It was something of a coronation this morning when Stacey Allaster was appointed chairman and CEO of the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour. Allaster, who begins her new role overseeing the women’s professional tennis tour immediately, cemented her status as the world’s most powerful woman in sports—and she’s Canadian to boot.

The Windsor-born Allaster has been a staple on the professional tennis scene for years, overhauling Canada’s two international professional tennis tournaments at Tennis Canada before departing to be the president of the Florida-based WTA at the start of 2006. Allaster has since been considered the front-runner in the race to replace Larry Scott, who led the organization before announcing his resignation in March to take over the NCAA’s Pac-10 Conference as commissioner.

“I am honored to lead the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, which since its founding by Billie Jean King 36 years ago has continued to break barriers and grow into a premier global sporting league,” Allaster said in a statement this morning. “The Tour and our sport have enjoyed unprecedented success over the past years, and we are poised for even greater heights in the years to come. Our primary and enduring focus will be our fans, our players and our tournaments, and continuing to build a premium sport and entertainment brand.”

The world’s No. 3 tennis player, Venus Williams, who worked with Allaster to secure equal prize money at Wimbledon had this to say about Allaster’s appointment: “Women’s tennis and the Tour have never been stronger as a business, and Stacey has been at the centre of this business success over the past years.”

The seven-time Grand Slam champion added: “Stacey has helped to lead the development of a stronger Tour product through the passage of a healthier and streamlined circuit structure. I believe that Stacey will be a great leader for the Tour, understands how players can help drive our business, and has all the tools to take our sport to even greater heights.”

Canadian Business published a feature profile of Allaster (written by Prashad) in our Feb. 16, 2009, issue.

That said, some teams, such as cash-strapped Phoenix and Tampa Bay, would likely rather spend less than the lower limit of US$40.8 million anyway, all but ensuring they will be at the bottom of the NHL next year. Not that opening up the wallet is any guarantee of success. Toronto has $44.5 million committed to 17 players, and only two of them could be even remotely be considered top-line material. The Leafs have about $12 million to spend on free agents this year, but the team is still likely to end up out of the playoffs as it has for the past four years while being one of the league’s top-spending teams.

The bigger issue for teams, says Doug MacLean, Rogers Sportsnet’s Hockeycentral analyst and a former NHL general manager with the Columbus Blue Jackets, is what will happen to the salary cap in 2010-11. The economy isn’t likely to bounce back too much before the start of that season, which will force companies to rethink their sponsorship dollars. Professional sports is an expensive marketing vehicle and there are only so many companies willing to pony up hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of dollars to be associated with hockey.

“I would be nervous for anybody that goes over $50 million in long-term deals this summer,” says MacLean. “I think you’ll see GMs try like crazy to sign smaller-term deals, but I’m not sure they’re going to be too successful, especially for the top guys. A lot of mid-range and low-range guys will get short-term deals, no doubt about that.”

Some players have already signed such deals. Forward Bill Guerin resigned with the Pittsburgh Penguins on a one-year, US$2-million deal; defenceman Rob Blake resigned with the San Jose Sharks for one year at US$3.5 million; and Jussi Jokinen resigned with the Carolina Hurricanes for two years at an average of US$1.7 million per season. Another 300 free agents await contract offers.

But the top guys will always get the lucrative long-term deals they want, except for the odd player such as Marian Hossa, who took substantially less than market value to play for the Detroit Red Wings in an attempt to win the Stanley Cup. The irony is that he left the eventual champions, the Penguins, to play for the Wings. He’ll have to do the same again this year if he wants to stay with the Wings.

MacLean doesn’t believe many players will follow in Hossa’s skates. “I don’t expect that to be the norm, especially not for a player of his caliber and his age,” he says. “Taking a little less is one thing, but going from US$79 million to US$7 million? I don’t think so.”

One thing MacLean does expect to see is GMs keeping or taking on short-term, high-salary players, because they want to be more flexible down the road. Such decisions are already well established in the NBA, where teams take on expiring salaries to balance trades (which generally have to be roughly equal in terms of salary) as well as to free up cash for the following year’s free agent crop.

“It used to be you didn’t want to give up prospects or draft picks for a guy that would walk as an unrestricted free agent,” says MacLean. “All of a sudden, we’re seeing teams take that player because he’s only got one year left at US$6 million. All of a sudden, expiring contracts are something GMs are moving into, which we’ve never had before.”

But don’t be surprised if a few NHL teams get caught up in the bidding wars starting July 1 at noon and overpay for middling talent. You can follow the action on Sportsnet’s website.

Here’s a list of teams and how much they had committed (as of June 25) to spend next season (all figures US$):

Montreal Canadiens ($23.5 million, 11 players)
Phoenix ($32.2 million, 15 players)
New York Islanders ($32.4 million, 17 players
Nashville ($33 million, 13 players
Atlanta ($33.3 million, 15 players)
Vancouver: ($33.8 million, 13 players
Chicago ($34.5 million, 11 players)
Florida ($38 million, 13 players)
New York Rangers ($38 million, nine players)
Anaheim ($38.9 million, 17 players)
Dallas ($39.5 million, 19 players)
Los Angeles (39.9 million, 19 players)
Tampa Bay ($40.2 million, 17 players)
New Jersey ($40.4 million, 14 players)
Carolina ($42.3 million, 15 players)
Edmonton ($42.8 million, 19 players)
Columbus ($42.9 million, 19 players)
Minnesota ($43.6 million, 15 players)
Toronto ($44.5 million, 17 players)
Washington ($44.6 million, 15 players)
Colorado ($44.8 million, 15 players)
Calgary ($45.4 million, 15 players)
St. Louis: ($46.2 million, 19 players)
Buffalo ($46.5 million, 15 players)
San Jose ($46.7 million, 13 players)
Pittsburgh ($46.8 million, 14 players)
Ottawa ($50.5 million, 20 players)
Detroit (51.2 million, 16 players)
Boston ($51.29 million, 16 players)
Philadelphia ($51.4 million, 17 players)

******************

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name.

Of course, it doesn’t always work out that way. Take the NHL, which starts its annual draft tonight. Some teams and general managers continually draft poorly, despite the fact everyone can take advantage of the NHL’s Central Scouting Service, which conveniently ranks players according to their position (goalies, defencmen and forwards). Peter Tingling, an assistant professor at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, thinks he may know the reason why.

“Scouts and GMs are focusing on the first and second round,” says Tingling, who has analyzed 30 years’ worth of NHL draft data. “GMs should think a little bit more about what they need, think a little bit more about the performance of their scouts and think about how they’re making their decisions. The scouting reports that we see are not real data, and that shouldn’t be the way you make decisions.”

Tingling, who is also founder and CEO of Octothorpe Software Corp., which makes systems designed to help execs make decisions, has found that nearly 60% of draft picks never play an NHL game, and one in five of those who do make it play less than 10 games. What’s worse, there’s little difference between the performance of players drafted in rounds three through seven who play at least two years. In other words, the NHL draft is a crapshoot that few are taking a more scientific approach to.

