Sabres ticket sales still pretty dismal

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Directly from one of the Lawyers who worked on the sale. There is a non movement clause for the team in the agreement. Both OSP and the NHL stipulated it. 
 

The team is not going anywhere.

 

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the problem is, if they file for bankruptcy then clauses like that can readily be overcome.  And it is surprisingly easy to file for bankruptcy in a business like this.

[PASabreFan]

Instant expert analysis on any topic. It is quite remarkable indeed. Not even meant to be a dig. We get to see into an incredible mind on the near-daily.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the problem is, if they file for bankruptcy then clauses like that can readily be overcome.  And it is surprisingly easy to file for bankruptcy in a business like this.

When one files for bankruptcy the business goes through the bankruptcy court system. The owner would have no interest in that unless it was a last option. It would tie him up longer with the final disposition becoming more of a question. I just don't see it. 

 

[PASabreFan]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Kane has been in the league for a long time. Without question, he has been a marquee player for a long time. He's simply not that caliber of player any longer. I'm not dismissing him as a player or having a contributing role for certain teams. However, I doubt it will be here. 

The best way to increase attendance is to start off well. It isn't a surprise to people in the hockey business why the Sabres will be one of the most showcased teams on national TV on this season. The increase in interest happened in our arena at the end of last season. I'm confident that same momentum will carry over this year. If you are looking for players to help the cause. I recommend that you look inside the organization instead of outside of it. 

I can almost guarantee you that if the Sabres are headed for a Cup, some kiddos will be sacrificed along the way and some major pieces will arrive from "outside" the SabreDome.

[PASabreFan]

I was trying to be nice. I have studied Taro for years. Unbeknownst to him, hair samples were procured at one of the meetups. The DNA analysis was quite interesting.

[Taro T]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When one files for bankruptcy the business goes through the bankruptcy court system. The owner would have no interest in that unless it was a last option. It would tie him up longer with the final disposition becoming more of a question. I just don't see it. 

 

Yes it does.  And that is where a potential owner that wanted the team moved out of town would need the current owner at that time to take them.  It would, by definition, be that new owner's only option.  Because there are literally covenants in the purchase agreement between Golisano and Pegula that require Pegula to keep the team in Buffalo and only sell to someone that would keep the team in Buffalo.

Personally, don't see the team ever moving.  But, never say never.

[PromoTheRobot]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

When Golisano sold the team to Pegula he noted in the news conference that the no-move clause existed. It certainly applies while Pegula is the owner. If Terry P. sells the team (don't see that happening any time soon) that is another matter. The issue here is not what the league will allow or not; the issue is what does the contract stipulation state. The matter revolves around the contract and law. 

You just nailed the point: next owner might but have any such clause.

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

Kane has been in the league for a long time. Without question, he has been a marquee player for a long time. He's simply not that caliber of player any longer. I'm not dismissing him as a player or having a contributing role for certain teams. However, I doubt it will be here. 

The best way to increase attendance is to start off well. It isn't a surprise to people in the hockey business why the Sabres will be one of the most showcased teams on national TV on this season. The increase in interest happened in our arena at the end of last season. I'm confident that same momentum will carry over this year. If you are looking for players to help the cause. I recommend that you look inside the organization instead of outside of it. 

I think we all agree that winning is the key. Fast start and competitive play, no question that brings back fans. 

The thing I'm on about with Kane though helps rocket things to the next level. You're all talking about Kane's ability on ice but you're missing the marketing point. He would have to buy in of course but it's all about local boy comes home. You get him and Tuch up there, add a few alumni, get them out front as poster boys, in the community, cross promotions with the chicken wing companies or whoever is big in Buffalo these days. It's Sabres front and center as THE thing in Buffalo again. It's a whole thing I can see in my mind. If I was working there I am 100% sure I could turn that signing into a genius marketing campaign that would turn the page on the last decade. Anyway,

I will leave it there. Right now I see the whole thing hanging on a thin thread. It could be the beginning of a new era, but I also see a path where it all crashes down again. We shall see what happens. Fingers crossed. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

18 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

After all these years you don't know me very well. If all I was worried about was losing money why would I have stayed a STH through the 12 year crapfest? 

