LEAFS for sale

[chessy]

The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is looking into selling its part of the Toronto Maple Leafs, the financial juggernaut said in a statement Saturday.

 

The Wall St. firm of Morgan Stanley has been hired to find potential suitors for its shares in MLSE, according to Quebec newspaper La Presse. Teachers, as it’s more commonly known, confirmed the potential sale in a release Saturday night.

 

“The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan today stated that it will explore the possibility of selling its 66% majority share of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, and will be making no further public comment on the matter,” the statement said.

 

The La Presse report cites a source involved in preliminary discussions regarding the sale worth a reported $1.3 billion. MLSE, the largest sporting group in Canada, owns the Leafs, Raptors, Marlies and Toronto FC. The group also owns the Air Canada Centre, BMO Field and Ricoh Coliseum, and Leafs TV and NBA TV Canada.

 

If completed, the sale would the largest in Canadian professional sports history. The potential sale does not affect the 20.5% share of MLSE held by real-estate mogul Larry Tanenbaum, who has the right of first refusal on the pension fund’s share, along with TD Capital, which has a 13% stake in the sports giant.

 

The hiring of Morgan Stanley will now allow the group to come up with the highest possible bids before approaching Tanenbaum and TD Capital.

 

Tanenbaum has long been interested in becoming sole owner of MLSE, but whether he can match the potential bids remains to be seen.

 

Got go-ahead from NHL?

 

If Teachers did indeed hire Morgan Stanley, it would mean it got the go-ahead from the NHL, which must be consulted before any possible sale discussions can take place.

 

Watching the Leafs on the giant screen outside the ACC as they found a way to beat the Sabres in Buffalo Saturday night, Mike Campbell said it makes sense the Teachers would be trying to sell.

 

“They’re probably at a point where they’ve maximized their investment and it’s time to move on to something else,” the Mississauga man said. “It’s just smart business, from their point of view.”

 

Campbell said he has never taken issue with the teacher’s involvement in the Leafs.

 

“But I’d really like the next owner to be someone who has a real love for the game,” he said.

 

Teachers has been a shareholder of the Maple Leafs since 1994, when it purchased a 49% stake in the club for $50 million.

 

If the sale goes through for an estimated $1.3 billion, the pension plan would see more than a 1,600% return on the initial investment. The battle for sports franchise ownership between telecommunication companies has been heating up as of late as it could spell exclusive coverage of games.

 

It has been reported that the pension fund and Rogers were close to settling on a deal for Teachers shares in MLSE. Rogers owns the Toronto Blue Jays and the Rogers Centre, worth a reported $326 million.

 

Peter Morrison, who also took in the Maple Leafs big win from outside the ACC, said NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman would likely relish the idea of the media giant buying the Teachers’ shares.

 

But he’s not so sure.

 

“I think Rogers controls enough,” the Beach resident said. “But who else could afford the shares?”

 

 

[irishfield]

1.3 billion eh. If only they were a winning Team as we could collect that in a few hours around here with 5000 members! (it's only 260K each.. lol)

[Cudz]

I was at the game last night and I also ate a whole bunch at the Real Sports bar and grill. I just wanted to see where my contribution to the pension fund is going. Can't really complain about that return. That TV in that bar is pretty sick too.

 

Makes sense to sell if those are the actualy figures.

[misfish]

1.3 billion eh. If only they were a winning Team as we could collect that in a few hours around here with 5000 members! (it's only 260K each.. lol)

 

Have you not learned anything Wayne? Leafs sell out every game,and they are not a winning team.Investers win.LOL

[ctranter]

I'm a leafs fan but this made me laugh

 

Since 1994 when the Teachers took over majority ownership, the team went from competing in conference finals, to being a steady playoff contender, to not making the playoffs, to the bottom 3-5. This year...well we'll just wait and see. All the while, over that 16 year time span, they earned a 1,600% return on their investment, assuming a sale goes through for 1.3 billion. Who says a team needs to win games to make money?

 

Either way they had a sweet game last night. Go leafs go

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

wow. rogers ontario is already COMPLETELY pure maple leafs... I can't wait to see the biased and balanced coverage once Rogers owns the leafs.

