PREDATORS WATCH

[scottie65]

Preds Set High Attendance Goal
New owner wants 15,000 each game
By JOHN GLENNON • Staff Writer • May 6, 2008

With sellout crowds at Sommet Center still fresh in their memories, Predators officials are quietly confident the enthusiasm shown their team late last season will serve as an attendance springboard for next season.

The Predators averaged 14,650 in paid attendance over the last 16 home games after averaging 12,640 through the first 25. Attendance has traditionally been higher after football season and similar surges were followed by setbacks.

Maintaining the higher paid attendance figures into next season is critical. The Predators need to average at least 14,000 in order to qualify for the NHL's full revenue-sharing plan, which allows smaller markets such as Nashville to share profits made by bigger markets with bigger local television contracts.

So the hierarchy isn't kicking up its heels and smoking cigars, but it finds the numbers reassuring after a season of tremendous turmoil headlined by an ownership change.

"Honestly, the number we talk about is not 14,000," said David Freeman, head of the ownership group. "Our expectation is that we're shooting in the 15,000 to 16,000 range. We have that much confidence in what this franchise has accomplished in a very short period of time and where we can go from here.''

The Predators averaged 13,429 in paid attendance at 17,113-seat Sommet Center during the regular season, riding the late surge past the 2007-08 revenue-sharing minimum of 13,125.

The Predators also played host to three playoff games, but postseason contests don't count toward revenue sharing.

"We believe this will be a good platform to build off of for next season,'' said Ed Lang, president of business operations. "We're encouraged about our strong finish and very appreciative of the entire fan base for the show of support. We're already hard at work on next year's sales and marketing programs to maintain those types of attendance levels throughout the whole season.''

Turnaround factors
The Predators struggled at the gate through the first half of last season, in part because of the previous summer's chaos. Last May, Craig Leipold announced he was selling the team, prompting relocation fears. Then he slashed payroll, leading to the departure of a number of star players.

The stability of a mainly local ownership group that took over at the end of November, as well as the team's improved play after Jan. 1, meant far better numbers at the gate.

"Once the ownership change took place, we got more aggressive from a marketing standpoint,'' Lang said. "We did some more advertising through all forms of media and our sales organization was more aggressive.''

Businesses became more confident in sponsoring the Predators. Taco Bell and Wal-Mart were significant additions to the client list, and a number of health-care organizations purchased big chunks of tickets for company outings.

"During the first half of the season, we had a lot of hesitation from companies and even individuals who were doing the wait-and-see thing,'' Lang said. "No one really wanted to make the commitment with the fluctuation that was going on. Once the new ownership came on board, I think you began to see people say, 'I want to be associated with the Predators again.' ''

Then there was the team's play.

The Predators stood at 18-18-2 as the calendar turned to January, but they embarked on a 12-4-4 run that carried them back into playoff contention. Nashville surprised many analysts by reaching the postseason before falling to the Detroit Red Wings in a first-round series.

"They had a really good run there where they moved out of the basement and into playoff contention,'' Lang said. "That helped a lot as well.''

Ticket trend key
Season-ticket renewals so far have been encouraging, the Predators said. A strong showing would allay fears that many fans — who bought tickets last summer to help the team in crisis — would not come back.

The Predators raised ticket prices but already had committed to a significant payroll increase, ensuring the core of the playoff team will be back.

"There was certainly nothing this year that would have dampened anybody's enthusiasm,'' Freeman said.

"We know there were people that took a leap of faith last summer. But hopefully we've rewarded them and given them every reason to not only renew, but to be even more enthusiastic.''

The Predators hope that enthusiasm will be present for all of 2008-09 so that a late-season surge won't be as critical.

"Our focus next year is to figure out how to get our attendance up in the first half of the season,'' Lang said. "We know we're always going to be competing with college football and the NFL.

"But we still have to be able to hold our own.''

Reach John Glennon at 259-8262 or [e-mail].

tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080506/SPORTS02/805060372/1028


The best of luck to you Nashville.

[WpgJets2008]

- The Predators averaged 14,650 in paid attendance over the last 16 home games after averaging 12,640 through the first 25. The Predators averaged 13,429 in paid attendance at 17,113-seat Sommet Center during the regular season, riding the late surge past the 2007-08 revenue-sharing minimum of 13,125.

This article paints such a rosy picture. But let's look a little deeper into the story.

We must understand that reaching the minimum threshold for NHL revenue sharing means that only 25% of the full revenue sharing will be paid out to the club. That means literally millions of dollars weren't passed over to the Preds since they failed to meet the 100, 75 and 50% thresholds.

Homework Check!
13424 = ((16 x 14650) + (25 x 12640)) / 41

Using the increased ticket prices for next season 2008-2009 and for partial season ticket packages (13 or 23 games), we can estimate the amount of revenue that this past season's ticket average actually brought in.

300 level: $19, $25, $31 and $39 ($28.50 avg)
200 level: $51 and $88 ($$69.50 avg, these are all club seats)
100 level: $55, $65, $74, $81 and $115 (these last seats are all-inclusives) ($78 avg)

Est. Revenue per game (High): $ 852,424 = 13424 x $63.50
(weighted 50% to $78, 25% of $ 28.50, 25% of $69.50)
Est. Revenue per game (Med): $ 787,541 = 13424 x $58.67
(simple average)
Est. Revenue per game (Low): $ 774,565 = 13424 x $57.70
(weighted 30% to $78, 35% to $28.50, 35% to $69.50)

Now it is a little in Nashville's favour to use their 2008-09 pricing against the G&M's original gate revenue data from now 3 seasons ago. Based on my range above Nashville would sit 14th to 16th. It is conceivable that due to sharp ticket price increases in Pittsburg and a couple others, that Nashville may find itself around 18 to 20th. (Aside: Can you imagine another 10 teams drawing less? That is why I'm so patient waiting for the ROTJ.)

No doubt the team's gate is been improving. It was only $516,000 back then while sitting 24th in the league. So while the ticket sales average has stalled out, the actual revenue continues to rise. Better for the club on one hand, but losing the bulk of the revenue sharing dollars still hurts alot (it was over $13 million just 2 seasons ago). What this means is that the same number of fans are coming out to the games but they are each paying more to do so. The influx of more ticket sales just hasn't happened yet under either ownerships.

predators.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NHLPage&id=10826

predators.nhl.com/team/app?service=page&page=NHLPage&bcid=tic_200708SeasonTicketInquiry#Inquire

- Maintaining the higher paid attendance figures into next season is critical. .

Wrong! Maintaining these numbers will kill the team! This author didn't bother to run the numbers as above.

- The Predators need to average at least 14,000 in order to qualify for the NHL's full revenue-sharing plan, which allows smaller markets such as Nashville to share profits made by bigger markets with bigger local television contracts.

Adding just short of 600 sold seats per game is no small feat, especially after trying so hard for a number of years. Leipold admitted when announcing he was selling the team to Balsillie that he had the most aggressive, most expensive marketing budget in the entire league and it still didn't get the job done, necessitating his sale of the team.

When Freeman talks about 15,000 and even 16,000 fans per game, you have to wonder if his statements are all public relations moves.

- Businesses became more confident in sponsoring the Predators. Taco Bell and Wal-Mart were significant additions to the client list, and a number of health-care organizations purchased big chunks of tickets for company outings.

It is good to see retailers jump on board. The rumour has been that the new ownership has forced their own health-care companies to buy tickets. Thereby creating some buzz that the ticket sales are in demand. These haven't been proven yet. However, it makes some sense if you have to bail the team out, why not use the lateral ticket sales as a way to draw interest.

"Monitoring the NHL"
Chris

[scottie65]

Holy shite Batman - way to break down the numbers. Good job.

[ratzy]

Except....do those numbers include "announced attendance" or people actually paying for tickets? I think your numbers are a little high...

[khall555]

May 6, 2008 21:37:24 GMT -5 ratzy said:

Except....do those numbers include "announced attendance" or people actually paying for tickets? I think your numbers are a little high...

PAID attendance is PAID as in people paying. Add to that they averaged 13,429 (which is more than the Jets ever averaged in announced attendance BTW) in paid attendance and will get a 100% revenue sharing. Revenue sharing is not paid on a game by game basis it is the average for the full year
I guess the attendance boost was those owners buying ticket from themselves though What a bogus lie. They could have let Sillyballs buy the team and then bought tickets to keep the lease valid and kept the team here and come off cheaper.

[White-Out]

May 7, 2008 15:52:14 GMT -5 khall555 said:

May 6, 2008 21:37:24 GMT -5 ratzy said:

Except....do those numbers include "announced attendance" or people actually paying for tickets? I think your numbers are a little high...

