Ansem Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 24 minutes ago, Levi Oakey said: I might have misheard this but again. You can own the league but choose not to have a franchise. It does mean they have a stake but that doesn't mean that they feel Toronto is viable with just their money (or they don't want to have a conflict of interest). So they ask Goldhar to come and open up a franchise instead. That would explain why MLSE via the Argos would own a stake in CPL but would not want to create a franchise for CPL. Argos : Competing on TFC territory would be against the interests of MLSE and the conflict of interest would be obvious for both CPL and MLS. TFC: TFC are trying to protect their market. The main reason for the whole TFC II drama is mainly that they would pass the conflict of interest test with MLS. MLS would never allow MLSE to start a CPL franchise as a majority owner. They could only do it as a minority partner to a CPL team outside the TFC market which by default is in MLS territory, not just TFC's. They see putting TFC II in a GTA market like London as a way to expand their market for themselves, MLS and MLSE. It's not that Toronto isn't viable. Actually, it's the most important market if handled the right way with the right ownership, but that ownership cannot be MLSE due to the Argos and TFC connection. The Toronto owner has to be a100% outsider of the current ownership...and the deeper the pockets, the better. Fighting TFC on their own turf will require a lot of marketing dollars to make it happen but there's room for 2...definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 17, 2017 Author Share Posted January 17, 2017 Jeez, I get distracted by the dumpster fire thread and I miss all the good stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 17, 2017 Author Share Posted January 17, 2017 So I'm doing some ownership math here because clearly this thing is starting to consume my life. We have 12 groups interested. 9 CFL, Halifax and KW makes 11. So that means we still have 1 mystery group. Any wild speculation or informed opinion on who this may be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levi Oakey Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I don't think all of the CFL clubs plan to own their own teams. Guessing some NHL clubs are interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Hammer- Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 9 hours ago, Gopherbashi said: The whole CFL story continues to worry me. They're a fairly risk-averse group of people who aren't exactly operating on amazing profit margins. If they're not willing to take the financial risk on dropping a team out east, I really find it hard to believe that they'll be willing to eat hefty losses on soccer for a decade. Yes and no, risk adverse depends on the team, as with the profit margins Montreal - Wetenhall - I don't see him putting up money towards a CPL franchise. He's a pure Football fan from Wisconsin, and I don't see him gambling on this endevour. As far as his margins, he's pretty much a break even operation from my understanding, and until the Big O gets fixed, you won't see him make much of a profit until he can host a Grey Cup. What I do see though, if Quebec City is involved is possible Quebecor stepping up to the plate and maybe taking a swing. Since the NHL dream seems to have faded, using some of that money towards a less risky option to generate some local content might be a consideration here. Ottawa - Jeff Hunt & Partners - Hunt has the Fury, and they are a big question mark right now. Their stint in the USL might be a success, at which point what sort of incentive (TV Revenue?) would they have to jump ship. Conversely, if their USL venture is a flop, it might be the end of the Fury. There is also a distinct possbility that another ownership group might step in at that point. The Sens owner might be interested on that front. They certainly aren't risk adverse, given how much this risked to make the RedBlacks happen, but this is less a case of them being well financed and more a case of them already had a shake at it and not being where they want to be. Toronto - Bell-Tennenbaum - I don't see this going anywhere, apart from TFC trying to get their farm into the league. Both have a vested interest in their local MLS club, and besides the obivious conflicts of interest with the MLS side, I doubt they want to make yet another distraction away from the Argos. The fact they have money means nothing, they aren't going to sour what they have in TFC. Hamilton - Bob Young - Pretty much a lock at this point, not much more to say. He's got money and willingness to risk it. As he said many times, buying the Ti-Cats was the worst financial descion of his life, but he still is glad he did it. Winnipeg - Community Owned - Winnipeg is widely regarded and one of the more profitable teams, but likely behind most Western teams, and are saddled with some stadium debt. With any community ownership, risk adversion comes with it. They have to justify their investment to the public and long soccer investment isn't it. One interesting point though is True North has seen nothing but success with the Jets and are well fianaced. Not sure how interested they would be and if they could get the Bombers on board. Also IGF is an even bigger facility then THF, not sure how well it would work. Saskatchewan - Community Owned - The Riders have a license to print money and are widely regarding as the CFL's most profitable franchise, still posting huge profits while paying the build costs of their own stadium. Money isn't the issue here, the concern is this is the heart of Football country without a lot of presence in Soccer (although someone from the region can certainly chirp in on this). A new sport appearing without a big following or culture might not work out. That said, the "Only game in town effect" might come around on this one. Hard to