Those teams that draft poorly do so at their peril, says Tingling. The consistently good San Jose Sharks and over-performing Buffalo Sabres are 2.5 times more effective at drafting than the Columbus Blue Jackets and Phoenix Coyotes, two perennial cellar-dwellers.

That said, even Tingling admits a good draft doesn’t translate into championships. “Good drafting is necessary, but it’s not going to get you the Cup,” he says. “However, bad drafting will lose you a lot of games.”

Perhaps not surprisingly, Tingling believes business executives would do just as poorly if they had a draft. “There’s far less science in drafting than you’d expect, but there’s far less science in decision-making in business than you’d expect,” he says. “People think executives make decisions using science, and a lot of times they don’t.”

But gut feels shouldn’t be completely discredited and replaced by analytics. For instance, Henry Ford’s decision to make cars wasn’t based on data, because that kind of information wasn’t available. However, Tingling says some managers have a nasty habit of finding data to support their decisions after the fact, something called decision-based evidence making, rather than analyzing the data beforehand. “What’s interesting to me is when people choose not to look at the data, when people want to be intuitive managers, and in a lot of cases intuition doesn’t work,” says Tingling.

Not that anyone would ever admit that. People are very eager to shed light on their triumphant decisions and shy away from their bad ones. Take Lee Iacocca. He’s best known for saving Chrysler and helping design the Ford Mustang. But he was also the project manager for the Pinto ($2,000 for 2,000 pounds). “Everybody tries to take credit for the Mustang,” says Tingling. “But I don’t see anybody trying to put their fingerprints on the Pinto.”

The same mindset appears in the NHL. GMs and scouts are quick to point out how smart they were in drafting players such as Rick Nash and Alexander Ovechkin, but nobody takes credit for first-round busts such as Alexandre Daigle and Greg Joly, never mind the thousands of players who never made the NHL at all.

But if you’re watching the draft and want to figure out who’s a thinking-person’s GM, look for those who draft out of position and those who historically find hidden gems in the latter rounds. They’re the ones thinking about what players they actually need and moving up or down to get them.

“The first rounds are sort of like shopping at a jewelry store—of course you’re going to see some diamonds. So will everyone else,” says Tingling. “The next rounds are like going to a garage sale. If you have a good eye, you can see what others might have missed. This is the sign of a smart GM and good scouts.”

Think about this: the difference between a .250 hitter and a .350 hitter in baseball is less than two hits a week on average. That miniscule increase turns an also-ran into an all-star. Or consider the NHL goalie. A .900 save percentage mark is considered the must-reach benchmark, but the real difference between, say, Vezina trophy winner Tim Thomas and the disappointing Vessa Toskala works out to just over an extra save per game.

The same principle, says Gordon, applies to managing a company such as giant retailer Walmart. “It’s not just the low prices. It’s the fact that they do 100 things 10% better than everyone else,” he says. “That 10% may not seem like much, but it puts Walmart miles ahead of the competition.”

There’s no secret formula, argues Gordon—who has worked with the Atlanta Falcons, Jacksonville Jaguars and Campbell Soup, among others—just a willingness to pay the price that greatness requires. Top players know what they want and they want it more than their competitors. As a result, they have more focus, dedication and commitment to the task at hand and that leads to more consistency and better results.

The idea that there is a huge gap between the best and the rest is just one of six myths that Gordon explodes in his book. Another biggie is that top performers were born that way. They somehow came out with an innate ability to succeed. But, says Gordon, people actually achieve greatness through hard work and focusing on the little fundamentals of their particular job until they are mastered.

And the best don’t stop there, because there’s always a new situation that will require their next great performance. The idea that successful athletes or execs feel no fear just isn’t true. They can be afraid, but they’ve learned to overcome it. In other words, the cream rises to the top when the heat is on precisely because the heat is on. They don’t run from situations where failure could be catastrophic; they run to it. “The best define the moment rather than letting the moment define them,” says Gordon.

If anything, great players and teams fear success more than failure, because success can lead to complacency. “If you want to be the best at what you do, never allow yourself to rest on your laurels,” Gordon adds. “If you want to be the best—to continue to be the best—forget past glories. Focus on growing, improving and innovating today. It won’t be easy, but it will be worth it.”

Judge Redfield T. Baum yesterday changed the auction date for the financially troubled franchise to Aug. 5 from Sept. 10, but will only accept bids willing to keep the team in Glendale, Ariz. If a suitable buyer cannot be found, a second auction will take place on Sept. 10 for anyone who wants to move the team.

At least one initial bid is expected from a group led by Jerry Reinsdorf, who also owns baseball’s Chicago White Sox and basketball’s Chicago Bulls. Reinsdorf has reportedly registered a company called Glendale Hockey LLC with the purpose of buying the Coyotes and keeping them in Arizona. Details of that bid might be revealed this Friday, but it’s expected to be substantially less than Balsillie’s US$212.5-million offer, which is contingent on moving the team to Hamilton. (UPDATE: Reinsdorf submitted a US$148-million offer that would pay secured creditors, but apparently not Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes, and requires a new lease to be signed for Jobing.com arena.)

A deal that satisfies only half of the team’s creditors, who are owed about US$300 million would be “tough to accept,” said Baum. “This is a troubled franchise and this court has an obligation to try to get the best outcome possible.”

Balsillie’s camp is betting Baum won’t accept a deal that is far worse than his offer—something the Nashville Predators did in 2007 by rejecting Balsillie’s takeover attempt. The judge also said the NHL must decide by Sept. 2 whether to accept Balsillie and Hamilton. “I’m going to expect the league to make a decision or give an awful good reason why they haven’t been able to,” said Baum.

League officials aren’t exactly keen on Balsillie as an owner, even though he was previously approved when he tried to buy the Pittsburgh Penguins in 2006—a deal he backed out on. “I think the Board has legitimate questions as to his suitability as an owner,” NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly told reporters.

The league is also suggesting Balsillie’s attempts to move the Coyotes are hurting the team. “A team’s lifeblood is derived from advance ticket sales, advertising revenue, corporate sponsorships and television revenue, all of which are adversely affected if there is uncertainty as to whether a team will continue to play in its current venue,” states the league’s filing with Baum.

Of course, very few people and potential sponsors were paying attention before Balsillie stepped into this mess—a fact the NHL conveniently ignores.

******************

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name.

The first part, buying the team, should be easy enough. Balsillie has more than enough dough to trump any competing bid, unless one was to come from, say, someone wanting to move the team to Toronto. And he’s already been pre-approved. “It appears to the court that the NHL can not object or withhold its consent to PSE [Balsillie’s corporate entity] becoming the controlling owner of the Phoenix Coyotes,” noted Baum, the judge presiding over the Coyotes’ bankruptcy case, in his ruling denying Balsillie’s purchase.

The second part is more problematic and likely involves hundreds of millions of dollars in relocation fees, indemnity fees and contract-breaking fees if the NHL approves the relocation proposal at all. If not, that could spur antitrust litigation since there would then be a bona fide dispute, something Baum noted has been missing in the case so far.

