sam's notes

notes on government, sports and popular culture

Friday, March 04, 2005

 
I've thought about hockey probably twice this winter. I haven't missed it. Still, I realize a lot of people wouldn't think much of a summer without baseball, while I would be severly depressed. But this N.Y. Times article on the bid to buy all 30 NHL franchises caught my eye.

On the face of it, such a transaction would be next to impossible to pull off. Many acknowledged this, among them an investment banker who described the bid as "creative, bold and aggressive," but still had "so many hurdles to overcome."

Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs simply said his team wasn't for sale.

But Hurricanes owner Peter Karmanos expressed "passing interest and morbid curiosity."

As for leverage in negotiating with the players' union, "even under the unlikely prospect of wholesale new ownership, the NHL would not be able to disregard the union or impose a new collective bargaining agreement with the same difficulty current ownership faces."

But what does the whole thing mean, given the situation in which the NHL finds itself? Was the league listening because it hoped more than a few owners would express serious interest? How many owners in warm-weather climates (such as North Carolina) want to get out while they can possibly can?


Archives

June 2004   July 2004   August 2004   September 2004   October 2004   November 2004   December 2004   January 2005   February 2005   March 2005   April 2005   May 2005   June 2005   July 2005   August 2005   September 2005   October 2005   November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?