So, with all these NHL owners in trouble with the law, why does the league consider Jim Balsillie such a risk?

Question

Balsillie — the guy who brought the world the Blackberry and who wanted to buy Pittsburgh or the Predators — would seem to be the model for what NHL owners should be, unlike Bettman's budddies who are up on charges, who have pled guilty to charges, or who have been carted off to jail in recent years. More details at the site below.

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/Hockey/article/436550

Answer 1

I have emotional ties to Jim. He and his partner are alumni of my University and have returned a great deal to the school.

Jim is not a loose cannon as has been reported. He is an entrepreneur and visionary who sees a problem and sets out to solve it. Southern Ontario is being deprived of the right to watch professional hockey. Toronto has a franchise which has held the monopoly on the product since the amalgamation of the NHL and WHA. Teams are losing money all over the USA. Jim saw a chance to do what he does best. He solves problems.

He has money. He offered to buy an NHL team that was going broke and didn't have a place to play. The "old boys club" (read NHL owners) found a way to use his money to scare Pittsburgh into solving their problem. (This was much in the same way Toronto was used in 1970 to solve the SF Giants problems with their stadium).

Jim saw that there were locations with problems greater than Pitytsburgh. He made an offer for Nashville. Signed an agreement with the Copps for a lease. Nashville then pulled an about face and reneged on part of their conditions. Leopold then sold the team for $30 Million less to a local consortium. Miraculously he was then able to purchase the Wild (which wasn't even for sale). The problem is that the purchasers of the Preds didn't have enough money so an additional investor was found with $25 Million. The only problem was he didn't have the $25 Million. So Leopold and Anschultz (LA Kings Owner) lent him the money. This was contrary to NHL rules. But Batman who is on the lookout for bad guys like Balsillie couldn't see that that is a problem.

Does the NHL have rules regarding moving a franchise to Hamilton, Kitchener or London. No they don't because any such rule is illegal in court. The decision LITY cites is not a legal decision but an interpretation of a bylaw. The author of that article has been quoted as saying he would like to see the court make a ruling. As long as the old boys decide who shall own the teams and bend the rules. the bush league will remain.

Answer 2

He wants to move a team to Canada. As to the Penguins they aren't on the ropes with the Salary Cap and Revenue Sharing. They were for sale because the City and State refused to help them get a new Arena and the Civic/Mellon Arena just wasn't going to work.

Answer 3

They don't want teams moving unless they absolutely have too. Balsillie wants to move any team he gets his hands on, regardless of the history or fan support. So if a team can no longer be supported, say the Nashville owners give it up, then he gets a call. But the NHL does not want him moving a team with no consideration to stability or fans of the team.

Answer 4

The NHL has no problem with Jim Balsillie.

1.  In the Pittsburgh case, the owners approved the sale to Balsillie..............Mario Lemieux then had several amendments made to the sale agreement (as was his right) that Balsillie balked at.

2.  In the Nashville case, Balsillie did NOT follow through on his promises and missed a financial payment due to Leipold.  All this was brought out in an investigation into NHL practices by the Canadian Competition Bureau (who were convinced that Balsillie was being unfairly treated) which determined that Balsillie was the one at fault (over 240 documents/emails where the NHL supported Balsillies purchase, and several where Balsillie kept putting off payment, and making false statements).

Balsillie would be far from a 'model' owner.  This is a man who sent a legal document to the NHL stating he would not move the Predators for 3 years and he was not behind the season ticket sales in Hamilton.  Court documents provided by TicketMaster and the City of Hamilton to the Canadian Competition Bureau proved that Balsillie lied.  Balsillie's lawyer 'leaked' emails from Jeremy Jacobs, Harley Hotchkiss, and the NHL's league offices which painted the NHL as anti-Balsillie.  Again, full transcripts of the emails as provided by the NHL and RIM to the Canadian Competition Bureau showed that Balsillie had selectively edited the emails and the actual story was quite the opposite.

In the end, the Canadian Competition Bureau found that the NHL was not at fault in their negotiations with Balsillie, and that on numerous ocassions, Balsillie was less than forthright and truthful about what was going on.

Globe and Mail article on the CCB siding with the NHL from March 31, 2008 follows

http://ago.mobile.globeandmail.com/gener...

Answer 5

First, Balsillie won't play by Bettman's "rules"... whatever the heck they are.

Second... and more important... Balsillie wants to put a team in Canada, where more teams belong in the NHL.  Bettman is dead set against it because his vision is for the NHL to be successful in the US, even in markets that look really awful for hockey right now, such as Nashville, south Florida, Phoenix and a couple others.  Allowing Balsillie to put a team in Canada, especially by moving an existing team out of the US, flies in the face of Bettman's stated desires and goals as the NHL commissioner, and Bettman won't put up with that.

Answer 6

The reason is that Balsillie is considered too much of a loose canon to fit in with the "good ol' boys" network.  While the other guys may have legal issues, they keep their mouths in check for the most part and stick with the program.

The bags and bags of money statement might be up in the air.  He was talking about moving to Hamilton which creates problems with infringing on the territory of the Maple Leafs and possibly Buffalo or Detroit.  Even junior teams have territorial rights and teams guard them closely.  Quebec and Winnipeg have proven that they are not able to support teams.  LITY posted this originally, including numbers, but there was a study done in Winnipeg which proved that a team would not work in the city.  In order for the team to earn any profit, it would need to operate at full capacity for every game with ticket prices that would be too outrageous given the population and economy in the city.

EDIT: The Penguins were on the verge of bankruptcy as recently as a few years ago.  The reason Mario Lemieux became the owner of the team is because the previous owner did not have the money necessary to pay Lemieux what he was owed so he more or less just gave him the team in lieu of paying what was owed.  They are in the oldest building in the league and the ownership did not have the money to purchase a new arena on their own.  Yes, they used moving as a tool in their negotiations to get the city/state involved in building a new one but the Penguins are not a good example of ownership with bottomless pockets holding a city hostage for an arena.

Answer 7

the bastille was a prison that was broken into by the french citizens. it was a major cause of the french revolution.

Answer 8

Their worried Balsillie move a team to a place where they'd financially rot.

Answer 9

It is because he wants to put another team in Canada. I only agree with Bettman blocking this because he wanted to put it in Hamilton which is a problem because it makes my team's division tougher to win and it makes another rival for my team which I do not need. If he wanted to put it in Quebec City or Winnipeg, I would agree with that.