PDA

View Full Version : Updated: Rogers, Bell buy majority stake in MLSE



Pages : [1] 2

Waggy
12-08-2011, 11:33 PM
Not sure which section is most appropriate for this, so mods feel free to move as required

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2011/12/08/19099591.html?cid=rsssportsslam!%20sports

"Sources have told QMI Agency that a deal worth as much as $2 billion is close to being settled with telecommunications behemoths Bell Media and Rogers Communications"


*edit Can a mod change the title to Canoe-Slam Sports? It was tweeted by a Sun guy and I was so excited I didn't even look at the actual URL or the banner

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:37 PM
Bell and Rogers?

mowe
12-08-2011, 11:37 PM
Wow, a joint Bell/Rogers ownership?

That's not better than OTTP right? I have no idea. I just hope we fans don't lose out in all this.

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:46 PM
Could this be causing the Blue Jays "parameters"?

Whoop
12-08-2011, 11:47 PM
Not sure which section is most appropriate for this, so mods feel free to move as required

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2011/12/08/19099591.html?cid=rsssportsslam!%20sports (http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2011/12/08/19099591.html?cid=rsssportsslam%21%20sports)

"Sources have told QMI Agency that a deal worth as much as $2 billion is close to being settled with telecommunications behemoths Bell Media and Rogers Communications"


*edit Can a mod change the title to Canoe-Slam Sports? It was tweeted by a Sun guy and I was so excited I didn't even look at the actual URL or the banner

Sun Media runs Canoe/Slam Sports. LOL

Lance Hornby is a Toronto Sun writer.

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:50 PM
"One of the matters to be settled is Bell's 18% interest in the Montreal Canadiens, which must be divested at some point under NHL rules."

No more Bell Centre?

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:52 PM
Where's Boban? Where's Ensco?

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:54 PM
John Tory??

billyfly
12-08-2011, 11:57 PM
I really thought that Bell and TSN/RDS had decided to get into bed with MTL and that Sportsnet/ Rogers had gone with the Leafs.

This was unexpected.

NBS
12-08-2011, 11:59 PM
CCL at Rogers Centre it is then.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 12:07 AM
Could this be causing the Blue Jays "parameters"?


Haha I posted that in the Jays thread already (I got excited when I saw the story and link dropped a bit. Sorry guys).


The Habs part is interesting. I don't have the info with me, I'm at work not at home, but I have a crap load of research on a story I was working on the Teachers Pension plan*, and they are heavy investors in a company that owns the Flyers I think it was. But it's not an obvious "They own two teams!" scenario, there was a cover company or 2 to go through. I'll find it when I get home. Either way, it's not too surprising. I feel like the success Bell/Rogers would have would be based entirely on who they have as the point man running MLJSE (see what I did there?). They'd have to go outside their companies I'd think, so who knows. I like how Rogers has owned the Jays a lot more than how the Teachers ran MLSE, I'll tell you that much


*sadly we could never publish it, the blog I was writing for was talking to the Raps about doing some stuff with them, so the editor didn't want me to put out something scewering the Teachers, just in case. By the end of last season they were already selling and it wasn't relevant anymore. Still, found a lot of interesting stuff

BS1327
12-09-2011, 12:08 AM
"One of the matters to be settled is Bell's 18% interest in the Montreal Canadiens, which must be divested at some point under NHL rules."

No more Bell Centre?


Maybe not in Montreal. They'll just rename the ACC.

boban
12-09-2011, 12:10 AM
Where's Boban? Where's Ensco?
You rang??

Whoop
12-09-2011, 12:11 AM
Haha I posted that in the Jays thread already (I got excited when I saw the story and link dropped a bit. Sorry guys).


The Habs part is interesting. I don't have the info with me, I'm at work not at home, but I have a crap load of research on a story I was working on the Teachers Pension plan*, and they are heavy investors in a company that owns the Flyers I think it was. But it's not an obvious "They own two teams!" scenario, there was a cover company or 2 to go through. I'll find it when I get home. Either way, it's not too surprising. I feel like the success Bell/Rogers would have would be based entirely on who they have as the point man running MLJSE (see what I did there?). They'd have to go outside their companies I'd think, so who knows. I like how Rogers has owned the Jays a lot more than how the Teachers ran MLSE, I'll tell you that much


*sadly we could never publish it, the blog I was writing for was talking to the Raps about doing some stuff with them, so the editor didn't want me to put out something scewering the Teachers, just in case. By the end of last season they were already selling and it wasn't relevant anymore. Still, found a lot of interesting stuff

You mean Comcast, Global Spectrum?

billyfly
12-09-2011, 12:12 AM
You rang??

LOL...I'm happy that you are here.

After Sporting got beat up by Bayern a few years back it was hard to be on the boards.

So what do you think of this turns of events?

boban
12-09-2011, 12:13 AM
Maybe not in Montreal. They'll just rename the ACC.
Bell Centre is sponsorship and has nothing to do with ownership.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 12:15 AM
You mean Comcast, Global Spectrum?


I really can't remember, it was over a year ago now. I don't remember for sure if it was the flyers or if it was the current owner. Comcast is very possible though, the teachers had a CRAP load of tele-com investments. I should be home in a few hours, I'll try and find the list. It was shocking. If you think OTPP is an evil corp now.... they make Dr Evils verion of viacom look like a mom and pop shop. Lots of dummy companies holding stuff too.

boban
12-09-2011, 12:21 AM
LOL...I'm happy that you are here.

After Sporting got beat up by Bayern a few years back it was hard to be on the boards.

So what do you think of this turns of events?
It's all specualtion right now but my guess is Larry is out as well - esp. if anything near that price. But who knows.
Seems Esco's guess on the pension fund pulling the sale was a poker move that worked (if this comes to fruition).
But at the end we get another faceless owner. But it is change for change sake.
I also think Leafs TV and Raptors TV are toast.

boban
12-09-2011, 12:31 AM
Well the National Post is running a story with a price 30% cheaper than listed in the sun article.

http://business.financialpost.com/2011/12/08/rogers-bell-close-to-mlse-deal-source/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Also says Larry stays on and waives his refusal. As a 'gift' for this action he retains Chairman of the Board.

werewolf
12-09-2011, 12:35 AM
LOL...I'm happy that you are here.

After Sporting got beat up by Bayern a few years back it was hard to be on the boards.

So what do you think of this turns of events?

JxKMPdsyDEc

Whoop
12-09-2011, 12:37 AM
It's all specualtion right now but my guess is Larry is out as well - esp. if anything near that price. But who knows.
Seems Esco's guess on the pension fund pulling the sale was a poker move that worked (if this comes to fruition).
But at the end we get another faceless owner. But it is change for change sake.
I also think Leafs TV and Raptors TV are toast.

I agree. In reality this doesn't change anything.

And I also while I agree that Leafs and Raptors TV would be toast, I think there would be a formation of another TV station, with all the teams under one umbrella and you'd have to pay a premium for said channel.

boban
12-09-2011, 12:46 AM
I think there would be a formation of another TV station, with all the teams under one umbrella and you'd have to pay a premium for said channel.
That would defeat the purpose of this deal and the existing channels the two networks have now - 5 sports channels in total.
They are buying to provide content to these channels.
Rogers owns Jays and there is no specialty or pay channel for them.

nfitz
12-09-2011, 12:46 AM
CCL at Rogers Centre it is then.If Rogers owns the team, who knows how often they'd end up there!

Whoop
12-09-2011, 12:54 AM
That would defeat the purpose of this deal and the existing channels the two networks have now - 5 sports channels in total.
They are buying to provide content to these channels.
Rogers owns Jays and there is no specialty or pay channel for them.

No, I meant it would be all under one channel, i.e. Toronto Sports channel (Leafs, Raptors, Jays, TFC, Marlies).

But who knows.

Whoop
12-09-2011, 01:01 AM
Not a Cox fan but some quick thoughts by him.

http://thestar.blogs.com/thespin/2011/12/here-.html

Like I said maybe a southern Ontario super sports channel... or maybe not.

boban
12-09-2011, 01:05 AM
And the Globe is saying the deal is even less than what the Post says......

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/rogers-bce-on-verge-of-deal-for-mlse/article2265448/

Auzzy
12-09-2011, 01:06 AM
The G&M has a slightly different take on this story: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/rogers-bce-on-verge-of-deal-for-mlse/article2265448/

EDIT Crap too slow... :D

boban
12-09-2011, 01:08 AM
Not a Cox fan but some quick thoughts by him.

http://thestar.blogs.com/thespin/2011/12/here-.html

Like I said maybe a southern Ontario super sports channel... or maybe not.
Where do you read that. Must have missed that.

boban
12-09-2011, 01:09 AM
The G&M has a slightly different take on this story: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/rogers-bce-on-verge-of-deal-for-mlse/article2265448/

EDIT Crap too slow... :D
Better than being too fast with a woman lol.

boban
12-09-2011, 01:22 AM
If this does go through I'm guessing we get to see TFC games on Sportsnet and a minimum on GoalTV :)

Yohan
12-09-2011, 01:49 AM
If this does go through I'm guessing we get to see TFC games on Sportsnet and a minimum on GoalTV :)
oh god. Dobson covering TFC games. *shudder*

Whoop
12-09-2011, 02:04 AM
Where do you read that. Must have missed that.

Here...



Under this reported deal .... the biggest result of all of this could be the formation of a new entity, some kind of new sports broadcast network for southern Ontario. Or not. Maybe this deal blocks that from ever happening.

I think ultimately though that is the future, all of the relevant Toronto sports teams under one umbrella and create one channel to showcase those teams. Leaving the curling, junior hockey, World Juniors, amateur sports, to be split between TSN and Sportsnet. Those channels would be free, but if you want the new Toronto sports channel, you'll have to pay.

ag futbol
12-09-2011, 02:14 AM
I think ultimately though that is the future, all of the relevant Toronto sports teams under one umbrella and create one channel to showcase those teams. Leaving the curling, junior hockey, World Juniors, amateur sports, to be split between TSN and Sportsnet. Those channels would be free, but if you want the new Toronto sports channel, you'll have to pay.
I think the new network (like we needed more) is the only way to get Bell and Rogers to work together.

Otherwise they are both setting themselves up for hell as Larry is still sitting on 20% which is enough to tip the scales either way. Sounds like a complete nightmare if they can't get along.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 02:21 AM
I'd think what we would see is the creation of more regional networks a-la sportsnet ontario/tsn winnipeg etc. A Toronto Sports Station just isn't practical, especially in March/April/May/Oct/Nov when theoretically all 4 teams are playing at once. It'd make more sense to have, say, sportsnet as the home of the jays and tsn ontario as the home of the leafs and some other new channel for the raps/tfc. I think this could be great for our exposure. Sportsnet and TSN owning TFC can only mean more people being able to see the games, more advertising during other sports coverage and better and longer coverage on sportscentre.



