you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 82 points 4 months ago (22 children)

Unfortunately if he's given them all partial ownership they're all entitled to be on there. I greatly dislike that sports teams are privately owned.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 121 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    I don't care that sports teams are privately owned, I do get really annoyed that stadiums are built with public dollars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

    Just finished writing a post comment about this exactly. That is the problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Sorry, not a post. A comment elsewhere in this thread.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    You can copy direct links to comments...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I kinda agree. But if a city has enough money to afford a sports team, they should invest more into the local tax base.

    But as far as the Stanley cup goes, billionaires aren't beholden to the Golden rule, so tax the fuck out of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Absolutely tax the billionaires.

    The part I hate is that a host city shouldn't have any obligations for a privately owned team. The owners get tax breaks and other concessions for building complexes that will be completely private facilities afterwards. Owners and owner groups can easily afford to fund all of this themselves but gain favors by playing on the opportunity for the city to have a sports franchise.

    While area businesses may benefit from the presence of a sports team, the general public ends up financing a good chunk with at best marginal returns.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Even worse when you got fans of the team on the council, they cant seem to comprehend that there are other hobbies or interests so paying loads to the arena for ice time for kids while saying to other groups that the commune cant afford renovations on the dance hall or swimming pool (which are also supposed to be funded from the same budget as "young activities")

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    His youngest child is kindergarten age.

    Minors legally cannot own part of a hockey team.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Minors can legally own shares of a private company.

    I'm not saying THIS child does... and out of EVERYONE on the list that kid is entirely morally absolved anyways by virtue of being a little kid.

    But, they can own shares.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    I don't think they have any relationship with the team. Just the guy's wife and loin product. There are actual minority co-owners who aren't on there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    Are we sure he didn't gift them something like .1% of the team just for this? I don't believe that has to be disclosed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Not from what I've read. But I'm not his accountant, so ...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Only theorizing. You're good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Assuming he's done this very specific thing without evidence is far more speculative.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Theorizing is synonymous with speculating in this connotation... My first statement is true: any owner gets their name on the cup. I didn't make any claims beyond that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment