Jump to content


Photo

Bell/Rogers buy majority share of MLSE


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 Boges

Boges

    Full Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,077 posts

Posted 09 December 2011 - 08:05 AM

I don't think anyone was expecting this.

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/news/local/article/173922--mlse-sold-to-rogers-bell-for-1-32-billion

In one of the biggest deals in Canadian sports history, the owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs and Toronto Raptors has been sold to telecommunications giants Rogers Communications Inc. and Bell Inc.

Rogers—the parent of Citytv—and Bell bought a 75 per cent stake in Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment (MLSE) from the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan for about $1 billion. The deal is expected to close in mid-2012 and is subject to regulatory and league approvals.

Rogers already owns the Toronto Blue Jays and the team’s stadium, the Rogers Centre. The company also owns broadcaster Sportsnet.

"MLSE is one of Teachers' longest standing and most successful investments," Jane Rowe, Senior Vice-President, Teachers' Private Capital, said in a statement. "We are proud of this iconic company, in which we first invested in 1994. It is second to none in the industry and has a very bright future. We believe that Bell and Rogers, with their MLSE partner Kilmer Sports, will deliver on the company's potential."


This is weird, most Leafs games are on Rogers Sportsnet, occasionally you get a national game on TSN, and the odd game on Leafs TV.

How will they spit the television broadcasts for Leafs, not to mention the Raps and TFC. Most Raps games were broadcast on the Score.

These guys played nicely during the 2010 Olympics but can the co-own the biggest sports entity in Canada?

I think ultimately this deal will mean HNIC won't be on CBC for the years to come. So :lol: CBC fans.

As a Leafs fan, I'm happy that at least these guys will be more concerned about viewership to a team that's competitive than simply the bottom line of how much money the teams make.

Edited by Boges, 09 December 2011 - 08:08 AM.


#2 Wild Bill

Wild Bill

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Ontario
  • Interests:building/repairing guitar amps (tube based)
    politics, sci-fi

Posted 09 December 2011 - 09:14 AM

As a Leafs fan, I'm happy that at least these guys will be more concerned about viewership to a team that's competitive than simply the bottom line of how much money the teams make.


Don't count on it! I just listened to their press conference. They only mentioned the product (teams) once! At the end, almost as an afterthought.

Everything else was just patting themselves on the back for being a megacompany.

I was 15 years old when the Leafs last won the Cup! I doubt very much if they will again before I die! The Leafs are run by accountants. Why spend a lot of money for a winning team if people still will pay a small fortune for seats?

If there's no need to ensure profits then they simply don't care! And that's the long and the short of it.

Meanwhile, they will do everything they can to block Hamilton from getting an NHL team, a city that actually would want to win! Might leave a couple of the cheap seats empty for the Leafs every once in a while.
"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw


"There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."

#3 blueblood

blueblood

    Cowboy member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,977 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 09:43 AM

Don't count on it! I just listened to their press conference. They only mentioned the product (teams) once! At the end, almost as an afterthought.

Everything else was just patting themselves on the back for being a megacompany.

I was 15 years old when the Leafs last won the Cup! I doubt very much if they will again before I die! The Leafs are run by accountants. Why spend a lot of money for a winning team if people still will pay a small fortune for seats?

If there's no need to ensure profits then they simply don't care! And that's the long and the short of it.

Meanwhile, they will do everything they can to block Hamilton from getting an NHL team, a city that actually would want to win! Might leave a couple of the cheap seats empty for the Leafs every once in a while.


And buffalo and Detroit would be upset as well. And every team wants to build a winner, the leafs aren't hiring the right guys to put a team together and they spend at the cap the same as other competitive teams, that's middle managements fault, not the top. Why has
Detroit built such a good team and Toronto can't? Detroit spends the same amount of money yet they get results. You can't play the leafs aren't spending on players card anymore in the cap era. Heck Minnesota spends much less and they are on top of the league.

Edited by blueblood, 09 December 2011 - 09:47 AM.

"Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary

"Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary

Economic Left/Right: 4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

#4 Wild Bill

Wild Bill

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Ontario
  • Interests:building/repairing guitar amps (tube based)
    politics, sci-fi

Posted 09 December 2011 - 09:48 AM

You can't play the leafs aren't spending on players card anymore in e cap era.


Perhaps, but it's been almost 50 years! We didn't have caps all that time! We're talking half a flippin' CENTURY here, BB!
"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw


"There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."

#5 cybercoma

cybercoma

    Posthuman Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,143 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:A Few Acres of Snow

Posted 09 December 2011 - 10:30 AM

Oh, but "Big Telecomm" are separate entities. I'm more concerned about what this says about the telecommunications industry in Canada.

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."

Thomas Jefferson


#6 blueblood

blueblood

    Cowboy member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,977 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 10:38 AM

Perhaps, but it's been almost 50 years! We didn't have caps all that time! We're talking half a flippin' CENTURY here, BB!


The leafs had very respectable numbers in the 1990's and early 2000's, both revenues and attendance. It was more like 23 years in the darkness, plus in the 1970s there weren't that many teams, so that leaves out the 80's as the decade of darkness.
"Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary

"Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary

Economic Left/Right: 4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

#7 Shwa

Shwa

    Full Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Da Shwa
  • Interests:Sports, Music, Books, Movies

Posted 09 December 2011 - 10:46 AM

I think ultimately this deal will mean HNIC won't be on CBC for the years to come. So CBC fans.