As for the OTPP, I found my chart, but sadly I didn't find the complete one. I tried to open the OTPP investments PDF from their website, but in the interum since I was using it they made it private http://www.otpp.com/ar/pdfs/ar_Investments.pdf

What I do have written down:

Deutsche Telekom
T-mobile (t-home, t-online, t-systems)
Scout 24 (a german craigslist)
Hellenic Telecom
Network Solutions
Strato AG
Maple Leaf Foods
Schneiders
Mitchells Gourmet Foods
Olympic fine meats
new york bagels
french croissant co
avance bakery
harvesttime bakery
la fornaia
bernand matthews bakery
OGX Petroleo e Gas participacoes Sa (supposedly the largest offshore drilling company in brazil, which would most likely make the company the largest offshore drilling company in the americas)
Cadillac Fairview (Eatons centre, TD Centre, Pacific Centre, Fairview mall, maple leaf square (It was originally 50/50 between MLSE and Cadillac Fairview, but MLSE sold their share to CF. As soon as I saw this I knew they'd sell as soon as possible after the project was complete, that's the only way it makes sense. That way they get to sell the risky and expensive part of the business but keep the cash cow they built)
Aquilex Holdings (owner/oporator of I maany nuclear plants worldwide)
Aquilex Nuclear services (manufacter and repair nuclear reactors)
Aquilex fossil fuels/petro chemicals/refining/waste to energy/industrial cleaning
GCT Global Container Terminals TSI Terminal, Vancouver/Delta BC (the ports in BC)
New York Container terminal, staten island (the ports in NYC)
Global Terminal (the ports in NJ)
Intergen NV (2 power plants in Australia, 1 in the philipines, 2 in the netherlands, 3 in England, 4 in mexico)
Scotia Gas networks
Samsonite
American Tourister
Lark
Lacoste (bags and small leather goods only)
Timberland (bags only)
Parmalat Canada
A and P
Dominion
Loeb
Pharmacy 1
Rexall
Real Canadian Superstore


They don't outright own all of these, all I could find is that they either were or had invested to some degree in them. Large enough to mention on the financial reports of either OTPP or the companies themselves that I could find. It was freaking tough compiling that list. Too bad OTPP made the investments pdf private. They're a pension fund, they should have some accountability towards the stuff they own. I assume lots of teachers wouldn't be happy they produce nuclear reactors or drill for oil offshore in South America. And the fact that when MLSE sold their part of Maple Leaf Square, that they sold it to Cadillac Fairview would seem to raise a few eyebrows (esp from the Ontario Securities Commission). They used the assets of one company to leverage a huge investment that they sold for a massive profit.... to another company that they own. which allowed them to sell the first company, for a major profit. And still keep the most valuable asset (ML Square long term is more valuable then owning the Leafs/Raptors. That land and those buildings are worth a LOT)


Edit 2: It was T-Mobile who made me suspicious, they're a MAJOR partner of the NBA. Of course OTPP own(ed) an NBA team. That seemed like a conflict. T-Mobile was recently sold, but there's problems with the sale with either the FCC or the SEC in the states, I don't really know that story or what ended up happening, if ownership eventually changed, or if it was quashed, or why. I still feel like there was another fishy thing with either Pit or Philly, but I don't have it so who knows.

ensco
12-09-2011, 07:03 AM
If enterprise value is $2.1 billion, Teachers/Larry ripped their faces off. One of the reasons this may have leaked everywhere overnight is to test the market reaction, I am always suspicious of that when merger deals leak in the middle of the night, as opposed to midday. If it isn't announced this morning, and BCE/Rogers stock prices are hit hard today, all bets are off. Even if they don't trade down today, I wouldn't go putting these stocks in my RRSP, personally. This is a very bad day for shareholders of BCE and Rogers imho.

The open discussion of a super channel, putting the Xbox thing out now, these turn out to be smart moves. Bell/Rogers are obviously seriously worried that, in the long run, they can't stop these things. It's bigger than sports.

Also Larry must have come to his senses. OTTP's bluff got called by him, but neither had winning cards, and you have to move forward. At some point soon here, a shotgun was going to get triggered, or it was going to wind up in court. OTTP had to be marshalling for war, the situation was untenable, and Larry had to know it. Larry was going to lose his right to block everything someday. So Larry blinked, in return for staying on the NHL Board of Governors - that's obviously an interesting gambit by the acquirers, a major concession. We need to understand that better - what are the terms of that? for how long? If it's for a year, that's one thing. If it's for 20 years, that's another.

It's an annoyingly socialist corporatist Canadian solution though. We'll have to wait for details about governance, but my initial reaction is that this outcome seriously sucks. We are guaranteed the higher possible prices to watch our teams down the line. And the governance and decision-making, I'll bet, may turn out to be even more dysfunctional and corporate then it already is, as hard as that is to achieve. Leaving Tanenbaum in place is how it starts - the owners don't exercise their natural control over the hiring of the people making operating decisions. Sound familiar?

DOMIN8R
12-09-2011, 07:04 AM
Headquarters to Ensco. Calling Ensco. Come in Ensco. We need the intel. Come in. Over.


Edit: There he is.

nxtmike
12-09-2011, 07:05 AM
MLSE has presser scheduled for 9:30am today. As per @CP24 tweet.

ensco
12-09-2011, 07:20 AM
Headquarters to Ensco. Calling Ensco. Come in Ensco. We need the intel. Come in. Over.

Edit: There he is.

Hi Dom. I'll be back with more. Stay tuned.

boban
12-09-2011, 07:46 AM
Here...



I think ultimately though that is the future, all of the relevant Toronto sports teams under one umbrella and create one channel to showcase those teams. Leaving the curling, junior hockey, World Juniors, amateur sports, to be split between TSN and Sportsnet. Those channels would be free, but if you want the new Toronto sports channel, you'll have to pay.
Oh Yeah. Whatever, that guy talks out of his ass. He's a sports writer, not a business one. lo

They already have Leafs TV and Rators and they have failed. Nobody is paying to watch TFC on GoalTV either. I don't see that happening. You get more advertising dollars with more viewers. Pay channels like this would cut the viewership drastically and as a result ad revenues.

ensco
12-09-2011, 08:35 AM
It's all true.

The deal is being announced at 9.30am today (press release at 9am). The Globe has the numbers 100% right.

The logjam broke because Tanenbaum was imminently going to be removed by Teachers as Chairman and Board of Governors Representative. It was time for Larry to do the deal, or go to war with Teachers. At 21x EBITDA (amazing), the deal made a lot more sense.

prizby
12-09-2011, 08:38 AM
didn't bell just sell its shares in the last year?

Phil
12-09-2011, 08:43 AM
It's all true.

The deal is being announced at 9.30am today (press release at 9am). The Globe has the numbers 100% right.

The logjam broke because Tanenbaum was imminently going to be removed by Teachers as Chairman and Board of Governors Representative. It was time for Larry to do the deal, or go to war with Teachers. At 21x EBITDA (amazing), the deal made a lot more sense.

Things just got a bit more interesting.

Oldtimer
12-09-2011, 08:44 AM
My own conspiracy theory: The reason why the Leafs and TFC have had a lot more money invested in them, and a lot more effort than usual to improve them, and the Leafs are doing way better than usual is that ML$E realized that they needed to have winning teams in order to make the "property" valuable to media companies like Rogers and Bell.

It's all about content. More games = more TV dates = more advertising revenue. When it's just Teachers' milking their cash cow, there's only a moderate interest in winning. Add in the need to make it attractive to media companies, and all of a sudden a lot more effort is put in. In TFC's case, no more simply hiring a "Mo," spend the money and have a consultant recommend the ideal coaching structure. In the Leaf's case, hire a proven winner as coach.

__wowza
12-09-2011, 09:01 AM
CCL at Rogers Centre it is then.

it just got a lot closer to actually happening. we WERE supposed to hear an announcement sometime this week no? maybe this is why it was being held off.

ensco
12-09-2011, 09:10 AM
They're streaming the press conference at 9.30am
http://www.mlse.com/mlselive_120911.aspx

David_Oliveira
12-09-2011, 09:20 AM
According to TSN 1.3 billion

Ossington Mental Youth
12-09-2011, 09:22 AM
i really hope we dont end up yearning for the days of the teachers pention as owners

Detroit_TFC
12-09-2011, 09:23 AM
it just got a lot closer to actually happening. we WERE supposed to hear an announcement sometime this week no? maybe this is why it was being held off.

That's a fair bet yes. CCL roll out got bumped. Actually good that it got bumped. It would have been buried, say if it got announced yesterday then this MLSE thing happened today.

Does TFC now get employee pricing on the Dome rental? :D

Phil
12-09-2011, 09:33 AM
i really hope we dont end up yearning for the days of the teachers pention as owners

It will be interesting for sure.

On one hand, teachers always hold that mantle of not caring about the product, only the results for their bottom line.

Now its arguable that the bottom line is directly affected by the results because of the TV deal. If the poduct is crap, viewership goes down.

In pricipal it does help eliminate that long time complaint but we will have to wait and see how it really pans out.

MG42
12-09-2011, 09:35 AM
Bell 37.5%

Rogers 37.5%

A guy named Larry 25% (up from 20% I believe).

romburgundy
12-09-2011, 09:37 AM
Prices will probably triple again in a year or two at the most.

ensco
12-09-2011, 09:37 AM
It'll be better in that these owners have to be better at finding and managing talent than Teachers were. It's a low bar.

But imho, putting the Hatfields and McCoys into a joint venture like this, how long will it take before their problems in dealing with each other spill over into team operations. Add Tanenbaum into that mix, oh boy....

I am pretty worried. I wanted a Russian grillionaire.

Detroit_TFC
12-09-2011, 09:39 AM
That gives Larry T huge leverage.

Phil
12-09-2011, 09:41 AM
It'll be better in that these owners have to be better at finding and managing talent than Teachers were. It's a low bar.

But imho, putting the Hatfields and McCoys into a joint venture like this, how long will it take before their problems in dealing with each other spill over into team operations. Add Tanenbaum into that mix, oh boy....

I am pretty worried. I wanted a Russian grillionaire.

That is a pretty big downside. We are all aware of the battles between Larry and Richard. Now take that to a corperate level and things could get messy fast.

Why is it I think Richard is just waiting for the other to blink then swoop in and take their share? Doubtful but you never know.

ensco
12-09-2011, 09:53 AM
Seeing Mohammed and Cope up there, their body language, man, this just isn't going to be easy.

BCE is getting about a quarter of the cash from its pension fund. BCE almost certainly cannot just vote the pension fund shares.

We've gone from 1 corporate owners back to 3 corporate owners. Only this time it's two bitter enemies in a mutual death grip, another pension fund, and the holdover we kept was a huge part of the historical problem re meddling in operations..

This is just peachy.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 09:55 AM
Just got our corp email announcing the deal.

ensco
12-09-2011, 10:05 AM
On a day when markets are up, both BCE and Rogers are trading down, but only a bit. The market doesn't love the deal, but isn't puking all over it.

ensco
12-09-2011, 10:10 AM
Classic. Tanenbaum is asked what it means to the Toronto sports fan. He says we're even better positioned to go after the Stanley Cup, the NBA Championship and.......double clutches and can't remember the name of what TFC is competing for. Winter has to tell him it's the MLS Cup.

Keyman
12-09-2011, 10:11 AM
They don't give a shit about TFC.

Northern Soul
12-09-2011, 10:11 AM
Seeing Mohammed and Cope up there, their body language, man, this just isn't going to be easy.

BCE is getting about a quarter of the cash from its pension fund. BCE almost certainly cannot just vote the pension fund shares.

We've gone from 1 corporate owners back to 3 corporate owners. Only this time it's two bitter enemies in a mutual death grip, another pension fund, and the holdover we kept was a huge part of the historical problem re meddling in operations..

This is just peachy.

Well, we've really gone from 2 to 3, and in all honesty, can it be much worse than under the Teachers? Sure it won't be perfect, but I'd rather have 2 giant telecommunications companies owning the team than a teachers' pension plan.

ensco
12-09-2011, 10:14 AM
I'd rather have 2 giant telecommunications companies owning the team than a teachers' pension plan.

Maybe. We'll see. I had high hopes for a better outcome. Watching these guys tell us how this means "more choice for consumers" with a straight face makes me a little nauseous.

swan
12-09-2011, 10:21 AM
They don't give a shit about TFC.


almost feels that way..

Detroit_TFC
12-09-2011, 10:22 AM
This is all about managing the content access and preventing a broadcast rights arms race in Canada. Those board meetings are going to be fractious though.

Oldtimer
12-09-2011, 10:29 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2011/12/09/sp-mlse-bell-rogers-ownership.html

spark
12-09-2011, 10:30 AM
Watching these guys tell us how this means "more choice for consumers" with a straight face makes me a little nauseous.

