tachaudh Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 According to TSN, the Flames are increasing their investment in the Stamps ownership. They also have significant shares in the Hitmen and Roughnecks. Great business ideas, but are we starting to look more like MLSE? What do these types of moves signify? We're sitting here pitching out ideas of what should happen to this team in order to make it more competitive, but do our owners seriously care whether the Flames do well or not? Are they just a group of corporate hawks? They're raking in tons of money and turning the sports industry in this city into a monopoly. They seem to be MUCH more assertive when it comes to business ideas as opposed to the actual on ice product. This city is swimming in money. Discretional income is substantially higher now than it was in the late 90s. Moreover, the way the sport is marketed now, even if your team sucks, your going to at least go to see the other team's stars. That's not how it used to be back when Gretzky would show up with the Rangers and we'd still have 14,000 in the stands. I still remember going to a Flyers game in 1998, with Lindros being in his prime, Leclair, I mean the team was stacked just coming off a Stanley Cup run. It would be like if The Penguins came in to town today. You wouldn't be be able to find a ticket, and the nosebleeds on stubhub would be in the triple digit range. It was an HNIC game and it wasn't even a sellout. I purchased nosebleeds for it and sat in section 201 row 8 or 9 because there were entire rows that were empty. The fact is we're not going back to that period any time soon. So why should ownership change anything? From an ownership prospective, if you have a strawberryty product but it's bringing in untold amounts of wealth, what is the impetus? This move is good for ownership's pockets, but can we read more into it? Such questions have already been raised by others but are we overanalyzing? I guess a lot of it will be answered in the offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucid_Flame91 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I honestly wish we had 1 owner, rather than 6 partial owner's with a spokesman, having to decide a direction for the team with 6 people arguing their points on what they want is ridiculous, as long as we have these owners its only going to be about the money and not the team, Until the fans demand better its going to be the same direction without much change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Ownership's role is to sign the cheques. I don't believe ownership should be involved in operations. Just let the Flames be a cap team, let the President manage the day to day operations, let the GM manage the roster, and then go do your other business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tachaudh Posted March 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I still think overall direction of a team goes through ownership. It's impossible for ownership to be completely disengaged. You can't tell me that if Feaster honestly wanted to blow it up that he wouldn't have to go through ownership first to approve a plan. But unless they have a little Mark Cuban inside of them, why should ownership approve such a plan when status quo is minting them money? I don't know, that's just how I see things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucid_Flame91 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Ownership's role is to sign the cheques. I don't believe ownership should be involved in operations. Just let the Flames be a cap team, let the President manage the day to day operations, let the GM manage the roster, and then go do your other business. You're telling me if you were the owner of the flames you would not be involved in what the on ice product was, or the coach, or GM? You would just blindly sign cheques. If so I want you to be my boss. The owner should be involved in ANYTHING major to the team that he owns or else you're putting your product and money in someone that doesn't have to check with you about what he does with it, that disturbs me personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CastleMania Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 You're telling me if you were the owner of the flames you would not be involved in what the on ice product was, or the coach, or GM? You would just blindly sign cheques. If so I want you to be my boss. The owner should be involved in ANYTHING major to the team that he owns or else you're putting your product and money in someone that doesn't have to check with you about what he does with it, that disturbs me personally. Umm, there are plenty of companies where owners aren't involved. They're called public corporations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Umm, there are plenty of companies where owners aren't involved. They're called public corporations. They still have some hand in day-to-day operations. Don't tell me that a company like Cenova Energy doesn't have a group of owners that do more than just blindly sign cheques. If you own a business, you work for it. That is the same for every one of them, whether it be a privately owned small-time barber shop or a large corporation like Microsoft. Even public corporations that are owned by taxpayers follow their owner's mandates, it's just that there's a lot more owners than some privately invested company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
senor_incendiarse Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 For me its a non-issue, its not just MLSE but look around pro-sports and you'll find many multi-sport owners Stan Kroenke owns 4 teams in Denver and one in St. Louis, Illitch family owns the Redwings and Tigers. To me I don't like owners who are too involved in player decisions, its good when they show they care, but there main priority imo is to get the right guys to run those sports. Its easy to crap on Flames ownership now, but in the larger picture they've owned the Hitmen for years and with the exception of last year have been one of the best teams in the WHL over the past 15 years. Thats a credit to the people in charge of the on ice product. It wasn't ownership who butchered the '03-'07 drafts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL44 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 This pretty signifies a significant stability of the Flames organization... A solid ownership group is a mandatory precursor to any future success. Now they just have to be smart enough to have the right people in the positions required to maximize profit..errr.. wins. Who is that chosen one that looks over the Flames operations? King? The pockets are full, a move like this suggests the pockets will remain full, now King just needs to spend it correctly. I don't think you have to worry about a disconnect with owners and fans here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
403Loyalty Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Ownership's role is to sign the cheques. I don't believe ownership should be involved in operations. Just let the Flames be a cap team, let the President manage the day to day operations, let the GM manage the roster, and then go do your other business. In all honesty tho ppl1 the owners do stay out of most operations. They only keep there nose in the ones that might directly effect the end capital ( something like trading the face of the franchise type decision) and for anyone to say there are teams where owners just write the cheque and dont ever meddle in the affairs of the team THEY OWN is plain ludicrous, any owner keeps a ear involved just in case they hear something they dont like. But most times they will trust in there management group they have put together to handle the day to day opps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.