However, “it is not an antitrust violation for professional sports leagues to have terms and conditions on relocations of member teams,” stated Baum. Indeed, some restrictions are necessary to create a league, organize games and award prizes—something covered by ancillary restraints doctrine, says Anthony Baldanza, chair of Fasken Martineau’s Antitrust/Competition & Marketing Law Group and a senior partner of the firm. “That really means the restraint is reasonable necessary for, and ancillary to, a broader legitimate agreement, and there is clearly a broader legitimate agreement namely the NHL arrangement as a whole.”

Restrictions such as deciding where a team can be located might be seen as pro-competitive, says Baldanza, in the sense that it may strengthen the NHL against other forms of sports and entertainment. The same restrictions may also dampen competition amongst the teams within a specific league. That’s why the court would apply a rule of reason approach to decide which side has the stronger case.

But antitrust laws as they apply to sports leagues are still developing so what may seem obvious—propping up the Coyotes is a detriment to the other teams as well as the league—is not so simple.

For example, Canada’s Competition Bureau looked at Balsillie’s previous attempt to buy the Nashville Predators in 2008 and found nothing in the NHL’s restrictions that contravened the Competition Act—this country’s equivalent to the Sherman Antitrust Act in the U.S. Since then, the Competition Act has been changed so the Bureau might come to a different conclusion if it were to look into the Phoenix case.

An antitrust lawsuit in this case is still just a lawyer’s dream, but it’s one option Balsillie could turn to if rulings continue to go against him

In the meantime, let’s have some fun. Here’s what the principal players in the Coyotes case have had to say about Baum’s ruling:

Balsillie’s spokesman Bill Walker:
“Jim Balsillie’s bid to bring a seventh NHL team to Canada continues. We’re still here. The court did not approve either our approach or the NHL’s.”

Um, Baum clearly sided with the NHL in most of his ruling.

Jerry Moyes, principal owner of the Phoenix Coyotes:
“Now the most important thing for us to do is work towards an open and transparent sales process that will result in obtaining the most money for the team’s creditors. The case depends upon whether the NHL denies relocation under any circumstances and thus violates anti-trust laws, or specifies a relocation fee that is reasonable in this case.”

Cue the lawsuits.

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly:
“We’re pleased the court recognized the validity of League rules and our ability to apply them in a reasonable fashion. We will turn our attention now toward helping to facilitate an orderly sales process that will produce a local buyer who is committed to making the Coyotes’ franchise viable and successful in the Phoenix/Glendale area. We are confident that we will be able to find such a buyer for the Coyotes and that the claims of legitimate creditors will be addressed.”

The Coyotes can be successful in Phoenix? Bill Daly’s attempt at humour falls flat.

The city of Glendale:
“Clearly the court recognized the significance of these issues and the unique interests of the City of Glendale and its taxpayers. The court based its decision on the law and facts and not on countless rumors and innuendo regarding this matter.”

Smart investors know when to cut their losses. Glendale doesn’t.

Hamilton mayor Fred Eisenberger
“Mr. Balsillie released a statement to suggest that it is not over and that they continue to aspire to getting a team in Hamilton. We’ll continue to try and impress upon [the NHL] that hockey is very viable in Hamilton and there is lots of community support.”

If you’re going to pay a huge fee to break into someone’s territory, wouldn’t it make more sense to be in that person’s rich backyard instead of down the road? Just a thought.

It’s not as if the chief judge of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Phoenix rejected Balsillie outright. In his 21-page ruling, Baum concluded there were just too many complex issues to resolve the case by Balsillie’s self-imposed deadline of June 29, 2009. “Simply put, the court does not think there is sufficient time (14 days) for all of these issues to be fairly presented to the court given that deadline,” the judge wrote.

Balsillie is still in the game and his team certainly put on a brave face after hearing Baum’s decision last night. “Jim Balsillie’s bid to bring a seventh NHL team to Canada continues. We’re still here,” stated spokesman Bill Walker. “The court did not approve either our approach or the NHL’s.”

Hardly. Baum sided with the NHL on most issues. For example, Baum wrote that Balsillie and current Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes cannot ignore the fact that the Coyotes have an agreement with the NHL to play games in Glendale. Baum also said antitrust laws do not apply because there isn’t a bona fide dispute over relocation yet.

“We’re pleased the court recognized the validity of League rules and our ability to apply them in a reasonable fashion,” stated NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly. “We will turn our attention now toward helping to facilitate an orderly sales process that will produce a local buyer who is committed to making the Coyotes’ franchise viable and successful in the Phoenix/Glendale area. We are confident that we will be able to find such a buyer for the Coyotes and that the claims of legitimate creditors will be addressed.”

Who in their right mind would want to keep the Coyotes in Glendale, Ariz., after getting a good look at the financial mess the team is in? There’s a population base that doesn’t care for hockey and probably won’t for the foreseeable future. There’s little media coverage and no chance of having a winning team in the near future. And then there’s the declining economy, which has taken a bigger chunk out of places such as Arizona than it has elsewhere.

The only logical answer is to move the team, but now it will be done on the NHL’s terms. That means big relocation fees, probably higher than what the Coyotes are worth, which is about half of the US$212.5 million that Balsillie was willing to pay.

In the meantime, the court still controls the sale process and an auction will likely be held in September, probably too late for the team to be moved. Baum also invited the NHL and Balsillie to enter mediation on a relocation application and fee.

Baum did not rule on whether Balsillie and Moyes could void the team’s arena lease with Glendale, which was claiming US$795 million in damages if the team had moved.

“Clearly the court recognized the significance of these issues and the unique interests of the City of Glendale and its taxpayers,” the city said in a statement. “The court based its decision on the law and facts and not on countless rumors and innuendo regarding this matter.”

Of course, cash-strapped Glendale will likely now be pressured by the NHL to reduce the team’s rent and taxes to the tune of US$15 million or more. Try and get that one past local taxpayers who have already signaled their disinterest in spending government money on a professional sports team many of them can barely name.

But as it stands now, Balsillie, Moyes, the NHL, Glendale and Hamilton are all losers in this case. Who’s the winner? No one.

“We’re the first Olympic sponsor to ever say we’re going to be carbon neutral,” says Moran. “We’re the first to say we’re going to be waste neutral.” He hopes those commitments will resonate with people attending or watching the Vancouver games this winter. It will certainly have to with those people who want to carry the torch as it’s carried across the country.

Coca-Cola is selecting torchbearers based on their self-described environmental friendliness, whether that’s a commitment to increased recycling, energy and water conservation or sustainability. You can nominate yourself at www.icoke.ca. The cost of the torch relay is about $31 million, according to the Olympic organizing committee, and is funded by Coca-Cola, RBC and other corporate sponsors.

But let’s back up a second. How can a consumer goods company possibly be carbon neutral even for a single event? Coca-Cola will be selling its products on-site so that requires coolers, trucks and manufacturing—all of which emit plenty of carbon into the atmosphere.