Hahahaha Well actually I would have expected nothing less.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 10:31 AM
Kiss HNIC goodbye in a couple of years?

Huyton
12-09-2011, 10:34 AM
Going to have to listen to Bob McClown tonight. Regardless of his bias against the Beautiful Game, he's pretty good listening when it's the business of sport being discussed..

Waggy
12-09-2011, 10:34 AM
Well, we've really gone from 2 to 3, and in all honesty, can it be much worse than under the Teachers? Sure it won't be perfect, but I'd rather have 2 giant telecommunications companies owning the team than a teachers' pension plan.

The teachers only bought out TD a few months ago. We've gone from 3 to 3. But... at least because bell and rogers want to make money on the broadcasting side of things, they have WAY more of an interest in having the teams be successful than TD or the pension fund (who's profit only came by raising value when they sold out)

phonzo
12-09-2011, 10:35 AM
They don't give a shit about TFC.

or the raptors..the deal was for the leafs plain and simple. Other properties are a nice bonus as long as they can be self sufficient and not require lots of cash injections.

However to be Rogers has proven they can "care" about a sports team. They haven't destroyed the jays and are working to turn that entire team around. At least I've been happy with the slow and steady changes in that organization...mind you I'm not a huge baseball fan :p

phonzo
12-09-2011, 10:36 AM
The teachers only bought out TD a few months ago. We've gone from 3 to 3. But... at least because bell and rogers want to make money on the broadcasting side of things, they have WAY more of an interest in having the teams be successful than TD or the pension fund (who's profit only came by raising value when they sold out)

bang on completely agree..first thing I said after seeing the deal rumblings.. no one will pay for content that isn't good.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 10:37 AM
Memo just went out here at Rogers. All Hab fans are being let go.

phonzo
12-09-2011, 10:38 AM
Kiss HNIC goodbye in a couple of years?

I don't think so; don't they currently buy their rights from the NHL? Belogers...Rogell can't necessarily take that away. More importantly be interesting to see what the regulator has to say. Most recently their was a ruling that on-line content can't really be restricted to that telecos users. I.E BCE can't stop Rogers customers from watching shows that air on CTV if they are streaming online or to a tablet.

Wouldn't be surprised if this mindset continues at some point...

Technorgasm
12-09-2011, 10:38 AM
So. . no more GOLTV?

ensco
12-09-2011, 10:39 AM
no one will pay for content that isn't good.

Not true for the Leafs, and that's what these guys are buying.

Except at the high end, demand remains insatiable for a team that, maybe, might sneak into the playoffs for the first time in 8 years.

Carts
12-09-2011, 10:40 AM
I wonder if I'll get my TSN-BellMedia employee discount on my season tickets...? lol :rolleyes:

Carts... :D

Carts
12-09-2011, 10:42 AM
I don't think so; don't they currently buy their rights from the NHL? Belogers...

Yes, HNIC is the 'League National Broadcast Deal' in which the NHL sells the package and rights to said games...

However, its not impossible to think that we'll see this partnership band together again to bid for the 'League National Broadcast Deal' and in turn, kill HNIC...

tfcleeds
12-09-2011, 10:43 AM
Watch out Burkie and Ronnie - maybe your jobs will be outsourced to India...

Chevy
12-09-2011, 10:44 AM
Memo just went out here at Rogers. All Hab fans are being let go.

lol. From the roof?

Detroit_TFC
12-09-2011, 10:44 AM
Leafs fans should be estatic about this, us and Raptors fans probably will get more media content but otherwise still will be treated as step-children. As for Marlies fans, when I find one I'll ask. (just kidding)

billyfly
12-09-2011, 10:45 AM
Watch out Burkie and Ronnie - maybe your jobs will be outsourced to India...


Rogers has very little outsourcing. Only Desktop IT really.

ensco
12-09-2011, 10:45 AM
Yes, HNIC is the 'League National Broadcast Deal' in which the NHL sells the package and rights to said games...

However, its not impossible to think that we'll see this partnership band together again to bid for the 'League National Broadcast Deal' and in turn, kill HNIC...

Possible. But it's not smart.

There are still a lot of places in rural Canada where people rely on rabbit ears to get their TV, even if satellite is available. Rural ridings are over-represented in Parliament. That's really why HNIC remains on CBC, it's part of how the CBC pander to Parliament, so that they, the CBC, get to stay in business. Stepping back, HNIC is a form of government subsidy that quietly benefits the NHL. Unlikely the NHL wants to upset this apple cart.

Ossington Mental Youth
12-09-2011, 10:46 AM
Watching these guys tell us how this means "more choice for consumers" with a straight face makes me a little nauseous.

this

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 10:47 AM
TBH as a consumer I'd rather have less choice in the form of "buy this one network to watch all your sports or watch none at all".

"Choice" for a sports fan means paying for premium packages to get all seven or eight channels you need to watch all the games.


So really, I'm sure they will offer more "choice" for consumers in the form of more channels, ie. options to choose from; it's just that that's not really helpful to us.

Carts
12-09-2011, 10:49 AM
Possible. But it's not smart.

There are still a lot of places in rural Canada where people rely on rabbit ears to get their TV, even if satellite is available. Rural ridings are over-represented in Parliament. That's really why HNIC remains on CBC, it's part of how the CBC pander to Parliament, so that they, the CBC, get to stay in business. Stepping back, HNIC is a form of government subsidy that quietly benefits the NHL. Unlikely the NHL wants to upset this apple cart.

Remember, Bell Media owns CTV - which has the exact same reach as CBC....

That's how the consortium (Bell/Rogers) won the Olympics from CBC...

Been done before, they will be trying again...

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 10:50 AM
It'll be better in that these owners have to be better at finding and managing talent than Teachers were. It's a low bar.

But imho, putting the Hatfields and McCoys into a joint venture like this, how long will it take before their problems in dealing with each other spill over into team operations. Add Tanenbaum into that mix, oh boy....

I am pretty worried. I wanted a Russian grillionaire.

Yeah, a low bar for sure. It's been "interesting" at CTV since it became CTV/BELLMedia and the managing of talent is certainly a challenge for them (have they announced any new shows at all? Have hey developed any of their own content?) The creative end of the TV business and the team performance end of the sports business have a lot in common - it's all about managing the talent, as you say.

It would have been more fun to see a grillionaire, that's for sure.

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 10:52 AM
but I'd rather have 2 giant telecommunications companies owning the team than a teachers' pension plan.

why???

lobo
12-09-2011, 10:52 AM
overheard this morning ...

The axis of evil is complete: Rogers, Bell and MLSE.

They're just jumping on the bandwidth wagon.

I am a Bell and Rogers customer, and I just felt a terrible pain in my behind.

I hope they don't throttle the talent.

Hockey tickets were already expensive, now you add all types of fees.

So, Bell and Rogers are done pretending to be competitors?

Wow, three things that make my blood boil all rolled up into one big, ugly, obnoxious, expensive, in your face package. Lovely.

Something about seeing old business men in tailored suits standing around smiling at each other really pisses me off.

I guess all of that nickel and diming does pay off.

Now Leaf players will be 30% slower than advertised and the team will hit its salary cap two weeks into the season.

Great! I can't wait for Rogers to bring their free-spending ways over from the Blue Jays to the Leafs, too. Errr... wait a minute...

When does Rogers and Bell announce purchase of Canada?

Bell sucks. Rogers sucks. The Maple Leafs suck. All think they're the
greatest. I can see the logic in this partnership.

Occupy The Air Canada Center.

trane
12-09-2011, 10:54 AM
I am not sure that this will be good. It would make sense that they want winning teams. But somehow I have concerns that this will be lost somewere in ther organizational priority lists.

It is more important then ever for us as a supporters group not to be cheer leaders, but supporters doing what is necessary to see the club get better, including taking actions wich will hurt their bottom line.

twistedchinaman
12-09-2011, 10:54 AM
Here's a PxP I did out of sheer boredom...check it out:

http://www.wakingthered.com/2011/12/9/2623395/bell-rogers-mlse-presser-the-translated-version

zamperina
12-09-2011, 10:55 AM
IMHO LeafsTV, RapsTV & GolTV are done. Low viewership coupled with the conglomerate being able to split the games on Sportsnet/TSN.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 10:56 AM
I can't believe I'll have to play nice with Carts (again)

TFC/Everton
12-09-2011, 10:56 AM
or the raptors..the deal was for the leafs plain and simple. Other properties are a nice bonus as long as they can be self sufficient and not require lots of cash injections.

However to be Rogers has proven they can "care" about a sports team. They haven't destroyed the jays and are working to turn that entire team around. At least I've been happy with the slow and steady changes in that organization...mind you I'm not a huge baseball fan :p

They care about making money, as they should.

Carts
12-09-2011, 10:58 AM
I can't believe I'll have to play nice with Carts (again)

HAHAHAHAHA!

I'll buy you a beer... Deal? :drinking:

bgnewf
12-09-2011, 10:58 AM
2 immediate questions from today for me. What will happen to GOL TV? And does the Rogers Centre have the inside track on hosting CCL game now?

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Alex Shnaider where are you?

:(

bones
12-09-2011, 11:00 AM
Am I the only one that sees this as the monkey owning the organ grinder here?

Should Media own the thing they're supposed to be independently unbiased about? (I know it happens, and please don't give multiple examples here) I'm asking should they in this case?

Ok you're a player and thinking about coming to the historic Toronto Maple Leafs franchise. They seem to have their house in order, but one thing is odd. All the Media is controlled by the ownership which is the media. Don't think they will control everything media wise? Just look at the response to a direct question about the LOSS of jobs with this merger to the digital channels. The media spin doctors said "but this will create more jobs for broadcasts........" Yeah, more jobs in your company, ask the people who work for Leafs/Raptors/TFC TV feel. And not the on air personalities. Spin doctors extreme, they're MEDIA! This is the same as the ATU Local 113 owning the TTC.

Isn't anyone else concerned? I just hope to god they sell off TFC to a real owner.

Bones...

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 11:04 AM
Am I the only one that sees this as the monkey owning the organ grinder here?

Should Media own the thing they're supposed to be independently unbiased about? (I know it happens, and please don't give multiple examples here) I'm asking should they in this case?

Ok you're a player and thinking about coming to the historic Toronto Maple Leafs franchise. They seem to have their house in order, but one thing is odd. All the Media is controlled by the ownership which is the media. Don't think they will control everything media wise? Just look at the response to a direct question about the LOSS of jobs with this merger to the digital channels. The media spin doctors said "but this will create more jobs for broadcasts........" Yeah, more jobs in your company, ask the people who work for Leafs/Raptors/TFC TV feel. And not the on air personalities. Spin doctors extreme, they're MEDIA! This is the same as the ATU Local 113 owning the TTC.

Isn't anyone else concerned? I just hope to god they sell off TFC to a real owner.

Bones...

...LOL

Technorgasm
12-09-2011, 11:04 AM
If our owners can profit from TFC success. . fucking great.
. . then they have a reason to care.

and maybe we'll see some imporvement on the filed. .

for the boys. . on the field. . for the Boys ONNN THEFIELD!@!!!!
oh we sing and chant the legend T.F.C!!

Ossington Mental Youth
12-09-2011, 11:05 AM
if they bring the bundesliga games to regular cable i wont be mad with a demise of goltv, if they rid of it all together ill be pissed (i cant see them ridding of it all together tho)

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:06 AM
HAHAHAHAHA!

I'll buy you a beer... Deal? :drinking:

Jason buys us both a beer. Done Deal.