[dhickey]

it seems to me that if a new owner is in the picture there still wouldnt be much of a

change other than perhaps management.

sallery cap is the problem.

it just doesnt seem rite to me that a team like chicogo made it through the rebuilding proces to win the cup only to have the team diismantled because of salery caps.

what ever happened to building a dynisty?

that can never happen under the current system. its only human nature to demand more money once you have achieved the goal set before you.

my own solution to this would be to let the cup winning team for that year be exempt from salry caps/depending on what thier own market or management can afford.

this would help keep teams together and promote the drive for five mantality and rekindle the true spirit of hockey.

TO BE THE BEST TEAM AND PROVE IT

 

????

[jedimaster]

We all know that this is going to Rogers. Its just a matter of time. TSN and CBC wil be up the creek for coverage. I am sure Bell is not happy about this either.

[Headhunter]

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss either Bell or Telus as they have been watching Rogers take ownership of virtually all programming in the sports world... they may have to consider this bitter pill, just to get a toe hold on this lucrative market.

HH

[chessy]

does bell not own part of tsn ?????

[chessy]

bell owns tsn just did a google search

 

BCE is the parent of telecom Bell Canada; the company sells landline, digital TV, and Internet services in addition to wireless. CTV operates Canada’s number one TV network with 27 stations across the country and 30 specialty channels (including TSN). They also own CHUM Radio, which operates 34 radio stations. Add mobile to a TV and Radio marketplace – filled with great content, including Olympic 2012 rights – and you have the beginnings of a great integrated marketing plan.

 

 

In today’s digital age it is extremely important for companies to advertise across multiple channels. To be able to advertise through a vertically integrated company that can take advantage of video delivered on multiple screens is extremely valuable. And for the consumer, will it mean they can now have CTV channels streamed directly to the iPhone?

 

CTV and TSN live on my Bell iPhone might be a good thing.

 

 

 

 

so they may bid on it as well

 

[Headhunter]

Bell may own TSN, but they do not own a team, and therefore they must compete on a different playing field then say, a Rogers owned team.

IF Rogers buys them, I would think that there will be some very nervous folks at the CBC as the Satruday night games as well as the playoffs are the number one revenue generator for the CBC, outside of our combined tax contributions.

This should be interesting... but my gut tells me that who ever buys the team, they will be looking at more pay tv and less "free" tv.

HH

[chessy]

Bell may own TSN, but they do not own a team, and therefore they must compete on a different playing field then say, a Rogers owned team.

IF Rogers buys them, I would think that there will be some very nervous folks at the CBC as the Satruday night games as well as the playoffs are the number one revenue generator for the CBC, outside of our combined tax contributions.

This should be interesting... but my gut tells me that who ever buys the team, they will be looking at more pay tv and less "free" tv.

HH

 

thats why i have internet. games always telivised if you know where to look

[ADB]

Detroit Red Wings.

 

Pre-lockout, Post-lockout....take yer pick. Good ownership has everything to do with it.

 

I'd really like to know what good ownership has to do with the Wings being competitive, especially post-lockout.

 

Enlighten me.

[Governator]

I'd really like to know what good ownership has to do with the Wings being competitive, especially post-lockout.

 

Enlighten me.

 

 

Uhmmm... I'll chime in - Mike bought the team in the 80s when they sucked (Detroit Dead Wings). That family has spent spent millions on the team and turned them around by the 90s when they brought in Bowman. The management is family run, his son is the President & CEO making actual decisions that matter. Since the lockout players have also taken pay cuts to play there (Which keeps them competitive). There are a lot more players in line wanting play for the Red Wings than Leafs and I believe a lot of it has to do with ownership. Having owners that care and want to make them win long term because they love hockey is crucial to any successful team (minus luck of the draw).

 

It's also been said from league experts many times over that he's the best owner in the NHL, by far (MLSE being the worst of course)

Edited March 14, 2011 by Governator

[jedimaster]

A team can be both succesful and unsuccesful with having a "Good" owner. A bad owner that keeps putting money in and hires a good GM is fine by me. A Bad owner that sticker there nose in running the team is not so great news.

I don't particularly see Rogers as a good owner. Look at the other franchises they own...how great are they? How many penants have the Jays won under the Rogers brand?

I hope RIM buys the leafs. Then we would have a true hockey fan own the leafs.

 

Don't forget Jim has 2.3 billion sitting in the bank.

Edited March 14, 2011 by jedimaster

[ADB]

Uhmmm... I'll chime in - Mike bought the team in the 80s when they sucked (Detroit Dead Wings). That family has spent spent millions on the team and turned them around by the 90s when they brought in Bowman. The management is family run, his son is the President & CEO making actual decisions that matter. Since the lockout players have also taken pay cuts to play there (Which keeps them competitive). There are a lot more players in line wanting play for the Red Wings than Leafs and I believe a lot of it has to do with ownership. Having owners that care and want to make them win long term because they love hockey is crucial to any successful team (minus luck of the draw).

 

It's also been said from league experts many times over that he's the best owner in the NHL, by far (MLSE being the worst of course)

 

Most of that is true.

 

But...

 

The only reason players take "pay cuts" to stay in Detroit is because they are a proven winner. I'm sure good ownership plays a role in that, but if they team was finishing in last place, no one would want to take take pay cuts to play there, no matter how nice Mike Illich et al are.

 

I think having "good" owners contributing to winning teams is really a myth in the post-lockout era. If you look at the Leafs, what more can MLSE do to make the team a winner? I've said it on here before...they spend to the cap, they'll put players in the minors [Jeff Finger], they'll buy players out [Darcy Tucker, Andrew Raycroft], and they hired Brian Burke, which not many argued was a bad move at the time.

 

Everything people hate about MLSE has to do with being a fan - high ticket prices, the corporate atmosphere, etc. None of that really builds a championship team. If Mike Illich took over Toronto tomorrow, things wouldn't really change in terms of the product on the ice.

 

You don't think MLSE wants to get to the playoffs? Talk about a business that basically has little growth potential without a winning team. Trust me, they'd love nothing more for a few home playoff dates where they can double ticket prices.

 

If someone can suggest something concrete than an owner can do in today's NHL that gives them an edge, I'm all ears.

[Spiel]

Who cares, it's hockey!

 

I'll use whatever disposable income I have (and it's marginal at best) to support better causes than wealthy owners and over paid players.

 

My time and disposable income is spent on "Fishing for Tyler," Fish-a-thon for a Cure," Irishfields Daughter" and most recently on the tradgedy in Japan.

[ADB]

Do you think Mike Illitch would let the Leafs flounder as they have in recent years, if he was the owner?

 

 

Good ownership surrounds themselves with good management. (GM, Scouting, development)

Good ownership cares about winning, first and foremost.

Good ownership hates losing.

Good ownership exists to serve the PRIMARY purpose of the team (which is winning). Shareholders are also important, but a successful team should take care of them, especially in a market like Toronto.

Good ownership has a face, not a 4 letter acronym.

 

Most of what you're saying is intangible. Just because an owner wants to win, doesn't make it so.

 

Your only argument thats I agree with is surrounding the team with good management. But if you think Brian Burke was a bad hire, then we simply have different opinions.

[ADB]

I think Burke is the first good thing they've done in a long time.

 

Should have never Fired Quinn if you ask me....

 

I kind of agree about Quinn.

 

The whole point of firing Quinn was because he couldn't coach youth [see Edmonton last year] and the team was supposed to be rebuilding with younger talent.

 

However, that youth rebuild never really happened with Maurice at the helm, so it kind of made that firing a waste.

Edited March 14, 2011 by ADB

[CCMAR]

I'm curious to see the outcome of this with the leafs. Highest reputable franchise in hockey. I truly hope that Balisile gets the Leafs.

[Governator]

Most of that is true.

 

But...

 

The only reason players take "pay cuts" to stay in Detroit is because they are a proven winner. I'm sure good ownership plays a role in that, but if they team was finishing in last place, no one would want to take take pay cuts to play there, no matter how nice Mike Illich et al are.