Moran agrees that Coca-Cola cannot have zero impact. The company is bringing in energy efficient coolers, using hybrid trucks and employees will wear 15,000 pieces of clothing (everything except shoes and underwear) made from polyethylene terephthalate or PET materials. But post-Games, Coca-Cola will get a third-party audit of its environmental footprint and then buy Gold Standard offsets (those with both social and environmental benefits) with the help of WWF-Canada and the David Suzuki Foundation.

“We knew that if we were going to reach out to Canadians and ask what commitment they were making to the environment, that we needed to demonstrate the kind of leading-edge efforts that we’re willing to go through to make sure our efforts justify that call to action,” says Moran.

Determining what its footprint actually will be is made easier by the fact that the Games is a closed environment so Coca-Cola—along with an outside environmental expert—are able to figure out exactly how many coolers and trucks they will be using, as well as employee travel and other activities.

What’s in it for Coca-Cola? A chance to highlight some of the environmental activities they’re already doing, says Moran. It should be pointed out that many of those activities are actually good for the company’s bottom line as well. Using lightweight packaging means less money spent on raw materials; making plastic bottles using 30% plant waste material cuts down on the need for new plastic; and accessing easily available clean water also cuts costs.

That’s not to take anything away from what Coca-Cola is doing. It should see a return on its investment in the environment, whether that’s through lower costs or more marketing visibility. Being green—or being seen to be green—is still a good business move despite everyone’s preoccupation with the economy.

“A global climate change expert talked to us in the fall and said that the smartest investment you can make, especially in tough economic climes, is in energy conservation because the ROI is guaranteed,” says Moran. “You put in cost-efficient lighting, you know how much you’ll save. When you have that insurance of ROI on your investment, you make those investments.”

Of course, there’s always the fear consumers will tune out if every company starts championing their green efforts. But Moran believes consumers are sophisticated enough to tell if companies are getting real results or whether the promise outweighs reality. We’ll see if that’s true at the finish line at Vancouver 2010 and beyond.

Balsillie and the NHL filed their respective arguments Saturday morning—a little past the June 5 deadline—and they were filled with accusations, threats and insults. But we didn’t learn much new. Balsillie’s side continues to claim that Hamilton is ready, willing and able to support an NHL franchise and that the bankruptcy court has the right to override the league’s constitution, which is filled with anti-trust issues anyway.

The NHL says only it can determine where a team is located—a move supported by the three other major North American sports leagues—and that there are four bidders ready to keep the team in Glendale, Ariz. Of course, none of those bidders is apparently prepared to pay anything close to Balsillie’s US$212.5-million offer, and one of them—Toronto Argonauts co-owners Howard Sokolowski and David Cynamon—probably doesn’t have any interest in keeping the Coyotes down south. They would move the team to Toronto and play out of a new facility.

Of the two arguments, Balsillie’s proposed move makes the most sense. Hamilton likes hockey: Phoenix does not. Hamilton may be a profitable location for the NHL; Phoenix is not and likely never will be. The NHL Players Association thinks the team should move if it can’t be profitable, but it doesn’t care where—just get the Coyotes out of Phoenix.

But all of that doesn’t mean anything if Baum rules the NHL has the right to force a team to stay in a town where it can never be profitable. Many just see the NHL’s actions as just a vain attempt to attract a lucrative American television deal. And that could trigger a flurry of litigation, including an anti-trust filing by Balsillie in the U.S. The Canadian Competition Bureau could also consider looking into the matter.

The Bureau found nothing wrong with the NHL’s policies regarding ownership transfers and relocations when it examined them in 2008. That was after Balsillie unsuccessfully tried to buy the Nashville Predators even though he offered millions more than the eventual successful bidder.

But the Bureau’s laws have changed since then and Balsillie might be able to make a case, says Tony Baldanza, chair of Fasken Martineau’s Antitrust and Competition Law Group in Toronto. He says the 2008 investigation was done using the “abuse provision” of the Competition Act, which looks at anti-competition issues from a criminal point of view. “It seems oftentimes that it’s a bit of a heavy stick in the context of what are at the end of the day commercial disputes,” says Baldanza.

But as of March 12, another provision came into effect that lets the Bureau look at such a case from a civil point of view, which is closer to the rule of reason approach that the U.S. has under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Under rule of reason, a court would consider whether any restrictions placed on the teams are for pro-competitive reasons, either between leagues or between teams. The court would also have to consider whether such restraints are reasonably necessary for and ancillary to the broader legitimate agreement that allows the NHL to create a league, organize games and award prizes.

That’s when most observers point to a landmark case, Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission vs. NFL, where a federal court decided that the league’s rule requiring a team to get approval from three-quarters of the other teams before it can move was an unreasonable restraint of trade. Baum has already indicated he feels there are few similarities between that case and the one Balsillie is making, but for the sake of argument let’s say that case—known colloquially as Raiders since it involved the Oakland Raiders moving to Los Angeles—carried some weight.

“The Raiders case is a classic case that said the league can’t prevent this type of move,” says Salil Mehra, a law professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia. “But it left open the concept that to the extent that the move costs the league or its other members, the league might seek reasonable reimbursement.”

In this case, the NHL could charge Balsillie a fee because Hamilton is located inside the territories of both the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Buffalo Sabres. That fee could be distributed equally amongst all NHL clubs, but would likely be given to just Toronto and Buffalo. The NHL could also ask a fee for vacating a large market such as Phoenix because it reduces interest in that market. (Although how it could go any lower is beyond most rational people’s comprehension.)

Salil says that if the Coyotes were going to fold or fail without Balsillie’s purchase, then that would make his case for relocation even stronger than the one Al Davis had for moving the Oakland Raiders, because that team was going to survive in any case.

But Gil Fried, a professor and chair of the Sport/Hospitality and Tourism Management Department at the University of New Haven in West Haven, Conn., says the courts in past antitrust cases have generally concluded that antitrust laws apply to player transactions (such as free agency), but not team transfers.

And even if Balsillie wins, the NHL may not be under any obligation to schedule games with his team, says Fried. “What Balsillie is buying are the assets such as the players, intellectual property, etc.,” he says. “The owner, not the team has a contract with NHL, so the NHL could always argue that they are not going to schedule any games for a rogue team in Canada.”

Which would no doubt launch even more legal actions. Oh yeah, the Stanley Cup playoffs resume tonight (Tuesday), with the Detroit Red Wings poised to capture their second consecutive triumph over the Pittsburgh Penguins.

Lawyers late yesterday submitted to the NHL a Wright-authored application for relocation on behalf of both PSE Sports and Entertainment LP, which Balsillie created to buy the Coyotes, and the team’s debtors and current owners.

It creates a fairly compelling case for a change of scenery.

According to information from Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes, the team has recorded operating losses of more than US$316 million since moving from Winnipeg in 1996, and will lose another US$44 million over the next five years under even the most optimistic of scenarios.

“Despite good efforts and intentions by many parties, the club is not, never has been and never will be financially viable, consistently supported by fans and a leading professional sports team in Arizona,” the application states.

Little wonder, then, that Moyes did not receive an offer lucrative enough to pay off most the team’s creditors and keep the club in Glendale, even though he hired Citibank’s Private Banking Group and an experienced adviser to pump the team.

