What To Do

This, my friends, is where my business gets tricky, and I wanted to share it with you so you might provide me - and us - with some valuable insight into what you want from this blog and our newspaper.

Sometimes, another media outlet publishes or broadcasts a report that is clearly off-base and speculative at best, but is sensational. It causes lots of conversation and water cooler talk.

Is it our job to follow up on that story? To dispute it? To prove it right or wrong? To ignore it?

That's what the issue was for me today when the Globe and Mail published a patently bogus story about NHL governors considering a second NHL team for Toronto.

For starters, there was no attribution to any of the main parts of the story. I get that, and sometimes we at The Star do the same thing under certain circumstances to protect sources.

But you should know an NHL governor is not necessarily an owner. It could be a GM, a team president or some other executive you've never heard of. Until he was fired last January, John Ferguson was an alternate governor with the Maple Leafs.

So an NHL "governor" could be a somebody or a nobody. That's why this story with anonymous sources gets tricky.

Other parts were just hilarious. First there's the suggestion that Jim Balsillie, the same fellow NHL authorities clearly don't want part of their league, would somehow be "rewarded" with a franchise.

Why would the NHL do that?

Second, that such a franchise could cost $700 million to settle with the Leafs. In these economic conditions, and with the dollar going down, would it be reasonable for an NHL owner in Toronto to start $700 million in the red? I know Balsillie's a billionaire, but he's a billionaire because he makes profitable business investments.

The story made no sense. I said we should ignore it, and that writing about it simply gives credence to a story with no real facts.

My editor disagreed, and we agreed I would blog on the topic. Editors always win.

So what do you think? Should we have ignored it or discussed it?

Anyways, here are some thoughts on a second team in Toronto.

People outside Toronto have long loved the idea because they perceive this to be a fertile market underserved by the NHL. Some inside Toronto love the idea because the Leafs have played people in town for suckers for so long, an alternative product is attractive.

People in general believe a second NHL team in Toronto would be enormously successful. That might even be true.

But this isn't a right or wrong, fair or unfair story.

It's a business story, and here are the facts.

First, monopolies don't voluntarily break themselves up. The Leafs have a monopoly in this incredible hockey market and they have no intention of sharing it or allowing any competition in the market. That's why, don't forget, they wouldn't sell Maple Leaf Gardens to Eugene Melnyk.

Second, a second NHL team in Toronto is of no help whatsoever to the 24 teams based in the U.S. other than it might create another team to contribute to the revenue sharing pool rather than take from that pool.

Third, there is no incentive  for the league to carve up its best market into smaller pieces. It might satisfy those who believe the Leafs shouldn't have a monopoly, but a second team in Toronto really does nothing to improve the NHL's business in a substantial way.

Fourth, there is no guarantee a second team would work. There are three teams in the New York area, but only the Rangers are significantly successful as a commercial venture. The Lakers and Clippers share a fertile basketball market in Los Angeles, but only the Lakers are successful.

Then again, the Mets and Yankees co-exist rather well in New York. So the point is, there's no guarantee a second team in Toronto would do well, particularly if it was a poorly-run as the Maple Leafs in terms of on-ice competitiveness.

Fifth, this is an old story that's been kicking around forever. Kudos to the Globe for getting a headline, but not only is there nothing to this story, there's nothing new here.

Sixth, if a second team in Toronto makes sense, wouldn't a second team in Montreal also work? In Philadelphia? In Detroit? Chopping up your best markets doesn't help the markets that don't work so well.

Look, if Jeremy Jacobs or Ed Snider or Larry Tanenbaum starts aggressively pushing the concept of a second team in Toronto, then it will be time to start seriously considering the notion.

Right now, I think the NHL would expand to Europe long before it considers another GTA club.

And, unlike Melnyk, I think the Euro wing of the NHL is a decade or more away.

Bottom line: The NHL isn't putting a second team in Toronto, mostly because the Leafs would never go for it but also because it makes little or no financial sense for the league.