PAID attendance is PAID as in people paying. Add to that they averaged 13,429 (which is more than the Jets ever averaged in announced attendance BTW) in paid attendance and will get a 100% revenue sharing. Revenue sharing is not paid on a game by game basis it is the average for the full year
I guess the attendance boost was those owners buying ticket from themselves though What a bogus lie. They could have let Sillyballs buy the team and then bought tickets to keep the lease valid and kept the team here and come off cheaper.

All I can do is laugh at you... Your comparing apples and oranges. 'Nuff said!

[vivianmb]

it's hard to tell some of these guys that even the great teams back in the 70's/80's only averaged in the 14000s. most rinks only held 14-16000 back then.i 've said this before and i'll say it again, when i was akid my dad used to take me to the ticket window at the garden right before the game and score good seats, regularly. and then when we moved to the island him and his buddies used to go to isles( yes the dynasty years) games without tix and get them at the window right before the game. sellouts were NOT THE NORM BACK THEN. so whiteout is right... apples to oranges.

[WpgJets2008]

Add to that they averaged 13,429 in paid attendance and will get a 100% revenue sharing. Revenue sharing is not paid on a game by game basis it is the average for the full year

Khall,

Your statement shows that you do not know how the NHL revenue sharing system works.

If your season average is 14,000 seats paid for then you 100% qualify for RS. This is not a lease requirement but an NHL CBA provision.

If your season average is below 13,125 seats paid for then get zero percent of RS.

There are other steps at 25%, 50% and 75% qualifying of RS too. Based on the article's stated average season (paid for) attendance 13,429, the Predators will only fall into the 25% RS, not the 100% RS.

This is why I said the Predators will get millions less in revenue sharing than what they could have had if 14,000 seats were sold on average.

We all know that 14,000 fans aren't enough to keep the team out of red ink. But it is a double whammy when the seats aren't sold plus the revenue sharing isn't able to be collected.

Also, I appreciate the dialogue that this forum provides us all but comparisons of Winnipeg attendances from 1980 through 1996 versus current NHL standards in 2008 are not going to help your Predators. So be careful of using numbers since they tend to bite back if not carefully checked into.

Also, comparing eras can lead to wild assertions like the following 2 examples:

1) The Winnipeg Jets seasons attendances were either slightly above or below the league average. This in modern terms means that Jet attendances could be slightly above or below 17,000.

2) Nashville's current season average of 13,429 tickets sold out of a possible 17,113 seats works out to 78% arena capacity. Standing room only at Winnipeg's old arena was 15,500. At 78% Winnipeg would only need to average 12,163 paid seats to match Nashville's past season. According to several sources, Winnipeg's attendance never fell even close to that low until the team annouced it was leaving town (1995-96 lame duck/last season)

So let's agree to leave these sorts of high school math comparisons aside as they are easy to do, not at all helpful to the ROTJ debate and can lead to bad feelings??

Chris

[khall555]

May 8, 2008 11:55:12 GMT -5 WpgJets2008 said:

Add to that they averaged 13,429 in paid attendance and will get a 100% revenue sharing. Revenue sharing is not paid on a game by game basis it is the average for the full year

Khall,

Your statement shows that you do not know how the NHL revenue sharing system works.

If your season average is 14,000 seats paid for then you 100% qualify for RS. This is not a lease requirement but an NHL CBA provision.

If your season average is below 13,125 seats paid for then get zero percent of RS.

There are other steps at 25%, 50% and 75% qualifying of RS too. Based on the article's stated average season (paid for) attendance 13,429, the Predators will only fall into the 25% RS, not the 100% RS.

This is why I said the Predators will get millions less in revenue sharing than what they could have had if 14,000 seats were sold on average.

We all know that 14,000 fans aren't enough to keep the team out of red ink. But it is a double whammy when the seats aren't sold plus the revenue sharing isn't able to be collected.

Also, I appreciate the dialogue that this forum provides us all but comparisons of Winnipeg attendances from 1980 through 1996 versus current NHL standards in 2008 are not going to help your Predators. So be careful of using numbers since they tend to bite back if not carefully checked into.

Also, comparing eras can lead to wild assertions like the following 2 examples:

1) The Winnipeg Jets seasons attendances were either slightly above or below the league average. This in modern terms means that Jet attendances could be slightly above or below 17,000.