Fort York Redcoat
12-09-2011, 11:09 AM
if they bring the bundesliga games to regular cable i wont be mad with a demise of goltv, if they rid of it all together ill be pissed (i cant see them ridding of it all together tho)

Sorry Ossi but I wouldn't expect it from an owner that doesn't even know what the MLS cup is. If they don't own it they got little reason to show it. You might get some when TFC play Bayern in the World Club Championship. Elsewise? Doubtful.

rudiker
12-09-2011, 11:10 AM
@ Bones

^^^ I understand what your saying, but we shouldn't be putting "the cart before the horse". For all we know, they may have great plans for TFC, one thing which may be to our advantage, is that the switch over is happening mid 2012, that's right in the prime of our season. Now, depending on how our attendance is, our televised attendance is, and how we are performing on field, they may see this as a franchise to invest more money into.

Fort York Redcoat
12-09-2011, 11:12 AM
Can anyone imagine a tv schedule between these 2 media giants that could improve the coverage of ALL their properties.... brands... er, I mean *teams*???

bones
12-09-2011, 11:13 AM
2 immediate questions from today for me. What will happen to GOL TV? And does the Rogers Centre have the inside track on hosting CCL game now?

Be honest here, why wouldn't they consider moving all the games? Larger stadium that they own and don't have to rent vs BMO. Keeping in mind that BMO is the National Soccer Stadium, and TFC are just the primary tenant.

As for the other issue, all digital channels are in jeopardy to build up the super sports channels of Belgers.

Bones...

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:13 AM
I wonder if I'll get my TSN-BellMedia employee discount on my season tickets...? lol :rolleyes:

Carts... :D

YES!!!!!!!!!!! I take back everything bad I've said about you Rogers!!!!


I'm so so so so excited about this. I reaaaaaaaaaaally hated the teachers. like REAAAAAAALLY hated the teachers. Now we have owners who have incentives to win, who WANT to properly market their teams, who know how to make fans happy and how to deal with angry customers (god knows rogers and bell see enough of them). I'm just so happy. I'd like to thank the academy...

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:14 AM
Be honest here, why wouldn't they consider moving all the games? Larger stadium that they own and don't have to rent vs BMO. Keeping in mind that BMO is the National Soccer Stadium, and TFC are just the primary tenant.

As for the other issue, all digital channels are in jeopardy to build up the super sports channels of Belgers.

Bones...


Also March 7 is before the Jays are in town. By April the dome isn't available anymore.

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 11:17 AM
YES!!!!!!!!!!! I take back everything bad I've said about you Rogers!!!! Also now maybe I can transfer internally to the TFC side? Huh? Come on Paul....


I'm so so so so excited about this. I reaaaaaaaaaaally hated the teachers. like REAAAAAAALLY hated the teachers. Now we have owners who have incentives to win, who WANT to properly market their teams, who know how to make fans happy and how to deal with angry customers (god knows rogers and bell see enough of them). I'm just so happy. I'd like to thank the academy...

lol pounding back the koolaid eh?

ACSertL
12-09-2011, 11:17 AM
if they bring the bundesliga games to regular cable i wont be mad with a demise of goltv, if they rid of it all together ill be pissed (i cant see them ridding of it all together tho)

I'm hoping for this.


Sorry Ossi but I wouldn't expect it from an owner that doesn't even know what the MLS cup is. If they don't own it they got little reason to show it. You might get some when TFC play Bayern in the World Club Championship. Elsewise? Doubtful.

But expecting this.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:17 AM
Be honest here, why wouldn't they consider moving all the games? Larger stadium that they own and don't have to rent vs BMO. Keeping in mind that BMO is the National Soccer Stadium, and TFC are just the primary tenant.

As for the other issue, all digital channels are in jeopardy to build up the super sports channels of Belgers.

Bones...

Trade with the Argos?

TFC in Skydome and Argos at BMO.

ryan
12-09-2011, 11:20 AM
IMHO LeafsTV, RapsTV & GolTV are done. Low viewership coupled with the conglomerate being able to split the games on Sportsnet/TSN.

Or merge into one super channel, charge 20 a month for it and put even more games solely on this channel forcing the consumer to have no choice but to buy or not be a fan.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:22 AM
lol pounding back the koolaid eh?

It's not even that I think Bell and Rogers are great owners. They're no Mark Cuban, that's for sure. But they're WAY better than the Teachers. Like WAAAYYY better than the teachers. On the ownership rankings we went from a 1 to a 7. Sure it's not a 10, but it's so much better. People here like to hate MLSE, I don't think MLSE was inherently bad, I think the teachers are. And I think these owners have incentive to win, which is all I really care about. The teachers never had incentive to win, only to increase the value of their investment. If they could win while doing that it'd be best, but the primary goal was increasing the asset base of MLSE (building BMO, upgrading the ACC, building Maple Leaf Square etc). To build a media empire you need people watching. Sure the leafs get viewers anyways, but they NEED the raptors to be successful to grow the brand. Same with TFC

Fort York Redcoat
12-09-2011, 11:25 AM
Be honest here, why wouldn't they consider moving all the games? Larger stadium that they own and don't have to rent vs BMO. Keeping in mind that BMO is the National Soccer Stadium, and TFC are just the primary tenant.

As for the other issue, all digital channels are in jeopardy to build up the super sports channels of Belgers.

Bones...


Trade with the Argos?

TFC in Skydome and Argos at BMO.


Now THAT....


























....is how you ruin a Friday.

bones
12-09-2011, 11:26 AM
Trade with the Argos?

TFC in Skydome and Argos at BMO.

*shudders violently*

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:28 AM
They refurbish the Rogers Centre ala Seattle and Van City.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:30 AM
Outdoor (roof open) game for Leafs 100th Anniversary will now be at Skydome.

Phil
12-09-2011, 11:32 AM
The deal at BMO is pretty sweet for whoever owns MSLE. That and the fact that BMO still cant fit a CFL field, they would be waiving additional revenue for stadium naming rights....


Lets not get too worked up, MLSE have a signifigant investment in that stadium as it is with the grass and heating.

Red Rat
12-09-2011, 11:32 AM
this is the kind of news that will make you make a choice between jumping off a bridge or hanging?
But there should be more choices right like maybe shot to the head or electrocution perhaps.

lobo
12-09-2011, 11:32 AM
I'Now we have owners who are incentivized to win, who WANT to properly market their teams, who know how to make fans happy and how to deal with angry customers (god knows rogers and bell see enough of them). I'm just so happy. I'd like to thank the academy...

yes, bell and rogers know very well how to deal with angry customers ... with great disdain ... much like MLSE, it's a perfect fit

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 11:33 AM
It's not even that I think Bell and Rogers are great owners. They're no Mark Cuban, that's for sure. But they're WAY better than the Teachers. Like WAAAYYY better than the teachers. On the ownership rankings we went from a 1 to a 7. Sure it's not a 10, but it's so much better. People here like to hate MLSE, I don't think MLSE was inherently bad, I think the teachers are. And I think these owners have incentive to win, which is all I really care about. The teachers never had incentive to win, only to increase the value of their investment. If they could win while doing that it'd be best, but the primary goal was increasing the asset base of MLSE (building BMO, upgrading the ACC, building Maple Leaf Square etc). To build a media empire you need people watching. Sure the leafs get viewers anyways, but they NEED the raptors to be successful to grow the brand. Same with TFC

Maybe. But they built media empires without creating any successful content of their own, simply by buying American content. So, of course, they want successful content of their own but so far in their other businesses they haven't shown any ability to create it.

Maybe it will be different with sports.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:37 AM
yes, bell and rogers know very well how to deal with angry customers ... with great disdain ... much like MLSE, it's a perfect fit

Rogers and Bell, if you have beef and you call and complain, you'll get something for free. Believe me (seriously, try it). MLSE under OTPP, when have they ever given fans anything to apologize for anything? I use Virgin because I hate dealing with Bell and Rogers so much, but look at their history. The Jays really couldn't ask for much more from Rogers from an ownership standpoint. I havent heard a lot of complains about the Habs ownership situation (though I'm not a fan, maybe someone knows different?).

Carts
12-09-2011, 11:39 AM
Jason buys us both a beer. Done Deal.

Game-Set-Billyfly! :drinking: :D

ag futbol
12-09-2011, 11:40 AM
IMHO LeafsTV, RapsTV & GolTV are done. Low viewership coupled with the conglomerate being able to split the games on Sportsnet/TSN.
They would be out of their minds to try and carve the games up only between their two existing networks. That would degrade into a game of tug-of-war for "better access" pretty quickly. They need to remove problems like this if they are going to be effective.

I'll say this: at least Rogers & Bell have some incentive to make the teams perform because they realize the value from increased ratings.

At 1.3 billion (reported) that price is below what they were floating before. 2B was a pipe dream, I think they got their bluff called and started looking at an asset they no longer wanted on the books. Valuation is full, but pipe dreams of an "ego premium" definitely dashed.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:40 AM
I don't tell people at parties who I work for.

Dv23
12-09-2011, 11:41 AM
This is good news as far as I am concerned. I think most people are forgetting how much we hated the Teachers. I am willing to put some trust in Bell/Rogers because god knows we'll be better off than how we were before.

bones
12-09-2011, 11:41 AM
The deal at BMO is pretty sweet for whoever owns MSLE. That and the fact that BMO still cant fit a CFL field, they would be waiving additional revenue for stadium naming rights....


Lets not get too worked up, MLSE have a signifigant investment in that stadium as it is with the grass and heating.

you mean Belgers*TM does ;)

Bones...


---
Belgers is a registered trademark of all those that drink beer too fast. Use of the term without speedy consumption of beer is strictly prohibited.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:45 AM
And for the "trade stadiums with the argos!" fear mongerers, that'd require both BMO field and the Skydome being basically rebuilt (BMO you'd have to tear down the south end and the lockerooms/internal stuff. Skydome you'd have to basically rebuild the whole stadium, it's a concrete box with a tiny drainage system. It can only handle a little bit of water. For a grass field to go in there they'd need a completely new drainage system, which'd require MASSIVE renovations to the dome. It'd be cheaper for the Argos to build a new stadium)

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 11:48 AM
Outdoor (roof open) game for Leafs 100th Anniversary will now be at Skydome.

I think it was last week, Burke already mentioned how this isn't a possiblity.

here;



“You can’t use the Rogers Centre because the dome cannot be open in the winter,” Burke said. “We haven’t been promised anything but we’re pushing real hard to host it and we’re hopeful."

billyfly
12-09-2011, 11:50 AM
I want BMO to be bigger, the Argos to be in their own stadium and for the Rogers Centre to be a nicer baseball stadium.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 11:53 AM
I want BMO to be bigger, the Argos to be in their own stadium and for the Rogers Centre to be a nicer baseball stadium.

I was just thinking about it. While TSN obviously doesn't own the Argos, they are basically partners with the CFL at this point. It's definitely in their interest for the Argos to succeed. Maybe they're next?


BIG EDIT: doesn't ESPN own 20 or 30% of TSN? ... Carts? That could be BIG

Mulder
12-09-2011, 11:55 AM
I was just thinking about it. While TSN obviously doesn't own the Argos, they are basically partners with the CFL at this point. It's definitely in their interest for the Argos to succeed. Maybe they're next?

It's a rumor I've heard of already. With the sale taking place after the 100th Grey Cup.

Ageroo
12-09-2011, 11:56 AM
I don't tell people at parties who I work for.

You shouldn't tell anyone......You and BFin.....;)

Carts
12-09-2011, 12:00 PM
BIG EDIT: doesn't ESPN own 20 or 30% of TSN? ... Carts? That could be BIG

Its basically 33.3% - the most allowed under CRTC Regulations...

Waggy
12-09-2011, 12:02 PM
Its basically 33.3% - the most allowed under CRTC Regulations...

... anyone else thinking what I'm thinking? :) Sunday night baseball! MLS games of the week! ESPN maybe even trying to get back into some hockey content? Toronto teams on sportscentER! We're not the ignored cousin anymore! ESPN has a reason to put Toronto teams on the network!! (Ok, maybe I'm reaching a bit. A guy can dream though right?)