So that's my take. For another view, be sure to check out Dave Perkins' column in tomorrow's Star.

Comments

[Honest Hockey]

Hell has frozen over! I agree with Cox

[S. Nicolaou]

I'd have to agree with you, it's not worth talking about until the ink is on the contract, and I don't see that happening. Let this one die.

[mark]

Damien. . .This is a non story and I'm surprised at the Star following the lead of the Globe on something this stupid.

[Richard A.]

Hi Damien

For better or for worse, Toronto is a HOCKEY TOWN. Always has been, always will be, no matter how poorly the Leafs play. So yes, I think the Star was correct to follow up on the Globe and Mail story and expose it for what it was -- smoke and mirrors and nothing else.

[Andrew Barrie]

The ACC holds slightly less than 20000 per Leafs home game. there are 41 home games a season, so that's 820000 tickets to sell. The GTA has approximately 5 Million People in it. Lets say 20% are Leafs/Hockey Fans. So 1 million people, completeing for 820000 tickets. 180000 people are out of luck.

EXCEPT, there are about 1000 tickets per game sold to non seasons ticket holders.

41000 tickets for the 1 million people who'd like to see a game.

I'm sorry, Southern Ontario/ GTA can easily support a new team.

what is the concern? that a new team would erode the television market for Leafs games? LeafsTV already did a great job of that. in 5 years it would be reasonable to believe even the CBC will have trouble broadcasting Leafs games, with Leafs TV hording the majority of games on its expensive network.

a few years ago, I caught a few of those games at a local East Side Mario's. When Leafs TV started forcing bars to pay more than the fee for a family residence, the local ESM stopped carrying the channel, as well as every other bar in my area.

As long as there is a Tampa Bay, Nashville and Carolina team that can barely attract fans over NCAA basketball, it will continue to be a great injustice that we don't have a second team in this neck of the woods, where we'd support the team, and definitely appreciate the product.

[Jeff Stengel]

Please........must've been a slow news day for the globe to start this nonsense again.A new team outside the precious maple leaf "territorial boundaries" makes sense.But no business person in their right mind would agree to pay MLSE a dime they dont have to.......We may see a Stanley Cup sooner than a second team in this market......and thats saying a lot.

[Still in the Headlines]

"Bottom line: The NHL isn't putting a second team in Toronto, mostly because the Leafs would never go for it but also because it makes little or no financial sense for the league."

I agree with the Leaf's argument, but I have to say that this league doesn't seem to do a lot based on 'finanical sense'. It would be hard to make a financial argument for a number of franchises.

I would also turn that financial argument around, and say that the Leafs WOULD go for it if it made financial sense to them. MLSE calls the shots, and they are all about the bottom line. Now it would be hard to find a scenario where it made financial sense to both MLSE and a new owner, so that would rule out Toronto.

Here's a question: is the 50 mile no-competition zone from the city centre? If so, would that put Hamilton outside of Buffalo's 'space'? If yes, I would think that the Hamilton scenario is more likely then Toronto.

[Josh]

Damien,
I'm of the mind that a second NHL team in Toronto would absolutely work, but the same cannot be said of places like Montreal, Philadelphia, etc.

First, Montreal is too loyal to the Habs. There isn't the same anyone-but-the-Habs segment of the population here that exists in Toronto, where there are significant numbers of hockey-loving, Leaf-hating folks. It helps that Toronto, by virtue of being the most populous city in the country, is also probably the most transient.

Second, Philadelphia isn't a fair comparison, just as any American city isn't a fair comparison. Sports fans in Canadian cities gravitate to hockey in a way that just doesn't happen in any American NHL - not Minneapolis, not Philadelphia, not even Detroit (where, incidentally, the Red Wings would lose their #1 billing in a nanosecond if there was anything at all to like about the Lions).

[Kyle Bosley]

hold the presses..Someone said that at some point someone else has thought about a second team in Toronto? wow! get back to us when you have some news.
I agree, this is not news.