My worry isn't selling my tickets, it's about ensuring the Sabres stay in Buffalo. I get the sense that several of you take great pleasure in seeing this team do poorly at the box office, but how would you feel if the Sabres left town? Won't happen, you say? I never take anything for granted with local teams. This franchise is too valuable elsewhere. And if we can't be bothered to buy NHL tickets for $33, who will shed a tear over the Houston or Atlanta Sabres?

 

He was joking you hoser.

[Pimlach]

20 hours ago, sabremike said:

Right now we are the least successful team in the over 100 year history of the NHL with owners who squandered away more goodwill than almost any in the history of pro sports. Things are looking up but the insane levels of damage inflicted is going to take time to repair.

Least successful in the past 12 years is true.   Longest playoff drought in league history is true. 

Prior to Pegula, the Sabres had the fourth highest winning percentage from the start of their existence.  So least successful team in the history of the NHL - NO!  

[Brawndo]

4 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

I'll never believe such a clause could be enforced in perpetuity. The league would never allow it 

 

3 hours ago, Taro T said:

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the problem is, if they file for bankruptcy then clauses like that can readily be overcome.  And it is surprisingly easy to file for bankruptcy in a business like this.

 

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

Yes it does.  And that is where a potential owner that wanted the team moved out of town would need the current owner at that time to take them.  It would, by definition, be that new owner's only option.  Because there are literally covenants in the purchase agreement between Golisano and Pegula that require Pegula to keep the team in Buffalo and only sell to someone that would keep the team in Buffalo.

Personally, don't see the team ever moving.  But, never say never.

 

50 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

You just nailed the point: next owner might but have any such clause.

There have been Three NHL Teams which have filed for bankruptcy since 1999, The Penguins, Sabres and Senators and all three remained in their original market. 
 

The Sabres sale was valued at 92 Million, but the actual cash paid for the team was 15 Million, despite higher offers for the organization.
There were multiple bidders for the Ottawa Senators, many well over 100 million, but the team was ultimately sold to Eugene Melnyk for 93 million. 
 

Why were the lower bids accepted? Because the NHL stipulated that neither team could be moved as part of the sale, Golisiano and Melnyk were the two that agreed to that provision, with Melnyk being the only potential bidder for the Sens to do so. 
This same way they stipulated the Sabres cannot relocated in the sale to Pegula. 
The League has control over where franchises are located and is saving the potential cities for expansion and the Billions of dollars that comes with it.
This is the reason why the Coyotes have gotten so many opportunities to find a new home, the league hates the idea of relocation. 
The Jets were moved because of ownership issues in Atlanta namely no one wanted to buy the team and keep it there

Hence the NHL is looking to put a team back in Atlanta and Arizona is rumored to be at the top of the expansion list (per Jeff Marek) in the event the Coyotes move. 
 

 

 

 

[LGR4GM]

I'd have to think that if Ryan Reynolds and his group were interested in Ottawa, than if Buffalo went up for sale they would be interested. 

There's value in established brands and in the next decade, city you play in will matter less than brand. Just my opinion. 

[PromoTheRobot]

27 minutes ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

He was joking you hoser.

Didn't come off that way.

[PromoTheRobot]

41 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

 

 

There have been Three NHL Teams which have filed for bankruptcy since 1999, The Penguins, Sabres and Senators and all three remained in their original market. 
 

The Sabres sale was valued at 92 Million, but the actual cash paid for the team was 15 Million, despite higher offers for the organization.
There were multiple bidders for the Ottawa Senators, many well over 100 million, but the team was ultimately sold to Eugene Melnyk for 93 million. 
 

Why were the lower bids accepted? Because the NHL stipulated that neither team could be moved as part of the sale, Golisiano and Melnyk were the two that agreed to that provision, with Melnyk being the only potential bidder for the Sens to do so. 
This same way they stipulated the Sabres cannot relocated in the sale to Pegula. 
The League has control over where franchises are located and is saving the potential cities for expansion and the Billions of dollars that comes with it.
This is the reason why the Coyotes have gotten so many opportunities to find a new home, the league hates the idea of relocation. 
The Jets were moved because of ownership issues in Atlanta namely no one wanted to buy the team and keep it there

Hence the NHL is looking to put a team back in Atlanta and Arizona is rumored to be at the top of the expansion list (per Jeff Marek) in the event the Coyotes move. 
 