Redcoe15
12-09-2011, 12:02 PM
Better the devil you know that the devil you don't, IMO.

The OTTP were the proverbial scapegoats for when things went bad - at least as far as the Leafs go. Now you've got two national multimedia giants in this country - the Canadian equivalent of Coke and Pepsi - each equally owning more than a third of the city's main sporting properties, and all the bells and whistles that go with it, and Tie Domi's best bud Larry Tannenbaum owning the rest.

This. Can't. Be. Good.

ArmenJBX
12-09-2011, 12:03 PM
Tear down BMO Field.

Build us a proper stadium, not a tin-can prop up.

Call if the Bell-Rogers-Sportsnet-Sportsnet Magazine-4G-Whatevertheheck Stadium, i don't care, as long as it looks intimidating, has a roof, and HAS PROPER CHIP BUTTYS! :D

Fort York Redcoat
12-09-2011, 12:06 PM
Tear down BMO Field.

Build us a proper stadium, not a tin-can prop up.

Call if the Bell-Rogers-Sportsnet-Sportsnet Magazine-4G-Whatevertheheck Stadium, i don't care, as long as it looks intimidating, has a roof, and HAS PROPER CHIP BUTTYS! :D

Keep this post in mind because when this happens I will lead the song

"We All Dream Of A Team Of Jacob P's...";)

Yohan
12-09-2011, 12:15 PM
sounds like most of you aren't going to happy with any owner unless it's some arab oil sheik who likes to blow money for fun

Nuvinho
12-09-2011, 12:17 PM
Bell + Rogers = Bogers

__wowza
12-09-2011, 12:18 PM
i remember the days when we used to be proud of BMO, when we were playing on turf, etc. i still didn't find anything wrong with it until we started comparing it to other stadiums being built. that'd be like tearing down your childhood home!

stick a roof on her, and that's all i'd need.


sounds like most of you aren't going to happy with any owner unless it's some arab oil sheik who likes to blow money for fun

or a russian that wants to drink champagne outt've a champions league trophy!!

PopePouri
12-09-2011, 12:23 PM
stick a roof on her, and that's all i'd need.


Yep.

Same symmetry with each stand would be nice but it's all aesthetics.

Yohan
12-09-2011, 12:31 PM
i remember the days when we used to be proud of BMO, when we were playing on turf, etc. i still didn't find anything wrong with it until we started comparing it to other stadiums being built. that'd be like tearing down your childhood home!

stick a roof on her, and that's all i'd need.

it's like losing your virginity to an ok chick whom you thought hot, but then after realized you could be banging even hotter chicks

I'm cool with BMO Field. It's home

T-boy
12-09-2011, 12:42 PM
I'm not sure about all the implications, if any, of this sale on TFC.

The one thing I'm NOT a fan of though, is that now one company (Rogers) has a say in ALL the cities pro sports franchises - which I don't like at all. So, whoever they (Bell and Rogers) decide to put in the board room, will effect ALL the cities sports at once. If you end up with a board full of money making profit driven pricks, they could ruin all the sports all at the same time. I'm a bigger fan of separating out all the sports, and then if one is failing, it doesn't impact all the others. So now the MLSE sports are joined with the Jays, making it one giant city wide sports monopoly. I'm not a fan of this at all. :(

reggie
12-09-2011, 12:50 PM
i love the line from the rogers CEO..calling the raptors a inconic world brand..lol

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 12:53 PM
I'm not sure about all the implications, if any, of this sale on TFC.

The one thing I'm NOT a fan of though, is that now one company (Rogers) has a say in ALL the cities pro sports franchises - which I don't like at all. So, whoever they (Bell and Rogers) decide to put in the board room, will effect ALL the cities sports at once. If you end up with a board full of money making profit driven pricks, they could ruin all the sports all at the same time. I'm a bigger fan of separating out all the sports, and then if one is failing, it doesn't impact all the others. So now the MLSE sports are joined with the Jays, making it one giant city wide sports monopoly. I'm not a fan of this at all. :(

Nobody is.

But from their point of view, everybody makes money.

bertal
12-09-2011, 01:02 PM
ticket prices lol

Couchy81
12-09-2011, 01:02 PM
Rogers and Bell, if you have beef and you call and complain, you'll get something for free. Believe me (seriously, try it). MLSE under OTPP, when have they ever given fans anything to apologize for anything? I use Virgin because I hate dealing with Bell and Rogers so much, but look at their history. The Jays really couldn't ask for much more from Rogers from an ownership standpoint. I havent heard a lot of complains about the Habs ownership situation (though I'm not a fan, maybe someone knows different?).

It's true, my dad called and complained about the lack of Raptors games on regular TV a couple years ago when TSN2 was new and ended up bargaining with them to a free year of Setanta.

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 01:03 PM
Waggy, you know that Virgin is Bell, right?

ryan
12-09-2011, 01:07 PM
Outdoor (roof open) game for Leafs 100th Anniversary will now be at Skydome.

Unless they change how that building works, won't happen. That roof stays closed until May.

ryan
12-09-2011, 01:08 PM
Tear down BMO Field.

Build us a proper stadium, not a tin-can prop up.


Does anyone think the owners, who don't even know what TFC play for, are interested in plopping down a few 10's of Millions for a new stadium?

Dreaming!

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 01:10 PM
Does anyone think the owners, who don't even know what TFC play for, are interested in plopping down a few 10's of Millions for a new stadium?

Dreaming!

It really depends on how well MLS does. If it does become a major North American sport these owners will at least keep up with the league. But they won't lead the way.

TFC/Everton
12-09-2011, 01:20 PM
I want BMO to be bigger, the Argos to be in their own stadium and for the Rogers Centre to be a nicer baseball stadium.

I would settle for a roof on BMO and any Toronto sports team to win a championship :)

Waggy
12-09-2011, 01:20 PM
Waggy, you know that Virgin is Bell, right?

They use Bell infrastructure, yeah. That's the most corrupt thing in Canada. I don't know why people don't really protest this. ALL telecommunications infrastructure in Canada is owned by Bell or Rogers. So any other company that wants to do business here HAS to partner with one of the two. The infrastructure (national networks of phone lines, internet cables etc) should be ran by the government to ensure some competition (and also a way to make a bit of money for the government, instead of lining Bell and Rogers pockets). That's the way it's done basically everywhere else in the world. It's a total monopoly, and it's freaking crap. The gov't is too cheap to take on the maintenance costs, as well as upgrade costs. So they let bell and rogers do whatever. Did you see the story the Wind owner wrote when he abandonded the canadian market a few months ago? It was SCATHING.

edit: heres a cbc story on the wind thing http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/11/17/f-naguib-sawiris.html

phonzo
12-09-2011, 01:27 PM
They use Bell infrastructure, yeah. That's the most corrupt thing in Canada. I don't know why people don't really protest this. ALL telecommunications infrastructure in Canada is owned by Bell or Rogers. So any other company that wants to do business here HAS to partner with one of the two. The infrastructure (national networks of phone lines, internet cables etc) should be ran by the government to ensure some competition (and also a way to make a bit of money for the government, instead of lining Bell and Rogers pockets). That's the way it's done basically everywhere else in the world. It's a total monopoly, and it's freaking crap. The gov't is too cheap to take on the maintenance costs, as well as upgrade costs. So they let bell and rogers do whatever. Did you see the story the Wind owner wrote when he abandonded the canadian market a few months ago? It was SCATHING.

Actually a little bit off here. Virgin used to be an MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) on the Bell network. Then a while back Virgin decided it wanted out of the market and sold it to Bell to use as their "discount' carrier to compete with Koodo / Fido even though Bell had Solo around at the time too.

It's not that the government is to cheap; it's that the infrastructure is pricey. A brand new cell site in Southern Ontario is easily a million bucks. Pulling fibre can cost up to if not more then 200,000 in one time costs for a km. (dependent if you choose to bury and how deep. slightly less if run alongside a major roadway)

If you want to ensure competition you remove protective policies and force firms to compete.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 01:30 PM
Actually a little bit off here. Virgin used to be an MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) on the Bell network. Then a while back Virgin decided it wanted out of the market and sold it to Bell to use as their "discount' carrier to compete with Koodo / Fido even though Bell had Solo around at the time too.

It's not that the government is to cheap; it's that the infrastructure is pricey. A brand new cell site in Southern Ontario is easily a million bucks. Pulling fibre can cost up to if not more then 200,000 in one time costs for a km. (dependent if you choose to bury and how deep. slightly less if run alongside a major roadway)

If you want to ensure competition you remove protective policies and force firms to compete.

Ahh my mistake. Huh. Did not know that at all. Def going to reconsider my use of virgin then.

phonzo
12-09-2011, 01:32 PM
Ahh my mistake. Huh. Did not know that at all. Def going to reconsider my use of virgin then.

you touched on my field...had to bite :)

though i did just realize how much of my money is now going to be feeding Rogers money piles....damn you billy.

Mulder
12-09-2011, 01:49 PM
Want to know the kicker in all this.

Rogers puts 'Sportsnet' as part of it's basic cable package. If I want TSN in Toronto, I either have to pay Rogers another $20 per month, or go with Bell and the sports package. (about the same amount).

This was when I lived in Toronto, so talk about promoting your own product.


I'm sure BCE may not be happy with that arragement (viewers wise)

ManUtd4ever
12-09-2011, 01:51 PM
Ultimately, I think Rogers and Bell will have more of a vested interest in building successful sports franchises than the OTPP.

Mulder
12-09-2011, 01:55 PM
The other thing I've read is a suggestion that the teachers pension feel the 'sports' market has peaked in Toronto.

Fort York Redcoat
12-09-2011, 01:57 PM
For Mulder,


BELL=

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090624152534/en.futurama/images/thumb/a/a5/Jack_Johnson.png/250px-Jack_Johnson.png



While Rogers =

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090624153246/en.futurama/images/thumb/b/be/John_Jackson.png/250px-John_Jackson.png




This equals MORE CHOICE!!!1!!:thumbsup:;)

phonzo
12-09-2011, 02:00 PM
well played FYR

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 02:02 PM
Want to know the kicker in all this.

Rogers puts 'Sportsnet' as part of it's basic cable package. If I want TSN in Toronto, I either have to pay Rogers another $20 per month, or go with Bell and the sports package. (about the same amount).

This was when I lived in Toronto, so talk about promoting your own product.


I'm sure BCE may not be happy with that arragement (viewers wise)

It's the other way around for cogeco in oakville.

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 02:04 PM
Actually a little bit off here. Virgin used to be an MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) on the Bell network. Then a while back Virgin decided it wanted out of the market and sold it to Bell to use as their "discount' carrier to compete with Koodo / Fido even though Bell had Solo around at the time too.

It's not that the government is to cheap; it's that the infrastructure is pricey. A brand new cell site in Southern Ontario is easily a million bucks. Pulling fibre can cost up to if not more then 200,000 in one time costs for a km. (dependent if you choose to bury and how deep. slightly less if run alongside a major roadway)

If you want to ensure competition you remove protective policies and force firms to compete.

That would ensure competition for a while, until one wins. Then, as you say, the start-up costs would be too much and keep new players out.

Neither pure competition nor pure protection would really work which is why we're stuck with this odd hybrid in every industry, it seems. It's like any game, it's really only as good as the refs (and we follow MLS ;)).

Mulder
12-09-2011, 02:04 PM
It's the other way around for cogeco in oakville.

Same in Belleville, I use Cogeco here.

Odd since how much of Cogeco is owned by Rogers.

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 02:05 PM
The problem is, it is going to equal more choice.

Which specialty premium programming channels will we choose to purchase.

They're framing this as though choice in any form is positive. As a sports consumer I'd happily pay for an "all-or-nothing" sports package, but instead they will be offering (and lauding themselves for doing it) more "choices".