[LeafJam]

Has anyone considered that Burke may be the source of this information? Is he a 'governor'? If so, maybe it was him who let this leak to try and deflect some of the media away from him while he's here tonight. I think thats the most likely scenario here, as clearly this news is bogus.

[Andrew C]

I do think it's a good idea to have another team around Toronto (i.e. Hamilton) but not in Toronto. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that the reason the baseball situtation works in New York (and Chicago) is because they are in the different leagues of MLB. I can't speak for every Leafs fan but the sad truth is that no matter how awful they are, they will always be my team because that's what being a real fan is to me. I think it would be hard for a new team to pull a significant number of fans away from the Leafs. Maybe they could reel in younger fans who aren't as attached to the Blue and White as others. I suppose another way it could work if the tickets for this new team were significantly cheaper as it would give Toronto hockey fans a cheaper alternative to see live NHL hockey, but I still can't see them being anything more than the LA Clippers of the NHL.

[Barb]

Only reason to publish such a ridiculous story was for the hilarious responses to Dave Perkins' column. Thanks for brightening my day!

[Sandeep]

I think this post was handled pretty well. The Globe story was obviously pure fiction, but it led to some interesting musings as to why a second Toronto team would or wouldn't work. Writing about a report that some chucklehead dreamed up because he felt like wasting some ink doesn't validate it; it just uses it as food for thought.

[Frank]

Blogworthy as a response to the Globe, but not newsworthy because it is so speculative. It's great for a discussion, because it's ridiculous on the surface, but dig deeper and there might be some gold. For example, while Balsillie doesn't seem like he'll intrude in Toronto (and at that price, who would want to), you have to think that the economic downturn is putting a squeeze on small-market teams. Sooner or later (and I think it's sooner), he'll get a team, and that's the first hurdle to get over before bring a team to... oh, I don't know... let's say Hamilton. So the NHL (Bettman, MLSE, Buffalo, others) might not want a team here, but I think there is reason to believe another team could head to Ontario in a few years. Money talks, especially when others need it or want out.
So, to make a long story short, the story wasn't newsworthy, and good for you for not reporting on it, but some elements are worth keeping an eye on.

[Big Bear]

Damien, I both agree and disagree. I think that a second hockey team in southern Ontario has potential if its done right. But Gary Bettman and his yes-men, along with MLSE and the Sabres ownership, were all openly hostile to that idea a mere 18 months ago. In the absence of any real evidence that anything has changed (and, gee whiz, the Globe article contains absolutely none), I have to conclude that this story is horse poop. Its terrible journalism, just speculation and wishful thinking masquerading as news. Kansas City and/or Las Vegas will get NHL teams long before Ontario gets another one. That's unfortunate, but true.

[Mark]

Regarding your six facts:
First: If the monopoly won't break itself, then the law can do it. Teams or leagues don't "own" fans or markets. Ask Al Davis.
Second: A second successful team can contribute revenue to the other teams. This is a fact in favour of the team, not a fact against it.
Third: The incentive is that a new team may increase demand. Two carved up markets may be bigger than the single market if there is unsatisfied demand, which there is. This is key.
Fourth: There is no guarantee any team will work. So what? Why are teams being put in other places where they may not work? Besides, this is not New York, L.A., baseball or basketball. This is a different market and a different sport. See point three above.
Fifth: This is an old story; now it's a new story. The fact it won't go away is significant.
Sixth: A second team in another market would work provided the demand is there. See point three above. Let the other cities worry about that. It's irrelevant to Toronto.

[Giller]

Why is it people are always calling Toronto a "Hockey Town"? Is this the same city that can't or won't support their local Marlies team, even when it's in the midst of an exciting playoff race (last year)? Or how 'bout the St. Mike's majors? Where are they again? Toronto is not a HOCKEY town. An NHL town maybe, but not hockey.

And Damien...whether or not it's real "news" - it can still be fun to bat the idea around.

[Brent Achtymichuk]

It would not surprise me if this story was leaked by the Ducks governor. It is too much of a coincidence that this story comes out on the one day (every 3 years) that the Ducks come to town. No one is talking about Burke joining the Leafers now are they. All the talk around the cooler is about the second team.