Really? Hmmmm. So Bell and Rogers, which both carry numerous CBC stations and get revenue from them as well as using them as advertising channels, will cancel HNIC, which is also seen in every other hockey market and region in Canada, because they both bought into a share of the Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment in Toronto.

Uh-huh. Nice try Boges. I think I see your problem with logic right here Boges.

:lol:

#8 blueblood

blueblood

    Cowboy member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,977 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 11:07 AM

Really? Hmmmm. So Bell and Rogers, which both carry numerous CBC stations and get revenue from them as well as using them as advertising channels, will cancel HNIC, which is also seen in every other hockey market and region in Canada, because they both bought into a share of the Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment in Toronto.

Uh-huh. Nice try Boges. I think I see your problem with logic right here Boges.

:lol:


That and the CBC already has a TV deal and rights to broadcast the canadian teams. Nobody went bankrupt and nullified the previous contracts. Next round of contracts will be interesting...
"Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary

"Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary

Economic Left/Right: 4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

#9 olp1fan

olp1fan

    Full Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 12:10 PM

Who doesn't Bell or Rogers own in Ontario? doesn't Bell own some of Montreal too?


I think I am more surprised / upset with Kaberle being traded to Montreal (the enemy)

#10 olp1fan

olp1fan

    Full Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 12:16 PM

And buffalo and Detroit would be upset as well. And every team wants to build a winner, the leafs aren't hiring the right guys to put a team together and they spend at the cap the same as other competitive teams, that's middle managements fault, not the top.


Actually if you've been following the Leafs they have been doing very well in months that they haven't been doing well in for the last six years.. Leafs are currently the youngest team in the NHL player age wise so mistakes are going to be made...plus most of our team has been off and on the injured reserve list ..yet we are still 15-10-3
that is a damn good record for losing our number 1 goalie for a month and a half

Future looks bright with Frattin, Colborne, Gardiner, Franson

We will make the playoffs this year ... just not sure how deep we're gonna make it but I don't care!
we're gonna make the playoffs!!!

#11 guyser

guyser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,503 posts

Posted 09 December 2011 - 12:47 PM

And buffalo and Detroit would be upset as well. And every team wants to build a winner, the leafs aren't hiring the right guys to put a team together and they spend at the cap the same as other competitive teams, that's middle managements fault, not the top.


Buffalo would die if Hamilton got a team. I just dont see them getting one for various reasons the strnogest being they are too close and could not afford the rights fee waiver.

Why has
Detroit built such a good team and Toronto can't? Detroit spends the same amount of money yet they get results. You can't play the leafs aren't spending on players card anymore in the cap era. Heck Minnesota spends much less and they are on top of the league.


Detroit is 2 points ahead of the Leafs. Detroit has not done so well in the past few years playoff runs have they.
2007-2008 is not that long ago, but .....they are no closer this year either.

Many teams have had bad luck ,lousy teams , bad chances over the past decade. The poinjt being, so many things have to come together at the right time for anyone to win the Cup. I do not think Boston was the best team last year, but they won it so one cannot argue.

Detroit has Ken Holland and he is a master draftsman. He knew who and what he wanted and always got it somehow.
But with his great skill, comes great luck.

A 7th rounder, 210 overall turns out to be one of the best in the league....

A 53rd pick,3rd rounder, one of the best D-men (if not the best) over the last dozen years....

Zetterberg and Lydstrom.

Thats a talent very few posess.

#12 olp1fan

olp1fan

    Full Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2011 - 12:53 PM

Lidstrom

Lydstrom is a different player whos not a dead wing

#13 guyser

guyser

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,503 posts

Posted 09 December 2011 - 12:55 PM

Lidstrom

Lydstrom is a different player whos not a dead wing

oops

#14 Jack Weber

Jack Weber

    Proud 4 time member of the MLW Cooler Cabal!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,861 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:movies,music,sports,history

Posted 09 December 2011 - 01:57 PM

Perhaps, but it's been almost 50 years! We didn't have caps all that time! We're talking half a flippin' CENTURY here, BB!


50 years of futility??


Pffffttttt...That's nothing!!

Check out the Chicago Cubs and theirsoon to be 104 year drought...

THAT'S futility!!!
The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!

#15 Wild Bill

Wild Bill

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Ontario
  • Interests:building/repairing guitar amps (tube based)
    politics, sci-fi

Posted 09 December 2011 - 02:16 PM

Buffalo would die if Hamilton got a team. I just dont see them getting one for various reasons the strnogest being they are too close and could not afford the rights fee waiver.


You know Guyser, when the League made up the rules about being so close you could drive from Hamilton to Maple Leaf Gardens in about 35 minutes. Speed limits were 80 mph on the QE highway!

Now it's more like at least 2 hours most times of the day. Certainly, if you wanted to make sure you could get parked and seated you should perhaps allow yourself at least 3 hours to be safe.

What's more, the drive is always a frustrating pissoff! It just frazzles your nerves and boosts your blood pressure.

Maybe the League should consider the situation in terms of the real world and how long a trip takes in 2011. It's doubtful if they would, however. The status quo is just fine financially for them.

I'm of the opinion now that Hamilton should simply forget about the NHL. They should support their local teams in less-important leagues.

Most important, they should completely boycott any Leaf games! Not that it would have any great effect but if the League doesn't care about Hamilton then screw them and the horses they rode in on!
"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw


"There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."