has said he does not intend to move the team---THATS NOT A JOKE --- THATS A FLAT OUT LIE and EVERYONE knows it especially nashville ticket holders... attendance will not be a factor so lets see how this unfolds in the courts because basically thats the only way the preds will be moved given all circumstances.. if balsille wants a team that bad and couldnot move if attendance is up (and it will be trust me) other than some sort of legal loop hole; why not wait 2 years and get one of the 2 new franchise expansion teams... i personally give him a 5% chance at relocation at best-- and god i hope im right...
2007-06-09 08:46:20 · answer #5 · answered by Copas -- Tit,Toots & Leggy line 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
a few things must happen first...
1) the sale must be approved by the NHL
2) there would have to be an arena with an NHL size rink and a large seating area.
3) it must have a town that would be able to support the team both emotionally and financially.
But, if everything lines up right then it is possible.
2007-06-09 08:38:46 · answer #6 · answered by thegamerdug 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hats off to michinoku2001 well said and correct!
He/she deserves best answer!
As far as no major market announcing their arrival ... Hamilton is getting press and in Waterloo where I live people are getting very excited!
This team is moving to Southern Ontario. My thought is to Hamilton for a short stay until a bigger, better arena can be built in the Kitchener Waterloo area.
Edit
copas is WRONG!
All Basille has to do is raise ticket prices to even close to the league average and watch attendance drop!
If he buys it and wants to move it he will. Look around how many billionares do you see not getting what they want!
2007-06-09 07:39:56 · answer #7 · answered by sensfantodd 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. There is great fan support in Nashville and the league will not allow relocation from Nashville.
2007-06-09 03:34:23 · answer #8 · answered by rgcanes 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
No one really knows. The devil will be in the details. I still say if he REALLY wanted them moved he would have the current owner move them. The current owner could move them under the rules in play. Will those rules be in play if he buys them?
2007-06-09 02:13:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes watch out waterloo
2007-06-09 02:55:39 · answer #10 · answered by matt r 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