In support of the idea that moving the Coyotes to Hamilton would not hurt the league, Wright refers to a study done by market researcher HotSpex in May that shows nearly two-thirds of Hamilton-area residents would hold the league in higher regard if a team moved there. By contrast, 38% of people polled in the Phoenix area said their opinion would not change if the Coyotes left, and 8% would have a higher regard for the league.

Wright also points out that the NFL is the most successful professional sports loop in North America, but doesn’t have a team in the second-largest market, Los Angeles, so the NHL could easily do without Phoenix. (You might reply that the comparison is not apt: while football is ingrained in the American consciousness, hockey is still growing in the southern markets. And football is a proven winner on U.S. television, while the NHL is not.)

Clearly, a move north doesn’t help strengthen American interest in the NHL, even if it would appease Canadians still bitter over losing the Winnipeg Jets and Quebec Nordiques a decade ago. There are 1.4 million people in Hamilton and the surrounding area—7 million in southwestern Ontario—and, contrary to popular belief, their median after-tax income is 14% above the Ontario average, suggesting that they may have the means to spend tens of thousands of dollars on hockey tickets.

And the tickets will be pricy if Balsillie is to pay for the improvements necessary to make Copps Coliseum suitable for the NHL. http://www.makeitseven.ca/press_coppsplan.html But the town has ponied up before. When it looked like Balsillie was going to get the Nashville Predators, 13,000 deposits on season tickets were made, as were 70 corporate ones, totaling US$11.1 million in tickets sold in 12 days. Wright says Balsillie believes a team in Hamilton will be an immediate success, but is “not only willing but is able to fund any losses.” Such losses would include keeping the team in Phoenix for one more year, if his bid is successful but he’s unable to move the team immediately because of scheduling or other concerns.

But one factor Wright’s application doesn’t address is the effect a team in Hamilton would have on the Toronto Maple Leafs and, to a lesser extent, the Buffalo Sabres. The NHL’s constitution grants each team a territory that extends 80 kilometres beyond the home city’s corporate limits in each direction. Those teams can prevent NHL games from getting played on their turf without consent.

Bill Walker, spokesperson for Balsillie’s bid, says those effects will be determined down the road, and depend on the outcome of the bankruptcy proceeding and auction, along with smaller matters such as team name, uniform and parking facilities. No doubt Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment has an exorbitant price in mind for such consent, while Sabres owners Tom Golisano and Larry Quinn would likely get a little less.

When the Colorado Rockies moved to New Jersey in 1982, the owners had to pay a combined US$12.5 million to the New York Rangers, New York Islanders and Philadelphia Flyers to encroach upon their territories. The Los Angeles Kings received US$25 million over a 10-year span when the Anaheim Ducks came waddling by in 1993.

But keep in mind those figures are 27 and 16 years old, respectively, and the NHL was in even weaker shape back then.
————

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer or search by my real name.

Far from being the typical jock, Quinn has a bachelor of arts degree in economics (which he earned while playing in the NHL) as well as a law degree. As a coach, he won two Jack Adams trophies as the best in the NHL (Philadelphia in 1980; Vancouver in 1991) and had won the fourth-most wins (616) as a coach in league history.

I had the good fortune to interview Quinn just before the World Junior Hockey Championships in December, and he is one of the most thoughtful leaders in any profession I have ever come across. He knows what leadership means. He knows what teamwork means. And he knows how to get the best from the talent he’s given.

One quote that still sticks with me was a bit about honesty and how leaders should deliver it. “As a coach, you need to try to be honest with your team. Sometimes you won’t tell them things that might hurt them, but you need to be honest, to be competent, have a plan for them, and they have to be comfortable that you know what you’re talking about.”

It’s too bad Quinn never had that kind of leadership above him while with the Maple Leafs, but he’s a proven winner with one goal left: a Stanley Cup. Not sure he’ll get that in Edmonton, but at least he has one more chance.

Read my Live & Learn interview with Quinn here.

Jim Balsillie is an Ontario-born-and-raised hockey fanatic who apparently helps run Research In Motion when he’s not trying to land an NHL team. He’s unsuccessfully tried to buy the Pittsburgh Penguins and Nashville Predators, and is now trying to land the Phoenix Coyotes for US$212.5 million, but only if he can move them to Hamilton.

Jerry Moyes is the owner of Swift Transportation, one of the largest trucking companies in the United States, and the lead owner of the Coyotes. His ownership group has pumped US$300 million into the team, which has been a consistent money loser. The team has lost $73 million in the last three years alone, according to court documents.

Jerry Reinsdorf is the owner of the Chicago White Sox and Chicago Bulls and he has put together an offer for the Coyotes with the NHL’s blessing. Details of that bid have been sealed for the moment, but it’s expected to be about US$100 million less than Balsillie’s offer. Reinsdorf would keep the Coyotes where they are.

John Breslow is a Las Vegas businessman who made a fortune in welding and owns 3% of the Coyotes. He has also put together a deal for the team that would keep it in Phoenix. Breslow was shopping the Coyotes around earlier this year to no avail.

The NHL is against Balsillie’s proposed purchase, not because it doesn’t like the idea of either him or Hamilton joining the league’s fraternity (as some Canadian nationalists like to point out), but because he is going about it the wrong way. The NHL believes it controls the Coyotes because it acquired that right in a proxy agreement when it advanced Moyes money in November to keep the team afloat. Moyes counters that he only gave up voting rights, not actual control.

Redfield T. Baum is the U.S. bankruptcy judge presiding over the Coyotes filing. On May 19, he ordered the NHL and Moyes to mediation on the topic of who actually owns the team and report back May 27. Baum also gave the two sides until June 22 to come up arguments as to whether the team can be moved.

The city of Glendale originally said it would take US$500 million to break the Coyotes’ lease, but it’s now seeking injunctive relief, which means it believes a financial settlement would not make up for what the area would lose if the team moves. Some believe the lease could be broken for as little as US$5 million, while others think it could stand up because cities are better at writing such leases these days.

The city of Hamilton would have to convince the provincial and federal governments to kick in about $120 million to complete long-term upgrades to Copps Coliseum, which would be the Coyotes’ new home if Balsillie wins. The RIM exec has said he will fund the first round of upgrades to make Copps ready for the NHL, which would cost him about $30 million.

Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment (owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs) has been mostly silent on the possibility of the Coyotes moving, but don’t expect it to stay that way. The distance between Copps and the Air Canada Centre is 41 miles, putting the proposed newcomers within the Maple Leafs’ 50-mile territory. It is estimated MLSE could lose $20 million per year in television revenue, plus potential losses in corporate and fan support.

Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand are two New York senators opposed to Balsillie’s plan because it would have a crippling effect on the Buffalo Sabres, which gets 20%—or about US$15 million—of its revenue from southern Ontario.

———————–

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name. That function finally seems to be working.