say. As with any community owned team, it's hard to justify such a purchase, expecting to lose money for 5-10 years. Calgary - CSE - I don't see any issues here apart from the venue is older. CSE has all the money in the world, and their modus operendai has been to take any pro sport running in Calgary and make in theirs. Edmonton - Community Owned - This is a hard one for me. The Esks are probably the 2nd most profitable franchise in the league, and while the Ownership probably isn't as well financed as Calgary, they got coin. The issue is the Fath's and Katz (owner of the Oilers). FC Edmonton isn't drawing where it needs to draw to make money, and the Fath's would fight tooth and nail to keep thier NASL team. Katz on the other hand, no one knows what the heck this guy is going to do, after their arena debacle. I think honestly, you buy out the Fath's before you can get into here. As with any community owned team, it's hard to justify such a purchase, expecting to lose money for 5-10 years. BC - David Braley - While David Braley certainly has money, he's checking out of the game. It's well known he is trying to get his affairs in order, and that he's talking with groups about selling the Lions. If another team gets dropped in Vancouver, I have severe doubts Braley will be involved. He's also considered to be ultra conservative, with how his ownership of the Argos and Ti-Cats went. Also, the Lions while still profitable, are regarded as the weakest financially of all the westerned CFL recently, since the Whitecaps have been doing well. That said, no one really knows the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Wasn't there something about Faths and Katz getting along fairly well and neither wanting to rock the others' boat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete Homer Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 17 hours ago, Gopherbashi said: Wasn't there something about Faths and Katz getting along fairly well and neither wanting to rock the others' boat? I think that was the Eskimos leadership (board? Not sure how their governance works) and the Faths, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete Homer Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 @-Hammer-, thanks for the great breakdown The community clubs are a really interesting question mark, and I wonder how exactly it could play out. With all the discussion about single-entity and hybrid models, it's hard to see who is risking what. If it's guys like True North, CSE, OSEG, Young, etc buying into the league itself as well as operating teams, while others may only be operating teams without buying into the league directly, I wonder if there is room for community clubs to enter the equation at low risk at the cost of a much smaller share of the potential profits. It would also explain the Halifax group, which doesn't look like it is in the same financial league as the rest, but looks like an ideal franchise operator This will all be really interesting to watch, and I expect people will be debating the merits of whatever the system looks like for years, assuming it is ever made public Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Complete Homer said: This will all be really interesting to watch, and I expect people will be debating the merits of whatever the system looks like for years, assuming it is ever made public I hope you are exactly right in this ... that we will be debating the merits of whatever system for years and years because the league will be around for years and years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Hammer- Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 6 hours ago, Complete Homer said: @-Hammer-, thanks for the great breakdown The community clubs are a really interesting question mark, and I wonder how exactly it could play out. With all the discussion about single-entity and hybrid models, it's hard to see who is risking what. If it's guys like True North, CSE, OSEG, Young, etc buying into the league itself as well as operating teams, while others may only be operating teams without buying into the league directly, I wonder if there is room for community clubs to enter the equation at low risk at the cost of a much smaller share of the potential profits. It would also explain the Halifax group, which doesn't look like it is in the same financial league as the rest, but looks like an ideal franchise operator This will all be really interesting to watch, and I expect people will be debating the merits of whatever the system looks like for years, assuming it is ever made public The thing here though, for most CFL and NHL ownership groups, tanking a half million dollar a year loss isn't a sink or swim thing for most of these organisations, save for maybe Hamilton where it really comes down to if the Ti-Cats continue to sell out. I think the bigger issue here is that the CPL wants to vet its owners, and wants to make sure they are committed, long term. No one is questioning that even under the most ideal of conditions (which likely won't be the case) it's going to take at least 5 years tanking losses. Sure, a single entity structure will soften the blow, especially if you have a hot market somewhere (no matter where is may be), but there is going to be losses and if you aren't prepared to handle them. I think it becomes a different story is the league is established as turning a profit, at which point I hate to say it, but it would likely be like MLS. Pay a one time, high but more manageable expansion charge for the right to drink from the revenue sharing stream. Really though, getting in on the ground floor for that first expansion is where you want to be, where the high fee, really isn't that high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levi Oakey Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 Guys, we did it. With this post I believe that the public Canadian Premier League thread will drop off the recently commented on threads! Success! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 18, 2017 Author Share Posted January 18, 2017 It's only a matter of time before it's rabbit season again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Quack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 A little shameless self-promotion, but we had a visit with Levi and Adrian from Grand River Union who have some reasonable information about CanPL. While they qualify their statements very carefully, it was interesting to hear. Also, much of this information came out after the GRU formation meeting but I'm not sure how much reach it had, so here it is FWIW. https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/from-the-black-hole/id625923470?mt=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsC Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, rob.notenboom said: A little shameless self-promotion, but we had a visit with Levi and Adrian from Grand River Union who have some reasonable information about CanPL. While they qualify their statements very carefully, it was interesting to hear. Also, much of this information came out after the GRU formation meeting but I'm not sure how much reach it had, so here it is FWIW. https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/from-the-black-hole/id625923470?mt=2 I listened this morning on the way to work and enjoyed it. It got me thinking that at some point you guys should do a 'round table' episode with members from a bunch of the groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, MrsC said: I listened this morning on the way to work and enjoyed it. It got me thinking that at some point you guys should do a 'round table' episode with members from a bunch of the groups. Yes I think this would be really fun, especially after the league is announced. At least we'd have more to talk about that's concrete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 3 hours ago, rob.notenboom said: Yes I think this would be really fun, especially after the league is announced. At least we'd have more to talk about that's concrete. While we're all still on speaking terms (ie. prior to the infamous studs-up ankle-breaking tackle by Roughriders FC against the Winnipeg Fury in the quarter-finals of the 2018 Voyageurs Cup). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rintaran Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 6 hours ago, rob.notenboom said: Yes I think this would be really fun, especially after the league is announced. At least we'd have more to talk about that's concrete. You should also get 1 or 2 from the supporters groups that have discovered they have no local team, just to provide an alternative perspective on the league launch. I think it could make for an interesting conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levi Oakey Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 Excited to see more groups on the podcast. It was a lot of fun to talk soccer with other Canada fans. A round table would be awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levi Oakey Posted March 1, 2017 Share Posted March 1, 2017 Don't know about you guys but my patience is waning. Let's get this league going! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyslexic nam Posted March 1, 2017 Share Posted March 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, Levi Oakey said: Don't know about you guys but my patience is waning. Let's get this league going! I honestly think the sniping back and forth in some of the threads is a result of people's frustration with the lack of solid news/announcements. I totally get that people don't want to announce prematurely, or to undermine any ownership group, but from a fan perspective it is hard to just wait, and wait. That is why I got a bit frustrated with the "Greetings from CPL" thread - if you aren't able to provide any info whatsoever, or engage with people who have questions about the league, why bother creating it? Clearly, I am part of the impatient cohort... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 I'm gonna be so pissed if BBTB ends up being right and this is some massive shell game of a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 16 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said: I'm gonna be so pissed if BBTB ends up being right and this is some massive shell game of a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete Homer Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 On 06/03/2017 at 6:38 PM, Gopherbashi said: I'm gonna be so pissed if BBTB ends up being right and this is some massive shell game of a failure. As fans who are pathologically fixated on this thing, we get antsy every time we go a few weeks without news, but we should remember that we aren't owed any and the only reason we know the majority of what we know is that people opened their mouths when they probably shouldn't have (including myself at one point). Beirne keeps saying that there's no manual for the creation of a league, and it wouldn't surprise me if a hundred minor details is holding things up more than big, "we don't have enough teams" kinds of problems Which I know sounds hollow since we've been saying it for months, but it's no less true now then it was when people were proclaiming doom and gloom last March That said, I just had a depressing realization that about 1.5% of our lifespan has gone by since that original Spectator article. Oof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuillermoDelQuarto Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 3/13/2017 at 10:06 AM, Complete Homer said: That said, I just had a depressing realization that about 1.5% of our lifespan has gone by since that original Spectator article. Oof not me, I plan on living to 300 so that was only .5 percent of my lifespan. Miracles of modern science n all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.