 

 

 

Sone very good points.

[PromoTheRobot]

55 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

 

 

There have been Three NHL Teams which have filed for bankruptcy since 1999, The Penguins, Sabres and Senators and all three remained in their original market. 
 

The Sabres sale was valued at 92 Million, but the actual cash paid for the team was 15 Million, despite higher offers for the organization.
There were multiple bidders for the Ottawa Senators, many well over 100 million, but the team was ultimately sold to Eugene Melnyk for 93 million. 
 

Why were the lower bids accepted? Because the NHL stipulated that neither team could be moved as part of the sale, Golisiano and Melnyk were the two that agreed to that provision, with Melnyk being the only potential bidder for the Sens to do so. 
This same way they stipulated the Sabres cannot relocated in the sale to Pegula. 
The League has control over where franchises are located and is saving the potential cities for expansion and the Billions of dollars that comes with it.
This is the reason why the Coyotes have gotten so many opportunities to find a new home, the league hates the idea of relocation. 
The Jets were moved because of ownership issues in Atlanta namely no one wanted to buy the team and keep it there

Hence the NHL is looking to put a team back in Atlanta and Arizona is rumored to be at the top of the expansion list (per Jeff Marek) in the event the Coyotes move. 
 

 

 

 

I didn't consider the biggest reason why Bettman would not allow the Sabres or any team to move to Houston, Atlanta or Salt Lake City: expansion fees.

[Curt]

20 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Why? It's not like we're talking an 8 year deal. Just a season or two to demonstrate that the tide has turned. You get the homeboy speaking about how great it is we become a destination not a place to avoid. Regardless of the practicalities, symbols and images do matter. 

Do many people in Buffalo actually like Patrick Kane a lot?  Honest question.

I mostly see people from the area dragging him because he has publicly represented the area pretty poorly throughout his career.

[klos1963]

On 9/29/2023 at 1:16 PM, Night Train said:

Say HELLO to this great economy. Tickets aren't cheap. 

When economies are bad, prices go down.

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

 

 

 

There have been Three NHL Teams which have filed for bankruptcy since 1999, The Penguins, Sabres and Senators and all three remained in their original market. 
 

The Sabres sale was valued at 92 Million, but the actual cash paid for the team was 15 Million, despite higher offers for the organization.
There were multiple bidders for the Ottawa Senators, many well over 100 million, but the team was ultimately sold to Eugene Melnyk for 93 million. 
 

Why were the lower bids accepted? Because the NHL stipulated that neither team could be moved as part of the sale, Golisiano and Melnyk were the two that agreed to that provision, with Melnyk being the only potential bidder for the Sens to do so. 
This same way they stipulated the Sabres cannot relocated in the sale to Pegula. 
The League has control over where franchises are located and is saving the potential cities for expansion and the Billions of dollars that comes with it.
This is the reason why the Coyotes have gotten so many opportunities to find a new home, the league hates the idea of relocation. 
The Jets were moved because of ownership issues in Atlanta namely no one wanted to buy the team and keep it there

Hence the NHL is looking to put a team back in Atlanta and Arizona is rumored to be at the top of the expansion list (per Jeff Marek) in the event the Coyotes move. 
 

 

 

 

And the league fought hard to keep Balsillie from buying the Pens because they wanted nothing to do with eventually ending up with a team in Windsor.  But as the NFL found out so many years ago when they lost their lawsuit to Al Davis, they can only work against teams moving so much.  The league doesn't own the team, the actual owner does.

Yes, the league under Bettman doesn't want teams moving and has fought very valiently against moves since Winnipeg lost the Jets.  But even though they oppose moves, Atlanta still lost the Thrashers.

And yes, the Pegulas agreed to a clause to both not move the team and to not sell to an ownership group that would move it.  But if Pegula (or a future owner) were to declare bankruptcy it would be up to a bankruptcy judge to determine whether to keep that clause in effect and if keeping it means the creditors can't be made whole but by getting rid of it they can be that clause is likely toast.