Too often business biographies don’t connect with the average person. Oh sure, these budding tycoons often start out just like anybody else, but before you know it they’re rich, successful and putting on airs. By the book’s last page we’re left feeling like we don’t really know the person we just spent several hours reading about, and, even more damning, we don’t care to. Fortunately, that’s not the case with Hat Trick: A Life in the Hockey Rink, Oil Patch and Community by Canadian oil-business veteran Harley Hotchkiss.

Certainly, the book, co-written by Paul Grescoe (who also helped pen Dick Haskayne’s solid Northern Tigers), has all the typical trappings of a poor-boy-makes-good kind of story. Hotchkiss grew up on a depression-era farm in southern Ontario, loved hockey, went to school and eventually found enough success as an investor in the oil and gas industry that he’s been able to give millions away to various organizations, as well as own a chunk of the NHL’s Calgary Flames.

But details of Hotchkiss’ oil patch successes are relatively short in the book, which is really more about the people he’s worked with rather than nitty-gritty details of how great his business ventures were. And it works. People are always more interesting than dry business tales, especially when the people are colourful folk such as Daryl “Doc” and Bryon “B.J.” Seaman, T. Boone Pickens and Nelson Skalbania, who was one of the first co-owners of the Flames along with Hotchkiss.

The Flames may have been dumped in the first round of this year’s playoffs, but there’s more than enough tales about hockey and the business of hockey to keep fans amused between periods during the next two rounds. Especially enjoyable in light of Research In Motion co-CEO Jim Balsillie’s attempt to land an NHL team is all the background wheeling and dealing Hotchkiss and his partners—and credit for getting the Flames has to go to the Seaman brothers—went through to move the team from Atlanta. The two situations are totally different, but provide an interesting comparison of the NHL at two very different times in its history.

But Gary Bettman haters beware. You may find newfound respect for a man many people openly despise, especially if you are a fan of the Flames, Edmonton Oilers or Ottawa Senators. Hotchkiss credits Bettman for helping to save all three teams. “All the teams, including the American ones that were losing money themselves, coughed up money to support the Canadian teams through the Canadian currency assistance plan,” recalls Hotchkiss. “I’ll be forever grateful to those American teams for doing that, and to Gary Bettman and his leadership team for doing that.”

Not that Hotchkiss would have anything bad to say anyway. In conversation, Hotchkiss is unfailingly polite, even apologizing if he thinks he’s rambling on a bit too long. He often ends his tales with phrases such as “or so the story goes” as if he’s talking about events that may have happened to somebody else. And maybe he is in a way. It seems like Hotchkiss is a bit taken aback at how his career unfolded, crediting lady luck, his co-workers and his wife far more often than himself for any success he’s had.

Indeed, there have been a few serendipitous moments—or “turning points” as Hotchkiss calls them—that have determined where he’s ended up. It turns out that he never really intended to go into the oil and gas business; he never intended to be an NHL franchise owner; and he never intended to be NHL chairman, especially for 14 years. And he certainly never intended to write an autobiography. But he did. These endeavours weren’t exactly whims, but neither were they exactly planned.

“One of my biggest challenges is that I find it hard to say no,” says Hotchkiss. “I don’t like to get my name involved in something unless I’m personally supportive of it and I’ve got my own time, energy and resources committed to it. I’m not a letterhead kind of a guy.”

And yet, despite a business career that would consume most people’s time and energy, Hotchkiss devotes a large part of his book to the friends he’s met over the years and his family. He admits he might have spent more time with his family, but he’s spent enough that he doesn’t feel the regrets that many businesspeople have. There’s no sense of having missed out on his family, his kids or outside interests. He understands that it’s knowing the people in your community—whether it’s defined by a common kinship, interest or geography—that make a life worth living.

In the end, that’s what makes Hotchkiss—and Hat Trick—so likable.

Hat Trick: A Life in the Hockey Rink, Oil Patch and Community by Harley Hotchkiss with Paul Grescoe, Dundurn Press, 2009, $36.

———————————
Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name. That function finally seems to be working.

History may end up showing that Eric Molson was on watch when his family’s brewery sold an 80.1% stake in the Montreal Canadiens in 2001 to American businessman George Gillett Jr. for US$184 million. History may also show that it was Molson who finally succumbed to the pressures of an increasingly globalized beer industry and merged with Coors Brewing Co. Critics suggested the deals were just two more examples of Canadians selling out to American interests. But that would be a bad rap.

The company sold the Canadiens partly because it was trying to refocus its attention on being a beer company, dismantling what had become a diverse and unwieldy conglomerate by the late 1990s. By 2004, even that focus was not enough to compete in an industry where the giants were getting bigger and bigger. Molson had a choice: become a Canadian-only player in a stagnating market or join the global community. That Eric Molson helped engineer a deal that gave him 50% control of what would be the world’s fifth-largest brewer—not to mention a pretty sweet special cash dividend of $5.44 for existing shareholders—should be applauded (although it would have been nice for Montreal to be the official headquarters, not Denver).

Notoriously shy of the media, Molson gave few interviews. It took seven years before he finally agreed to a Canadian Business Live & Learn profile, but even then he had three conditions: the interview had to be in-person at a location of his choosing, his sons, Andrew and Geoff, had to be present, and the interview could not be recorded. The first two conditions were easily met, but the third was troublesome because Live & Learn articles are a series of first-person quotes. But the interview went off with nary a hitch, well, except for an initial hesitance on Molson’s part to say more than a few gruff syllables at a time.

Molson wasn’t rude, just wary and only warmed up only after the topic of chemistry was brought up. “I’m a chemist, really,” Molson told me. “I love brewing beer, trying beer, drinking beer, but being a chemist is the only thing I’m really good at. The rest of the stuff I learned. To take on salary administration and bonus structures gets complicated.”

Molson revealed himself to be a dedicated beer baron, hockey fan and family man, often deferring to his sons’ knowledge or memories, and paying kudos to his long-time wife, Jane. But the Molson name isn’t disappearing from the corporate organization chart along with Eric’s departure. His oldest son, Andrew, already a director, takes over as vice-chairman, and Geoff, currently vice-president of marketing in Quebec, is also now on the board of directors. To find out more about Andrew and Geoff, see The Molson Way.

Hopefully, the Molson legacy will live on for a few more generations. Cheers!
————————————
Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name. That function finally seems to be working.

Let’s review two of his more contentious decisions (and they were his first and most recent ones). His first was to give Philadelphia Flyer Daniel Carcillo a one-game suspension for punching Pittsburgh Penguin Maxime Talbot in the head in the waning minutes of a game out of reach. He also fined Philly coach John Stevens US$10,000 for allowing that to happen, declaring that the NHL will “not tolerate attempts by clubs to ‘send a message’ late in a game when the outcome had been determined.”

But Campbell yesterday did a 180, apparently deciding to endorse the very “message” he had decried four weeks earlier. He refused to suspend Carolina Hurricane Scott Walker for sucker-punching Boston Bruin Aaron Ward in the head late in the game on Sunday. In fact, he overturned the referee’s on-ice decision to hand out a misconduct, a fighting major and a minor for instigating that would have resulted in an automatic one-game suspension because it occurred in the last five minutes of the game.