Canary10
12-09-2011, 02:11 PM
There's barely a mention of TFC in any of the articles. I hate that. We've just started building a solid team, I hope the new ownership is committed to staying the course.

TOBOR !
12-09-2011, 02:16 PM
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQp7_yvi0MO-mhxs-JjXbJmA3czLVlEZSOnfqxe-khzecHhHArf

ensco
12-09-2011, 02:27 PM
No one could be bothered asking about TFC...

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/article/1099624--mlse-sale-no-changes-planned-in-management-of-leafs-raptors

PopePouri
12-09-2011, 02:33 PM
http://blogimages.thescore.com/footyblog/files/2011/12/torontovancouver.jpg

Shakes McQueen
12-09-2011, 02:33 PM
I don't mind sports teams being owned by large conglomerates these days - that just seems to be the way sports ownership is going as team values and contract values continue to skyrocket.

But there is something kind of gross about having every major sports franchise in Toronto owned by the same corporations that employ the people whose job it is to cover them.

- Scott

ag futbol
12-09-2011, 02:39 PM
Does anyone think the owners, who don't even know what TFC play for, are interested in plopping down a few 10's of Millions for a new stadium?

Dreaming!
Maybe the best thing about having the crappiest first gen stadium in MLS is that you get the first second generation stadium in MLS. Although, technically RBNY is already kind of there with their stadium that's well beyond everyone elses.

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 02:50 PM
I don't mind sports teams being owned by large conglomerates these days - that just seems to be the way sports ownership is going as team values and contract values continue to skyrocket.

But there is something kind of gross about having every major sports franchise in Toronto owned by the same corporations that employ the people whose job it is to cover them.

- Scott

it's fucking ridiculous is what it is.

Dv23
12-09-2011, 02:58 PM
I don't think it's fair to call them out on not knowing the name for the Cup. I mean, heck, I've been a TFC fan since day 1 but if someone asked me blatantly what the cup's title was, I would honestly not be very confident in my answer. I could care less if they don't know what it's called, as long as they work to get us to it.

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 03:03 PM
I don't think it's fair to call them out on not knowing the name for the Cup. I mean, heck, I've been a TFC fan since day 1 but if someone asked me blatantly what the cup's title was, I would honestly not be very confident in my answer. I could care less if they don't know what it's called, as long as they work to get us to it.

Is it not just "the MLS Cup"?

Lol... I mean you'd have to actually follow the NFL to know that the "Superbowl" is a game played for "the Lombardi trophy".

Very few "iconic" named trophies out there.

ensco
12-09-2011, 03:24 PM
I don't think it's fair to call them out on not knowing the name for the Cup. I mean, heck, I've been a TFC fan since day 1 but if someone asked me blatantly what the cup's title was, I would honestly not be very confident in my answer. I could care less if they don't know what it's called, as long as they work to get us to it.

It's not about the name of the trophy. He can just say "we want to win the Super Bowl".

It's about the fact that he has probably never put the sentence together before. It matters.

If the airline has coffee stains on the tray tables, I personally wouldn't make excuses, I'd be seriously worried about how they do the engine maintenance.

Read an article about Steve Jobs, then tell me if you think he wouldn't know the name of the prize the team he owned/ran was competing for.

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 03:24 PM
Is it not just "the MLS Cup"?

Lol... I mean you'd have to actually follow the NFL to know that the "Superbowl" is a game played for "the Lombardi trophy".

Very few "iconic" named trophies out there.


Is it not the lamar hunt trophy?

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 03:26 PM
This shouldn't surprise anyone. This is fairly simple stuff, Bell and Rogers are not well run companies. Never have been.

Yohan
12-09-2011, 03:30 PM
Is it not the lamar hunt trophy?
that's the US Open Cup. MLS Cup is Phil Anschutz trophy

mdc 77
12-09-2011, 03:32 PM
that's the US Open Cup. MLS Cup is Phil Anschutz trophy


ah the other owner. lol

Red CB Toronto
12-09-2011, 03:40 PM
In honour of the great Pat Burns quote when the Leafs acquired Bill Berg from the Islanders. Would Bell CEO George Cope and Rogers head honcho Nadir Mohamed even know Paul Beirne if either of them ran him over with a car?

Seriously,this deal is about content and distribuation on all five platforms. TV, Radio, Print, Digital and Mobel and thus I really do not see much of a difference being brought to the table from a TFC standpoint.

There is a reason why TFC was on GOL TV last season outside of the TSN national deal, ratings over the first four seasons for the most part were pretty bad. I think of the three MLSE channels, GOL has the best chance to survive as they need a place to park TFC's brodcasts. Will you see more exposure of Sportsnet and TSN in the future, who knows but it will have to make sense from a dollar standpoint.

ryan
12-09-2011, 03:53 PM
Maybe the best thing about having the crappiest first gen stadium in MLS is that you get the first second generation stadium in MLS. Although, technically RBNY is already kind of there with their stadium that's well beyond everyone elses.

That's a bigger maybe than I'm willing to hope on.

Man, I'm so depressed here (on a Blue Jays related note mostly...until I see "gate charge"..."plastic cup charge"..."singing charge"..."scarf charge"....added to my TFC ticket that is)

ensco
12-09-2011, 04:04 PM
^People are overthinking GolTV.

There will probably be a rationalization of the "super premium" soccer tier (the old Setanta, owned by Rogers) and the "premium" tier (MLSE's GolTV) as part of this.

GolTV is about the Bundesliga and La Liga. TFC is secondary and they never pre-empt Euro league games for TFC (I think it's why there were so many night games early and late last year).

TFC games will go wherever they go. They won't be strategic to that discussion.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 04:38 PM
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/blogs/insight/left-mlse-deal-telus-last-telecom-standing-180545619.html

Telus left alone? Shaw doesn't own anything either.

dantdot
12-09-2011, 04:43 PM
Toronto FC hopes MLSE sale brings stability, broader exposure
http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/article/1099900--toronto-fc-hopes-mlse-sale-brings-stability-broader-exposure

The article quotes a post from the boards!

ensco
12-09-2011, 04:45 PM
Tale of the Tape:

Dow up 1.5%
TSX up 0.7%

BCE up 0.3%
Rogers down 0.5%
Shaw up 0.9%
Telus flat

Bottom line: it was a non-event to the markets. Surprises me.

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 05:23 PM
Tale of the Tape:

Dow up 1.5%
TSX up 0.7%

BCE up 0.3%
Rogers down 0.5%
Shaw up 0.9%
Telus flat

Bottom line: it was a non-event to the markets. Surprises me.

Maybe the teachers are right and the sports market has peaked. So nothing really changes, the same amount of people spend the same amount of money on the same two carriers to watch the same amount of sports.

(did the CFO of Bell move to Rogers a few weeks ago?)

ensco
12-09-2011, 05:37 PM
Maybe the teachers are right and the sports market has peaked. So nothing really changes, the same amount of people spend the same amount of money on the same two carriers to watch the same amount of sports.

(did the CFO of Bell move to Rogers a few weeks ago?)

This says to me that the market doesn't think they paid too much (nor conversely does it seem like a deal)

Bell's CFO is a Bell lifer and has been in his current role for 10 years.

The Rogers CFO was the CEO of Call-Net (Sprint Canada), which Rogers bought a few years back.

denime
12-09-2011, 05:43 PM
^People are overthinking GolTV.

There will probably be a rationalization of the "super premium" soccer tier (the old Setanta, owned by Rogers) and the "premium" tier (MLSE's GolTV) as part of this.

GolTV is about the Bundesliga and La Liga. TFC is secondary and they never pre-empt Euro league games for TFC (I think it's why there were so many night games early and late last year).

TFC games will go wherever they go. They won't be strategic to that discussion.


Agree,I think GolTV will stay,because of Bundesliga and La Liga.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 05:58 PM
Tale of the Tape:

Dow up 1.5%
TSX up 0.7%

BCE up 0.3%
Rogers down 0.5%
Shaw up 0.9%
Telus flat

Bottom line: it was a non-event to the markets. Surprises me.

Well... I mean while to sports fans a 1.3 billion dollar transaction is a MONSTER, for the Dow or the TSX a billion dollar transaction is what happens when the US dollar moves a decimal point or two. Until people know how this split will work, how they plan to make money, what kind of revenue or losses they'll be facing, what this does from a CRTC standpoint etc there's nothing to get excited about. Once they start carving up TV and online rights I think you'd see a lot more activity one way or the other for Bell and Rogers. (just a hunch, not my field. I'm sure there are those on here who'd be able to speak better on the subject)

edit: the best summary of the whole deal I've heard: MLSE was sold for 6 Albert Pujols!

boban
12-09-2011, 06:04 PM
Agree,I think GolTV will stay,because of Bundesliga and La Liga.
I always thought that also. Question is what does that d to TFC games. Last year there 21 game sin that station - and waay too much for any fans liking. But reading Anselmi's reaction, TFC are going to go there still. It's just it will be distributed to more people. Don't know what that means since there is no chance i will pay for that channel.

thisisinternetclash
12-09-2011, 06:07 PM
From a soccer standpoint, this now means that TSN and Sportsnet have access to the non-TFC licenses previously owned by MLSE/GOLTV. So, I wonder if this means more potential exposure for Bundesliga and La Liga matches? I think, at the very least, the two Clasicos could be on one of the main networks and do quite well.

boban
12-09-2011, 06:09 PM
Ultimately, I think Rogers and Bell will have more of a vested interest in building successful sports franchises than the OTPP.
This is nothing about sports and everything about business.
In essense there is no real new ownership. This is just musical chairs and everything on the MLSE stays the same (paraphrasing but both Bells and Rogers words).
Nothing changes on the pitch or ice.
Fans lose in this transaction.

denime
12-09-2011, 06:16 PM
From a soccer standpoint, this now means that TSN and Sportsnet have access to the non-TFC licenses previously owned by MLSE/GOLTV. So, I wonder if this means more potential exposure for Bundesliga and La Liga matches? I think, at the very least, the two Clasicos could be on one of the main networks and do quite well.

I don't know how exactly that works but there is GolTV USA and they have rights for Bundesliga and La Liga,wouldn't that be a problem for TSN(ESPN 30%) and Sportsnet to take over the GolTV Canada TV rights?

Waggy
12-09-2011, 06:32 PM
This is nothing about sports and everything about business.
In essense there is no real new ownership. This is just musical chairs and everything on the MLSE stays the same (paraphrasing but both Bells and Rogers words).
Nothing changes on the pitch or ice.
Fans lose in this transaction.

Question. If nothing changes then how do fans lose? If this raping is the same as the last raping then while we're still getting raped, it's not like our situation got worse

boban
12-09-2011, 06:38 PM
I don't mind sports teams being owned by large conglomerates these days - that just seems to be the way sports ownership is going
What a passive thing to say. In essence that seems to be the problem with society everywhere in general. Always excepting how things are done by big business as if things can't be done different.

boban
12-09-2011, 06:40 PM
Maybe the best thing about having the crappiest first gen stadium in MLS is that you get the first second generation stadium in MLS. Although, technically RBNY is already kind of there with their stadium that's well beyond everyone elses.
Ours is bottom end second gen, and NYRB is 3rd gen.
Chicago and Salt Lake are 2nd gen and look how much nicer theirs look.

boban
12-09-2011, 06:44 PM
Question. If nothing changes then how do fans lose? If this raping is the same as the last raping then while we're still getting raped, it's not like our situation got worse
Our situation isn't worse. It hasn't changed. We're still getting raped.
Unless of course you like taking that pipe up your ass. ;)

boban
12-09-2011, 06:48 PM
I don't know how exactly that works but there is GolTV USA and they have rights for Bundesliga and La Liga,wouldn't that be a problem for TSN(ESPN 30%) and Sportsnet to take over the GolTV Canada TV rights?
GolTV is not 100% owned by MLSE. There is somewhere between 20-25% ownership by GolTV international of GolTV Canada. Don't think those rights are going anywhere but GolTV.
An aside, if I am not mistaken ESPN has at max 25% ownership of TSN (CRTC regulations).