Again, personally don't see the Sabres ever leaving Buffalo.  Buffalo is arguably the best hockey market in the states.  And fully expect the league would once again try hard to find a buyer that would keep the team in Buffalo should conditions like we saw back in '02 ever recur.  Can't come up with a reasonably likely set of conditions that will make it inevitable that the Sabres do move.  But conditions can change and these past few years give ample examples of why people should never say never.

[Marvin]

Who is this Patrick Kane guy?  Zac Benson could be a better sales pitch immediately.

[sabremike]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Least successful in the past 12 years is true.   Longest playoff drought in league history is true. 

Prior to Pegula, the Sabres had the fourth highest winning percentage from the start of their existence.  So least successful team in the history of the NHL - NO!  

Please read my post clarifying what I meant earlier in the thread.

[MBD]

9 hours ago, JohnC said:

When Golisano sold the team to Pegula he noted in the news conference that the no-move clause existed. It certainly applies while Pegula is the owner. If Terry P. sells the team (don't see that happening any time soon) that is another matter. The issue here is not what the league will allow or not; the issue is what does the contract stipulation state. The matter revolves around the contract and law. 

Golisano demanded the NMC, but Terry had no intention of moving the team anyway.  He can demand a NMC for the next owner if he so chooses.  And I believe he would.

8 hours ago, Taro T said:

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the problem is, if they file for bankruptcy then clauses like that can readily be overcome.  And it is surprisingly easy to file for bankruptcy in a business like this.

Who would be filing for bankruptcy? 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, MBD said:

Golisano demanded the NMC, but Terry had no intention of moving the team anyway.  He can demand a NMC for the next owner if he so chooses.  And I believe he would.

Who would be filing for bankruptcy? 

Whomever owns the team at the time if they want to be able to sell to an owner that would move the team.  Wouldn't be terribly difficult to do were one determined.

[MBD]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

Whomever owns the team at the time if they want to be able to sell to an owner that would move the team.  Wouldn't be terribly difficult to do were one determined.

Terry can sell the team to whomever he wants.  He doesn't need to, nor would he ever, declare bankruptcy just to sell it to someone who will move the team.

[Brawndo]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

And the league fought hard to keep Balsillie from buying the Pens because they wanted nothing to do with eventually ending up with a team in Windsor.  But as the NFL found out so many years ago when they lost their lawsuit to Al Davis, they can only work against teams moving so much.  The league doesn't own the team, the actual owner does.

Yes, the league under Bettman doesn't want teams moving and has fought very valiently against moves since Winnipeg lost the Jets.  But even though they oppose moves, Atlanta still lost the Thrashers.

And yes, the Pegulas agreed to a clause to both not move the team and to not sell to an ownership group that would move it.  But if Pegula (or a future owner) were to declare bankruptcy it would be up to a bankruptcy judge to determine whether to keep that clause in effect and if keeping it means the creditors can't be made whole but by getting rid of it they can be that clause is likely toast.

Again, personally don't see the Sabres ever leaving Buffalo.  Buffalo is arguably the best hockey market in the states.  And fully expect the league would once again try hard to find a buyer that would keep the team in Buffalo should conditions like we saw back in '02 ever recur.  Can't come up with a reasonably likely set of conditions that will make it inevitable that the Sabres do move.  But conditions can change and these past few years give ample examples of why people should never say never.

Even if a judge says that the clause is voided,  Any new owner still requires still an approval from the Board of Governors if the new owner’s plans do not align with the NHL’s they will not be approved 

IIRC, the NHL, Mario and Golisano all worked closely with the bankruptcy courts to ensure a smooth transition. 

Edited September 30, 2023 by Brawndo

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, MBD said:

Terry can sell the team to whomever he wants.  He doesn't need to, nor would he ever, declare bankruptcy just to sell it to someone who will move the team.

Didn't say it necessarily would be the Pegulas as the owners that are looking to declare bankruptcy to remove that condition from the earlier sale.  

And, considering the caveat that was in the sale agreement between Golisano and Pegula, you are mistaken about whether Pegula would have to have the Sabres declare bankruptcy to sell to an owner that wanted to move the team.