Never mind that Walker was the third man into the altercation—another NHL no-no—and may have broken a bone in Ward’s face, whereas Carcillo’s blow did little damage. Instead, Walker was given a US$2,500 fine—hardly punishment at all. Campbell is making the NHL look bush league at a time when it needs to save face in the southern U.S. In short, his inconsistency

* means players won’t change their ways;
* annoys the league’s employees—the players and coaches;
* angers the league’s fans—i.e., its customers.

Conspiracy theorists might suggest Campbell is making these ridiculous decisions to take the heat off his boss, NHL czar Gary Bettman, who has been portrayed rather unflatteringly by the media lately. But the truth is Campbell just can’t make up his mind about what the NHL wants from its players—and that means his actions are doomed to fail.

Hockey is a hard-nosed sport and dust-ups are inevitable. When they happen, the referees are the ones who are supposed to decide on the appropriate punishment. Senior managers like Campbell should only step in as a last resort on altercations that are egregious. Only one event of that nature has happened so far, when Washington Capital Donald Brashear was given a five-game suspension for blindsiding New York Ranger Blair Betts.

Campbell got that one right, but every other decision he’s made has been wrong, because he has contradicted himself time and time again. Campbell is not doing his job and now it’s up to Bettman to step in and show his wayward lieutenant the error of his ways. If Campbell continues to make decisions and not back them up with any kind of logic, then Bettman should discipline and, ultimately fire him if he doesn’t shape up.

——————————

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @onsportsandbeer. Search by user name or my proper name. That function finally seems to be working.

Balsillie made the first move, presenting a US$212.5-million offer for the Coyotes that was included in the team’s Chapter 11 filing. But Bettman was quick to strike back, stripping Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes of his authority over the team and publicly declaring Balsillie will not get his way. “We fix the problems,” Bettman said earlier this week. “We don’t run out on cities.” Of course, that’s not even remotely true.

Bettman didn’t care a whit when the Quebec Nordiques moved to Colorado in 1995 and the Winnipeg Jets moved to Phoenix in 1996 (oh the irony of that move if Balsillie gets his way). But it’s also true that the teams in Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa would likely have folded or moved away without his help. Don’t believe me? Let’s ask Harley Hotchkiss, co-owner of the Calgary Flames.

“If people are critical of Gary Bettman and I know lots of people are, they’d better remember that he probably kept the Flames, Oilers and Senators in business,” says Hotchkiss. “All the teams, including the American ones that were losing money themselves, coughed up money to support the Canadian teams through the Canadian currency assistance plan. I’ll be forever grateful to those American teams for doing that and to Gary and his leadership team for doing that.”

Today, all three of those teams are on relatively sound financial footing. The same cannot be said of the teams that Bettman has been championing in the southern U.S. Phoenix has the most public financial problems, but Nashville, Atlanta, Tampa and Florida are experiencing tough times, too. The sticking point for Bettman now—just as it was in the mid-1990s when he allowed the Canadian teams to walk away—is that the NHL cannot get a decent American television deal without interest in the south. A major network is not going to shell out billions of dollars when one-third of the country is completely disinterested.

Yet Bettman’s ego—and it’s a big one—is tied directly to U.S. expansion. He will do everything in his power to stop any team from moving north for mere economic reasons or absence of fans. He would rather the league spend millions propping up franchises in areas that demonstrate little interest in hockey despite more than a decade of trying to build a fan base.

Balsillie has a large ego, too. While he often comes off as the good ole small-town Canadian boy that he is, he’s every bit as determined to get hold of a team and move it to southern Ontario as Bettman is to block him. He’s tried twice and been blocked by Bettman. Now he’s trying for a third time.

One troubling aspect of Balsillie’s power play is that there’s no guarantee that southern Ontario would actually support a second team. There is interest, certainly, and the team would likely sell out the small confines of Hamilton’s Copps Coliseum for the first couple of seasons at least. But professional hockey other than the Toronto Maple Leafs (and how professional they are is debatable) has not been a huge success in this neck of the woods. The Toronto Marlies—farm team of the  Leafs—attract crowds better measured in the hundreds, not thousands. And Hamilton’s not a hotbed for the American Hockey League, either. Local fans just don’t care about minor pro hockey.

But it’s often been said that Toronto is not a hockey town at all. It’s a Maple Leafs town. The sports bars around the city are not crammed with people interested in watching good teams play playoff hockey. And the truth is that the Leafs are finally wearing out their welcome, too. Season tickets are still hard to get, but there are plenty to be had cheap on most scalping services, and there were plenty of empty seats at the two games I attended this year (not to mention a healthy contingent of fans of the opposing team). That attitude is not that much different in the suburbs.

The real question is whether there is enough corporate interest to support a third team in a province that is crumbling as its manufacturing engine gets crushed by globalization and the economic downturn. Balsillie seems certain there is, but until there actually is a team in Hamilton—or wherever—we won’t actually know.

All of which makes the game being played between Bettman and Balsillie even more interesting to watch. Who will present the most compelling case to the bankruptcy court in Phoenix? Who will be able to convince NHL team owners that they have the best plan for their own economic interests?

Thousands of hockey fans—most of them in Canada—are waiting for the answer and the first battle will be played May 19 in a Phoenix courtroom where a judge could decide who currently controls the team: the NHL or Jerry Moyes. Game on.

But that’s not good enough for NHL brass. The league quickly stripped ownership powers from current Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes, who bought the team in 2001 for US$127 million. It’s a move that seems designed to thwart Balsillie’s dream again. “We are investigating the circumstances surrounding the petition, including the propriety of its filing,” said NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly in a statement. “We have removed Jerry Moyes from all positions of authority to act for or on behalf of the club. The league will appear and proceed before the bankruptcy court in the best interests of all of the club’s constituencies, including its fans in Arizona and the league’s 29 other member clubs.”

The last time Balsillie tried to take over a team he was also rebuffed, with many speculating the NHL didn’t want the brash co-CEO of Research In Motion or his desire to move a team to Canada. That was May 2007 and Balsillie offered US$238 million for the Nashville Predators. A week later he launched a season-ticket drive in Ontario and reactivated a deal that gave him exclusive rights to negotiate a lease agreement at Copps Coliseum in Hamilton. The whole thing was dissolved a month later when Predators owner Craig Leipold sold the franchise to California businessman Boots Del Biaggio III for almost US$50 million less. Yes, he actually took less money in order to avoid selling to Balsillie.

A year earlier, Balsillie tried to buy the Pittsburgh Penguins for US$175 million, but that didn’t pan out either and Balsillie withdrew later that year.

Now he’s back with a new offer and a new web site (www.makeitseven.ca) to publicize his efforts. Will it work? The NHL seems determined to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix despite the fact that the franchise loses millions every year and has little hope of ever making money. A team in southern Ontario, though, would be a pretty easy sell once Balsillie throws enough money at both the Toronto Maple Leafs and Buffalo Sabres for intruding on their territory.