Kaz
12-09-2011, 06:51 PM
Hey I love BMO pretty much just as it is. Take down the east stands and make a mirror of the west side if you want to increase seating. Maybe find a way to put a roof at some point.

But honestly speaking as someone that suffers from fairly nasty anxiety and panic attacks, I would have a hard time in a packed house in Red Bull Arena. It's seriously bad for me. In October while I was in a heightened state where I can be set off easily I was still able to make a game as it's open and I've always been able to adjust for crowds without issue. In fact the hardest part of the commute is the street car ride if I don't time it right, even then I can walk to Union without issue if need be.

So for those who want some Euro style art piece, I hope you never get what you want because I couldn't go. I dunno if I'll be able to go to the Quarterfinal match if it's at Rogers, as much as I want it there for the numbers game against Montreals Big O performance.

It's better then most CFL stadiums out there so I'm not worried at all and I'm happy to call it our house.

Waggy
12-09-2011, 06:53 PM
Our situation isn't worse. It hasn't changed. We're still getting raped.
Unless of course you like taking that pipe up your ass. ;)

Lol, sadly I don't think that's an option in the 21st century. We're all going to get raped somehow. I dunno, I look at this similar to the Dome argument. At worst things don't change at best they get better. Why expect the worst off the bat? May as well treat the new owners like a new GM or a new player. We know the deal with all of them, but we give everyone a clean slate until they screw us somehow.

loconet
12-09-2011, 06:55 PM
this is the kind of news that will make you make a choice between jumping off a bridge or hanging?
But there should be more choices right like maybe shot to the head or electrocution perhaps.

Funny guy. Did you just ask for choices on a thread about Bell/Rogers? There isn't even a choice in suicide method when it comes to those two.

ManUtd4ever
12-09-2011, 06:57 PM
This is nothing about sports and everything about business.
In essense there is no real new ownership. This is just musical chairs and everything on the MLSE stays the same (paraphrasing but both Bells and Rogers words).
Nothing changes on the pitch or ice.
Fans lose in this transaction.

Unlike the OTPP, Rogers and Bell should theoretically have added motivation to build successful winning franchises, because that will have a direct impact on the collective revenues generated from Sportsnet and TSN. Winning teams equate to increased television ratings, which equate to increased profits.

Pookie
12-09-2011, 07:05 PM
On the plus side, TFC Content should become much more accessible than it is now. Hopefully, this means the end of SD broadcasts.

On the minus side, the companies aren't buying into MLSE without the goal of making a profit. Clearly, ticket prices will be unaffected.

On the maybe side, the new organization might be more interested in winning. With all teams under a cap and a profit motive still existing, I'm not sure that we will see that translate into anything dramatically different. Bell's 37.5% share is split between their own Pension Fund and the Business Side. There are still very conservative motives at play.

On the really interesting side, Larry Tannenbaum just became a major power player in this empire. While he only controls 25% of the shares, he is the "swing vote" in an awkward alliance with 2 major power players. With both Rogers and Bell controlling 37.5% this is like a minority government. If both major players are at odds with direction, Tannenbaum gives either side the power.


On the shites and giggles side, I'd like to bump a post that I made on Nov 27, 2011 when this deal was rumoured to be dead in the water. Since I can't say "I told you so" to my wife without snuggling privileges being removed, I need an outlet so this is it:

Before folks consider that the current ownership will last forever consider the following truths.

- OTPP were open to selling their shares
- A major media empire was interested in buying
- Selling MLSE would net OTPP a hefty profit
- Acquiring MLSE would net a media empire coveted content

While the deal is supposedly "dead" at this point those driving factors will pull both sides back to the table in the future.
http://redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?p=1410124#post1410124

jimiv
12-09-2011, 07:23 PM
Tear down BMO Field.

Build us a proper stadium, not a tin-can prop up.

Call if the Bell-Rogers-Sportsnet-Sportsnet Magazine-4G-Whatevertheheck Stadium, i don't care, as long as it looks intimidating, has a roof, and HAS PROPER CHIP BUTTYS! :D


I can hear it now...

Roger's/Bell announces that TFC will be moving to the Roger's Centre for the 2013 while rebuilding BMO field

...then 6 months later...

Roger's/Bell MLSE has decided to make the Roger's Centre TFC's permanent home.

:facepalm:

ginkster88
12-09-2011, 07:28 PM
I can hear it now...

Roger's/Bell announces that TFC will be moving to the Roger's Centre for the 2013 while rebuilding BMO field

...then 6 months later...

Roger's/Bell MLSE has decided to make the Roger's Centre TFC's permanent home.

:facepalm:

...

You realize the majority of the TFC season coincide with Jays and Argos, right?

Reason number one why what you just suggested will never happen.

jimiv
12-09-2011, 07:36 PM
...

You realize the majority of the TFC season coincide with Jays and Argos, right?

Reason number one why what you just suggested will never happen.


Yes, I realize that the seasons intermix, however money drives change and dumber things have happened. Roger's has in the past tried to find additional tenants...

kitchener-TFC
12-09-2011, 08:15 PM
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/blogs/insight/left-mlse-deal-telus-last-telecom-standing-180545619.html

Telus left alone? Shaw doesn't own anything either.
They may not have TFC, the Leafs, Raptors or Marlies, but they've got their name on Bixi bikes!
https://toronto.bixi.com/sponsors/partners

jazzy
12-09-2011, 08:17 PM
before we jump for joy is everyone missing the point that basically rogers has stated this week, they are back to limiting the jays yearly budget to 62 mill, stating in a round about way, the fans will have to show up before we invest big time in acquisitions. basically sealing the jays season to be also rans , again!.....no wild cards for them , will this be TFC's fate???.....so then not much will change then?

Beach_Red
12-09-2011, 10:08 PM
This says to me that the market doesn't think they paid too much (nor conversely does it seem like a deal)

Bell's CFO is a Bell lifer and has been in his current role for 10 years.

The Rogers CFO was the CEO of Call-Net (Sprint Canada), which Rogers bought a few years back.

I was thinking of Staffieri (anthony, I think) senior VP finance, something like that, just went from Bell to Rogers.

Pookie
12-09-2011, 10:28 PM
before we jump for joy is everyone missing the point that basically rogers has stated this week, they are back to limiting the jays yearly budget to 62 mill, stating in a round about way, the fans will have to show up before we invest big time in acquisitions. basically sealing the jays season to be also rans , again!.....no wild cards for them , will this be TFC's fate???.....so then not much will change then?

Not quite the same situation as MLB operates without a salary cap.

Not that the MLS Cap is a hard cap by any stretch. In any event, I am with you in principal. There is a profit motive here, perhaps the only motive since they are businesses.

Bell is splitting their share with their pension fund so there is a conservative aspect to this too.

I don't see ticket prices coming down in this "deal for the fans" nor do I see wild spending.

billyfly
12-09-2011, 10:40 PM
Larry is (was) friends with Ted. Does he side with Rogers in a dispute?

Pookie
12-09-2011, 10:47 PM
Larry is the big winner in all this. He has all the power in any inevitable dispute.

boban
12-09-2011, 11:06 PM
The more I think about this deal, and the more I read and listen to reports the more I dislike it.
Things aren't worse, but they are not better. It's basically status quo and just a business deal.
No talk of Championships, just platforms and watching the game.
Greeeaaat. You lost 5-3 on TV. Now I get to watch you lose 3-2 on my phone. :cryin:

TFC07
12-10-2011, 01:36 AM
But don't Bell own Montreal Canadiens as well?

As for TFC POV, this just means we get more access through media and play at Rogers Centre for free now.

Now the question is: would Rogers and Bell allow TFC to sign DP players in the future and invest in club (like academy)?

razor787
12-10-2011, 01:52 AM
I feel bad for Winter and Mariner. They came to the club, knowing what MLSE had planned. They felt comfortable with that plan, and came because of it. New ownership means that whatever they were told, has potentially changed over night. With them aiming towards the viewing of the teams, and not for actual performance, who knows whether or not we will have an academy this time next year, or be allowed to (re)sign DP's.

werewolf
12-10-2011, 02:10 AM
JxKMPdsyDEc

bump.

Shakes McQueen
12-10-2011, 07:03 AM
The more I think about this deal, and the more I read and listen to reports the more I dislike it.
Things aren't worse, but they are not better. It's basically status quo and just a business deal.
No talk of Championships, just platforms and watching the game.
Greeeaaat. You lost 5-3 on TV. Now I get to watch you lose 3-2 on my phone. :cryin:

It was a business deal - they bought a combined 75% stake of MLSE, not the Leafs, Raptors and TFC directly. And more than just that, they bought MLSE's portfolio of stadia, condos, television networks, and production companies. The press conference yesterday was for shareholders, not fans.

The voice of ownership to the fans will continue to be MLSE, as they represent the traditional functions a single owner would have.

Richard Peddie's imminent retirement will be far more impactful on us as fans, than who is financially behind MLSE, ultimately writing the cheques. Particularly if Tom Anselmi - a guy who has been pretty intimately involved in TFC on a day-to-day basis - becomes the new CEO, as many believe he will be.

Nothing changes on the fan's end with this news - but nothing was going to change, short of a multibillionaire oil tycoon buying all 100% of the corporation, dissolving it (or divesting all of the real estate assets), and running the sports teams like an old tyme-y single owner.

The one change I could see, is a renewed mandate of pushing Toronto FC on TSN and Sportsnet, as both try to maximize their share of the broadcasting rights - so that's a plus.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
12-10-2011, 07:09 AM
I feel bad for Winter and Mariner. They came to the club, knowing what MLSE had planned. They felt comfortable with that plan, and came because of it. New ownership means that whatever they were told, has potentially changed over night. With them aiming towards the viewing of the teams, and not for actual performance, who knows whether or not we will have an academy this time next year, or be allowed to (re)sign DP's.

Rogers and Bell aren't going to come in and take a wrecking ball to MLSE's long term plans. And they don't even take formal control of their share of MLSE until next summer.

And again - Tom Anselmi is considered the frontrunner to succeed Richard Peddie. Anselmi has been the MLSE executive most-involved in all of these TFC plans. Short of Bell/Rogers deciding to stick ther fingers directly into the affairs of the sports franchises (unlikely), those plans aren't going to change.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
12-10-2011, 07:12 AM
I'm emotionally unmoved by the news of this sale, not because I think it's bad news, or a bad move, but precisely because I know it really doesn't make much difference to me as a fan.

I think the two largest sports media corporations in Toronto owning all of Toronto's major sports franchises is pretty gross from an ethical and principled standpoint, but as a fan? No difference.

- Scott

Waggy
12-10-2011, 07:15 AM
Yes, I realize that the seasons intermix, however money drives change and dumber things have happened. Roger's has in the past tried to find additional tenants...

You mean like the money that MLSE spent to get BMO built, only to abandon it after 5 or 6 years for a 25 year old non soccer stadium that would only allow them 13 or 14 available days ALL summer?
Or the money they invested in a state of the art grass pitch?
Or the money they'd have to spend on field turf at the dome every 3-4 years min (because they can't put grass in there, but also can't have them playing on crap. it's an injury risk)?
Or the lawsuit they'd face from the city of toronto for breaking their long term contract at BMO?
Or the lawsuit they'd face from the Argos for terminating their long term contract and leaving them homeless? (They can't play at BMO without BMO being torn down and rebuilt with a field about 40% bigger, and totally new locker room facilities to accomodate a CFL team instead of a relatively small soccer team?)