[Heaton]

The monopoly that the Leafs hold will be challenged in court.

Leafs could play out of the Rogers centre and still get sold out. Please don't compare it to basketball in LA. And if only one NHL city should have two teams it should be Toronto (GTA) so don't bring up Philly, Detroit etc.

[Jason]

I might be wrong, but I seem to recall a similar story in the Globe & Mail many years ago, before the San Jose Sharks expansion. There was a lot of discussion about which cities would bid for expansion teams, and a least one group floated the idea of another Toronto team. It may well have been the Ron Joyce group that eventually bid to put a team in Copps Coliseum.

[JJ Themer]

Sounds like you got beat on a good story, so your maligning the (superior) reporter who beat you. Looks good on you.

[John Richardson]

Based on everything we've known about the Leafs for, oh, the last fifty years, there's no way MLSE would willingly allow another franchise in their market.

By and large I like David Shoalt's stuff but this piece was so over the top that you wonder what he was smoking when he went deep background on this story.

Oh, and to the poster that said "Toronto is a hockey town", it isn't.

If it were, Marlies games would be sold out and the two Major Junior teams in the GTA-- St. Mike's in Mississauaga and the Battalion in Brampton --would attract more than 1800 fans per game.

The only possible scenario for another team in SW Ontario is K-W.

Despite being a born and bred Hamiltonian, the Steel City doesn't have a chance at a franchise.

[torontosportsmedia.com]

Of course this isn't a story. These phantom sources know the Toronto media and that if you go off the record with comments like this it will stir the pot in TO for days to come. Here is the reality, a team won't be awarded to Jim B. If the nhl can get 750m for any franchise they should Jump off the CN tower for it. That may be a dumb enough amount of money to appease MLSE as a starting point for splitting the market.

As for whether you should carry the story, I answer with a question. If the Sun ran a story with a trade rumor in it, sighting unnamed sources, would you feel compelled to comment on it? Truth is you in this business do it every day. Part of the reason you hate "Hsnky" over at hockeybuzz is that his site and sites like it make tracking down true stories harder, there are more stories out there every day that you feel compelled to comment on. So if you wrote tomorrow Burke to Toronto is a done deal and you have a league source, you know the globe is going to get Burke to say nothing has changed. The good news is that we as educated fans know the game. You the media in this town anyway have become very predictable. The first article I read on the star today was by Kevin M, shooting down the Shoalts story.... I didn't have to read it to know what was in it. We all know who is credible, who is not. We can predict with a very high rate of success what angle each of you are going to take on a story simply because we know you oh so well.

http://www.torontosportsmedia.com

[ed best]

Personally, I like the sound of the Toronto Blackberries. It has a nice ringtone to it.

[Angelsmoke]

Cox...once again your out lunch. The NHL has been tenderly nursing MLSE for far too long. Plain and simple. Regardless if the Globe and Mail ran a so called bogus story. Why is MLSE privy to a Monopoly? Hamilton has been trying to get a team for years. I can't stress this enough: Monopolies are supposed to be illegal in a free market. The conversation should not be about the Globe and Mail. It should be about the fact the MLSE has flexed it's muscle every time free enterprise tries to get a team in Ontario. Let the market deside, not the NHL and MLSE.

As a reporter, you should be investigating if there is collusion or schemes to prevent market competition in Sport here in Ontario. Why do you think a franchise would have to "settle" with the Leafs. I think the opposite. What the Leafs are doing, could be grounds for punitive damages under competition law. . But once again you go for the lazy and easy story rather than questioning a complacent giant's monopoly and it's anti-competitive practices. Something smells, and your nose is so far up your ego, you never get a whiff. Common Cox....you can do it...make a difference for hockey fans in Ontario. Tell me your not part of that old boys club, and speak up The NHL and MLSE are running a Monopoly in Ontario. Stay focused dude!

( you probably won't post this, but that's okay)
Angelsmoke