“I am excited to move closer to bringing an NHL franchise to what I believe is one of the best unserved hockey markets in the world — Southern Ontario,” Balsillie said in a statement. “A market with devoted hockey fans, a rich hockey history, a growing and diversified economy and a population of more than seven million people.”

Another offer for the Coyotes could come in while the team is in bankruptcy protection, but given the lousy economy, a better offer seems unlikely. Phoenix is a drain on the league, which has been lending it money to pay its bills this year, and the players don’t like it either, because it lowers overall revenues and that helps lower their salaries.

Balsillie has also agreed to provide $17 million in financing to keep the franchise afloat until a sale is complete, which is supposed to be finalized June 30 so that the team, wherever it may be, can play in the 2009-10 season.

Ultimately, a decision to let Balsillie join the NHL fraternity might come down to what the board of governors thinks and they just might be sick and tired of supporting a team that has no hope of being a success. But don’t for a second underestimate the power of NHL czar Gary Bettman’s ego. He doesn’t like Balsillie’s pressure tactics, or the fact that his dream of expanding hockey into the American south is blowing up in his face.

———

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/onsportsandbeer. Don’t bother searching by my real name or user name, because that function doesn’t work very well on Twitter.

“Ontarians have spoken out clearly, resoundingly and unequivocally against companies benefiting from the primary and secondary markets,” says Chris Bentley, Ontario’s attorney general. “This is about fairness. We are determined to ensure that Ontarians have fair access to entertainment tickets for events taking place in the province.”

If the legislation is passed, any individual convicted of reselling would face a fine of up to $5,000, but corporations could be dinged up to $50,000.

The proposed legislation is certain to be applauded by sports and entertainment ticket buyers, as well as brokers who have complained that Ticketmaster is horning in on their territory.

Ontario’s current Ticket Speculation Act already makes it illegal for anyone to a) sell or try to sell a ticket at higher than face value, or b) buy or offer to buy tickets with the intention of selling them at prices higher than the advertised or announced price. Anyone guilty is subject to a fine of up to $5,000.

Whether or not Ticketmaster is actively reselling tickets directly on TicketsNow—and, for the record, Ticketmaster says it isn’t—the current legislation would seem to cover everyone selling tickets through the online service. If that indeed is Ticketmaster, charge them, just as police would charge a street scalper.

But this new legislation probably does at least one thing: it should force Ticketmaster to change how its subsidiary works. TicketsNow, which was bought last year for US$265 million, would have to prevent anyone from Ontario reselling tickets that were originally bought through Ticketmaster. If the legislation passes, no doubt other jurisdictions will look at adopting similar laws.

It’s all just another headache for Ticketmaster, which also faces four class-action lawsuits in Canada, widespread consumer hatred and artist criticism. But it’s a well-deserved one.

———

Anyone interested in quick sports business hits (and a few on brews, too) can check me out on Twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/onsportsandbeer. Don’t bother searching by my real name or user name, because that function doesn’t work very well on Twitter.

Most hockey fans are aware that it was Jacques Plante, then tending goal for the Montreal Canadiens, who first used a practical mask in 1959 after being struck in the face by a shot by the New York Rangers’ Andy Bathgate. Bill Burchmore, a 35-year-old sales-promotions manager at Fiberglass Canada Ltd, designed the mask, which eventually evolved into the product that all goalies were using by the early 1970s.

Fewer people know that Clint Benedict briefly wore a leather-and-wire mask in 1929, and even fewer realize Elizabeth Graham was the first to wear a mask in a game, way back in 1927 while playing for Queen’s University. Good on ya, Liz.

But before we get too excited about how much we know about this country’s innovative history, it turns out that both the electric oven and lightbulb were invented in Canada, but only 8% and 20%, respectively, of those surveyed know that.

And while Leger’s survey, done on behalf of innovation consulting firm Nytric Ltd., reports that 76% of respondents believe Canadians are an innovative bunch and that nearly 60% have had product ideas of their own, only one in seven have ever considered marketing them.

Why bring this up? Because Canadian Business and Nytric have kicked off the third annual Great Canadian Innovation Competition – giving one lucky inventor the opportunity to receive up to $90,000 in engineering and business services to bring the winning concept to life, plus a profile-boosting feature in an upcoming issue of the magazine. The deadline for entries is midnight, May 1.

So if you believe you might just have invented the next lightbulb or goalie mask, go to http://www.canadianbusiness.com/greatinnovation

There’s one week left to enter. Don’t get left behind.

The interconnection of sport, beer and gender is a “holy trinity of contemporary popular life” and as such “a marketer’s dream” say the editors of (what else) Sport, Beer, and Gender, a book published earlier this year. Indeed, sport is a major driver of the beer marketplace and most of the beer advertising is aimed at men. About 60% of the US$1 billion spent on alcohol advertising in the United States supports sports programming.

On this side of the border, Saint John, N.B.-based Moosehead has a long history of supporting sports at both the professional and amateur levels. It is currently the NBA’s official beer partner in Canada and the title sponsor of an NBA fantasy game and also sponsors a team in the Nova Scotia Senior League called the Dartmouth Moosehead Dry, which will host this year’s Canadian Senior Baseball Championship.

Now, I don’t know what you think about Moosehead’s other offerings (and it boasts about 10 beers in its line-up, although some are only available in the east), but Cracked Canoe is a light beer whose chief enticement seems to be that it has less than 100 calories per bottle or can. No surprise, then, that it checks in at just 3.5% alcohol. If you like light beer, Cracked Canoe is an easy switch.

But Moosehead is also going after a more mature, upscale audience, both men and women, particularly those who are health conscious. No wonder it decided to launch Cracked Canoe at Canoe, a particularly swanky restaurant that overlooks Toronto’s business district and the lake. Matt Johnston, Moosehead’s vice-president of marketing for North America, describes the beverage’s appeal as one of “approachable sophistication.” A television and print campaign called An Ode to Slow certainly drives home that message, featuring two lingering romantic-type scenes sandwiched around a baseball pitcher throwing a knuckleball in slow motion.

While such soft-ball marketing would seem to shut out the high-testosterone crowd, Moosehead president Derek Oland says sports is still a key part of Moosehead’s strategy even as it seeks a higher clientele. “So many beer-drinking occasions are associated with sports, after a golf game, after a workout or after a racquetball game,” he says. “But the reality is that you probably have to move on to something else, like go back home, or back to work, or something along those lines.”

That’s where a light beer like Cracked Canoe comes in, says Oland. Drinking a couple of these certainly won’t make you feel light-headed or heavy, and advising people to slow down fits in with the idea that Moosehead takes its time making its products. “The knuckleballer is one of the images we used because there’s such a great connection between the throwing of a knuckleball and what we think is the skill involved in producing this great beer,” says Oland.

You’ll get a chance to see the ad if you’re watching the NBA playoffs on TSN or Score, which is part of the media buy Moosehead has in its deal with the league. Ironically, the largest Canadian-owned brewer doesn’t have a deal with the only NBA team, the Toronto Raptors. Then again, the Raptors didn’t even come close to making the playoffs. That, too, may take some time.