 

I think having "good" owners contributing to winning teams is really a myth in the post-lockout era. If you look at the Leafs, what more can MLSE do to make the team a winner? I've said it on here before...they spend to the cap, they'll put players in the minors [Jeff Finger], they'll buy players out [Darcy Tucker, Andrew Raycroft], and they hired Brian Burke, which not many argued was a bad move at the time.

 

Everything people hate about MLSE has to do with being a fan - high ticket prices, the corporate atmosphere, etc. None of that really builds a championship team. If Mike Illich took over Toronto tomorrow, things wouldn't really change in terms of the product on the ice.

 

You don't think MLSE wants to get to the playoffs? Talk about a business that basically has little growth potential without a winning team. Trust me, they'd love nothing more for a few home playoff dates where they can double ticket prices.

 

If someone can suggest something concrete than an owner can do in today's NHL that gives them an edge, I'm all ears.

 

 

Ontario Pension Plan took controlling interest of MLSE in 2003. They hired John Ferguson, Jr. who left the team in shambles giving away terrible no trade contracts & making awful trades. The year before the lockout leafs posted their best regular season in franchise history before missing playoffs for 5 straight years... In today's NHL (and past) owners have to make the right decisions when it comes to who runs the business. One or two bad decisions up top and a franchise can be ruined for a very long time AKA the leafs. This is why Detroit is also where they are today, good decisions from a good businessman. Hiring Burke and giving him full realm to make decisions on his own was a good start - I'm not a Burke hater.

[ADB]

Players take pay cuts to play for a winning team. The team wins because Illitch does not accept defeat very well.

 

MLSE has a funny way of demonstrating their desire for post-season activity! Spending to the cap isn't the only thing a good owner should do - it's the minimum required.

 

Lol...I still have a hard time seeing the argument here. Illich does not accept defeat very well? What does that mean?

 

If spending to the cap is the minimum...then what is the maximum?

 

Mike Illich must be a wizard, because from what you guys say he just thinks of what he wants, and then he gets it.

 

Ontario Pension Plan took controlling interest of MLSE in 2003. They hired John Ferguson, Jr. who left the team in shambles giving away terrible no trade contracts & making awful trades. The year before the lockout leafs posted their best regular season in franchise history before missing playoffs for 5 straight years... In today's NHL (and past) owners have to make the right decisions when it comes to who runs the business. One or two bad decisions up top and a franchise can be ruined for a very long time AKA the leafs. This is why Detroit is also where they are today, good decisions from a good businessman. Hiring Burke and giving him full realm to make decisions on his own was a good start - I'm not a Burke hater.

 

I agree that JFJ was a mess...but how does one bad decision make MLSE terrible owners, and one good decision in hiring Ken Holland make Mike Illich a genius?

Edited March 14, 2011 by ADB

[ADB]

And further to my last post - Illitch probably would have never hired JFJ in the first place!

 

I would love if Balsillie bought them, although sadly I doubt the NHL would let him.

 

I don't agree with you on the "wanting to win" argument. To me, there are lots of owners who want to win as bad as Illich, but it doesn't translate into Stanley Cups.

 

Can't agree with you more on JFJ though. Hiring/firing management is huge, and MLSE obviously failed with JFJ.

Edited March 14, 2011 by ADB

[Governator]

I agree that JFJ was a mess...but how does one bad decision make MLSE terrible owners, and one good decision in hiring Ken Holland make Mike Illich a genius?

 

 

Well... I never called Illich a genius but having hockey smarts, past business success and knowing when to hire the right people is what makes a successful a good owner. He hired Ken Holland, that wasn't just one good decision that was an outstanding decision. He's also made many more before it. Hiring Scotty Bowman wasn't exactly a bad one. MLSE hires JFJ (Illich would NEVER have hired JFJ)... That gave us Toskala as our starting goalie when Belfour ran dry. That gave us Maurice when they got rid of Quinn.. It's been 7 years, they've made a lot of mistakes in the first 5 and it'll take years before they ever get back to over 100pt/season again.

 

Oh yea, also how are those Raptors doing too? MLSE you rock.