Don't be ridiculous. TFC isn't going anywhere. The team was sold, it doesn't mean MLSE's balance sheets reset. They still are obligated to their commitments. It's not like the new owners come in and go "Ya, we just paid 1.3 billion for a hockey/basketball/soccer team, a hockey/basketball arena and a soccer field. Hey! How about we close the soccer field since the previous owner paid for that like 3 years ago and move them to another stadium that's not designed for it! That's BRILLIANT! We'll make money hand over fist!" "... um, how?" "Don't worry about it" Why don't they move the Raptors back to Skydome? Then the ACC is all for the leafs! And the Raptors get to play in their historic grounds! Where's that picard facepalmy thing

Huyton
12-10-2011, 07:17 AM
I'm hoping for an update to the Fake Tom Anselmi diary.

Shakes McQueen
12-10-2011, 07:21 AM
Don't be stupid. TFC isn't going anywhere.

His concerns may be a bit naive of the facts, but calliing him stupid isn't really necessary...

- Scott

Waggy
12-10-2011, 07:24 AM
His concerns may be a bit naive of the facts, but calliing him stupid isn't really necessary...

- Scott

Ya I expanded on it. I'm not calling him stupid, just the idea that TFC would move from a 5 year old soccer stadium to a 23 year old football/baseball stadium is stupid, and it's not just him, it's allll over these boards. I don't get people sometimes. But sorry if it looked that way, will fix it

jaahuuu
12-10-2011, 08:00 AM
...

You realize the majority of the TFC season coincide with Jays and Argos, right?

Reason number one why what you just suggested will never happen.

I agree that it won't happen, but in LA the Lakers, Clippers and Kings all share the same building.

Ricky_Portugal
12-10-2011, 08:43 AM
ya but the clippers suck lol so they dont count

boban
12-10-2011, 09:56 AM
But don't Bell own Montreal Canadiens as well?

As for TFC POV, this just means we get more access through media and play at Rogers Centre for free now.

Now the question is: would Rogers and Bell allow TFC to sign DP players in the future and invest in club (like academy)?
Throughout the presser, and in interviews both Rogers and Bell said its business as usual. This is not about championships, its about business and making sure you see the teams at every turn.

boban
12-10-2011, 09:58 AM
I feel bad for Winter and Mariner. They came to the club, knowing what MLSE had planned. They felt comfortable with that plan, and came because of it. New ownership means that whatever they were told, has potentially changed over night. With them aiming towards the viewing of the teams, and not for actual performance, who knows whether or not we will have an academy this time next year, or be allowed to (re)sign DP's.
Where in God's green earth was it in the previous (or still current) MLSE makeup about on field performance? Nothing has changed. Continue on with paying high prices for sub par product. You only get to watch them on your phone now.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:02 AM
It was a business deal - they bought a combined 75% stake of MLSE, not the Leafs, Raptors and TFC directly. And more than just that, they bought MLSE's portfolio of stadia, condos, television networks, and production companies. The press conference yesterday was for shareholders, not fans.
And you are arguing with me about ..????


The voice of ownership to the fans will continue to be MLSE, as they represent the traditional functions a single owner would have.
They do???? Alot of people would argue with you on that. It's still a faceless ownership. With a single owner it is not.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:06 AM
You mean like the money that MLSE spent to get BMO built, only to abandon it after 5 or 6 years for a 25 year old non soccer stadium that would only allow them 13 or 14 available days ALL summer?
Or the money they invested in a state of the art grass pitch?
Or the money they'd have to spend on field turf at the dome every 3-4 years min (because they can't put grass in there, but also can't have them playing on crap. it's an injury risk)?
Or the lawsuit they'd face from the city of toronto for breaking their long term contract at BMO?
Or the lawsuit they'd face from the Argos for terminating their long term contract and leaving them homeless? (They can't play at BMO without BMO being torn down and rebuilt with a field about 40% bigger, and totally new locker room facilities to accomodate a CFL team instead of a relatively small soccer team?)

Don't be ridiculous. TFC isn't going anywhere. The team was sold, it doesn't mean MLSE's balance sheets reset. They still are obligated to their commitments. It's not like the new owners come in and go "Ya, we just paid 1.3 billion for a hockey/basketball/soccer team, a hockey/basketball arena and a soccer field. Hey! How about we close the soccer field since the previous owner paid for that like 3 years ago and move them to another stadium that's not designed for it! That's BRILLIANT! We'll make money hand over fist!" "... um, how?" "Don't worry about it" Why don't they move the Raptors back to Skydome? Then the ACC is all for the leafs! And the Raptors get to play in their historic grounds! Where's that picard facepalmy thing
I agree with retty much everything you said, but they didn't buy a soccer field, the city owns that.

ManUtd4ever
12-10-2011, 10:07 AM
Throughout the presser, and in interviews both Rogers and Bell said its business as usual. This is not about championships, its about business and making sure you see the teams at every turn.

For what it's worth, Larry Tanenbaum made a point of stressing that the ultimate goal was to bring a Stanley Cup, NBA Championship, and a MLS Cup to Toronto. At the very least, I'm confident that MLSE will continue to allocate sufficient financial resources to the Leafs, Raptors, and TFC in an effort to build clubs that can eventually be successful on the ice/court/pitch. The rest is up to the respective management teams currently in place.

Shakes McQueen
12-10-2011, 10:14 AM
The do???? Alot of people would argue with you on that. It's stil la faceless owership. With a single owner it is not.

Why would they argue that? It's not a judgment on the quality of their stewardship, or it's "faceless-ness" - it's merely an acknowledgement that they fulfill the function of day-to-day ownership duties. They hire the GM. They approve expenditures. They negotiate plans for new stadiums and renovations. They even cut the paychecks in the name of the moneyed interests backing them.

They are the people charged by the stakeholders, with running the day-to-day of their investment. On the fan level, they are the face of ownership. That's not an opinion - it's a fact. Whether you think they do it well, or even competently, is a matter of opinion.


And you are arguing with me about ..????

I was taking on the acerbic tone in your post when you said that, as though we should hold the fact that this was a business deal in a negative light. And I know the tone of your posts well enough to know this was the intention.

- Scott

Whoop
12-10-2011, 10:19 AM
Outdoor (roof open) game for Leafs 100th Anniversary will now be at Skydome.

I thought there were issues with open/closing roof on a winter day?

Outdoor game will be at BMO.

ensco
12-10-2011, 10:22 AM
The amount of debt being put on MLSE is not receiving sufficient attention....this won't be, can't be, "business as usual".

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:23 AM
bump.

I can only assume this is for me...lol

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:24 AM
I thought there were issues with open/closing roof on a winter day?

Outdoor game will be at BMO.


I know. I am just wondering how the Leafs figure out the seating capacity thing.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:26 AM
Why would they argue that? It's not a judgment on the quality of their stewardship, or it's "faceless-ness" - it's merely an acknowledgement that they fulfill the function of day-to-day ownership duties. They hire the GM. They approve expenditures. They negotiate plans for new stadiums and renovations. They even cut the paychecks in the name of the moneyed interests backing them.
Should have qualified it a bit more clearly.



I was taking on the acerbic tone in your post when you said that, as though we should hold the fact that this was a business deal in a negative light. And I know the tone of your posts well enough to know this was the intention.

- Scott
You assume a lot.

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:28 AM
Lots of layers in this story.

I wonder how the NHL feels. I don't remember seeing any comments yet.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:31 AM
For what it's worth, Larry Tanenbaum made a point of stressing that the ultimate goal was to bring a Stanley Cup, NBA Championship, and a MLS Cup to Toronto. At the very least, I'm confident that MLSE will continue to allocate sufficient financial resources to the Leafs, Raptors, and TFC in an effort to build clubs that can eventually be successful on the ice/court/pitch. The rest is up to the respective management teams currently in place.
I was listening to the presser on radio. Nobody talked anything about winning or championships until 40 minutes into it. And even then it was when someone specifically asked for a comment on it.
Even then the comment wasn't abut Stanley Cup or MLS Cup, just a generic comment on winning.

We'll see in 6 months time if they change their visions/values page and mission statement. Want to take bets on it?

Beach_Red
12-10-2011, 10:32 AM
The amount of debt being put on MLSE is not receiving sufficient attention....this won't be, can't be, "business as usual".

Just like Bell's take-over of CTV was called business as usual but in a year all they've done is reduce staff and talk to the CRTC about ways to reduce the amount of investment they need to make in Canadian shows. And, of course, they're claiming to have no money.

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:34 AM
I was listening to the presser on radio. Nobody talked anything about winning or championships until 40 minutes into it. And even then it was when someone specifically asked for a comment on it.
Even then the comment wasn't abut Stanley Cup or MLS Cup, just a generic comment on winning.

We'll see in 6 months time if they change their visions/values page and mission statement. Want to take bets on it?

Nadir said something about Stanley cup in 5 years.


Grrrrrrreaaattttttt

Whoop
12-10-2011, 10:37 AM
Lots of layers in this story.

I wonder how the NHL feels. I don't remember seeing any comments yet.

They can't comment until Bell divests itself of it's 18% ownership of the Canadiens.

Whoop
12-10-2011, 10:38 AM
I know. I am just wondering how the Leafs figure out the seating capacity thing.

It will be 20k, unless the stadium expands.

With it only be 20k they will be able to charge a premium for tickets as it will be a hot ticket item.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:38 AM
Nadir said something about Stanley cup in 5 years.


Grrrrrrreaaattttttt
I was working so I didn't hear the whole thing. But his opening statement were nothing about winning, just business. That is a point thats lost by people here.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:40 AM
It will be 20k, unless the stadium expands.

With it only be 20k they will be able to charge a premium for tickets as it will be a hot ticket item.
I hear that its going to be 25K. It seats 22K now. They'll add 3K on the field.

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:40 AM
It will be 20k, unless the stadium expands.

With it only be 20k they will be able to charge a premium for tickets as it will be a hot ticket item.


People scoffed at this when I first said that 20,000 k was most likely to happen and they would just market it as "cozy" and "intimate".

billyfly
12-10-2011, 10:43 AM
This was a business transaction of course.

The open question is will this group be more motivated (whatever that means) to try and win since I think we can all agree that winning means $$$.

If not it will be:

SHhrZgojY1Q

Whoop
12-10-2011, 10:43 AM
I hear that its going to be 25K. It seats 22K now. They'll add 3K on the field.

Yeah I figured 25, just being conservative.

They'll still end up charging $1000+ per ticket.

Whoop
12-10-2011, 10:45 AM
People scoffed at this when I first said that 20,000 k was most likely to happen and they would just market it as "cozy" and "intimate".

Who scoffed? It's not like BMO is a 50k stadium and they could still do it at the Dome with the roof closed.

There was talk of getting some more temporary seating at BMO, which could still happen though logistically I don't know how.

Either way, I won't be going to an outdoor game so I don't really care.

boban
12-10-2011, 10:57 AM
This was a business transaction of course.

The open question is will this group be more motivated (whatever that means) to try and win since I think we can all agree that winning means $$$.

True, but if that's the case why don't the teachers make it more about winning? Don't think they are averse to making money.

ManUtd4ever
12-10-2011, 11:05 AM
True, but if that's the case why don't the teachers make it more about winning? Don't think they are averse to making money.

There are two significant reasons why Rogers and Bell stand to benefit more than the OTPP from a financial perpsective: Sportsnet and TSN.

Furthermore, I'm sure all the new related content to be introduced by Rogers and Bell for IPhone/Blackberry apps will be far more popular if the teams are winning.

boban
12-10-2011, 11:07 AM
There are two significant reasons why Rogers and Bell stand to benefit more than the OTPP from a financial perpsective: Sportsnet and TSN.

Furthermore, I'm sure all the new related content to be introduced by Rogers and Bell for IPhone/Blackberry apps will be far more popular if the teams are winning.
Thank you Mr. Cope.