2) Nashville's current season average of 13,429 tickets sold out of a possible 17,113 seats works out to 78% arena capacity. Standing room only at Winnipeg's old arena was 15,500. At 78% Winnipeg would only need to average 12,163 paid seats to match Nashville's past season. According to several sources, Winnipeg's attendance never fell even close to that low until the team annouced it was leaving town (1995-96 lame duck/last season)

So let's agree to leave these sorts of high school math comparisons aside as they are easy to do, not at all helpful to the ROTJ debate and can lead to bad feelings??

Chris

the 14K number is for NEXT Season not this current one the Predators will recieve a full share this year. They reached that plataeu that gave them a full share around 13,250. Any proof that all of those attendance numbers for that Jets was paid numbers? No Comps were ever given right.
The attendance numbers are what they are. You can't complain about Nashville when Winnipeg's number are no better. Add to that 10 years ago ticket were far cheaper than today.
True hockey fans don't go to the game unless they can see the entire ice surface right, but Nashville just has bad fans
Our Businesses steped up when the team was moving did Winnipeg's? Our Governments steped up did yours?


Have any proof Predators owners were buying up tickets through their businesses? I guess they own Taco Bell right. FYI Taco Bell was making money here and still pulled out last season because the team was not fulfilling their agreement along with other businesses (which are returning now).

[senner]

You are absolutely right on the "stepping-up" issue. It hurts, but it is true.

[vivianmb]

May 8, 2008 16:18:00 GMT -5 khall555 said:

May 8, 2008 11:55:12 GMT -5 WpgJets2008 said:

Khall,

Your statement shows that you do not know how the NHL revenue sharing system works.

If your season average is 14,000 seats paid for then you 100% qualify for RS. This is not a lease requirement but an NHL CBA provision.

If your season average is below 13,125 seats paid for then get zero percent of RS.

There are other steps at 25%, 50% and 75% qualifying of RS too. Based on the article's stated average season (paid for) attendance 13,429, the Predators will only fall into the 25% RS, not the 100% RS.

This is why I said the Predators will get millions less in revenue sharing than what they could have had if 14,000 seats were sold on average.

We all know that 14,000 fans aren't enough to keep the team out of red ink. But it is a double whammy when the seats aren't sold plus the revenue sharing isn't able to be collected.

Also, I appreciate the dialogue that this forum provides us all but comparisons of Winnipeg attendances from 1980 through 1996 versus current NHL standards in 2008 are not going to help your Predators. So be careful of using numbers since they tend to bite back if not carefully checked into.

Also, comparing eras can lead to wild assertions like the following 2 examples:

1) The Winnipeg Jets seasons attendances were either slightly above or below the league average. This in modern terms means that Jet attendances could be slightly above or below 17,000.

2) Nashville's current season average of 13,429 tickets sold out of a possible 17,113 seats works out to 78% arena capacity. Standing room only at Winnipeg's old arena was 15,500. At 78% Winnipeg would only need to average 12,163 paid seats to match Nashville's past season. According to several sources, Winnipeg's attendance never fell even close to that low until the team annouced it was leaving town (1995-96 lame duck/last season)

So let's agree to leave these sorts of high school math comparisons aside as they are easy to do, not at all helpful to the ROTJ debate and can lead to bad feelings??

Chris

the 14K number is for NEXT Season not this current one the Predators will recieve a full share this year. They reached that plataeu that gave them a full share around 13,250. Any proof that all of those attendance numbers for that Jets was paid numbers? No Comps were ever given right.
The attendance numbers are what they are. You can't complain about Nashville when Winnipeg's number are no better. Add to that 10 years ago ticket were far cheaper than today.
Our Businesses steped up when the team was moving did Winnipeg's? Our Governments steped up did yours?


Have any proof Predators owners were buying up tickets through their businesses? I guess they own Taco Bell right. FYI Taco Bell was making money here and still pulled out last season because the team was not fulfilling their agreement along with other businesses (which are returning now).

True hockey fans don't go to the game unless they can see the entire ice surface right, but Nashville just has bad fans

[/quote]

hey you want to buy a hockey team ? the players are paid in u.s dollars which is the equivilent of 1.35 the amount of the dollars you get paid when you sell tickets. and we get no revenue from our stadium as there are no lux boxes and we dont own concessions. well do you want to buy it?

seriously if you knew 1/10 of what you are talking about it would be something.


they hung the ENTIRE upper deck FROM THE ROOF !!!! you could barely see the whole rink from the front row. the building origially sat arouind 9500
then in the the late 70's to 15500.
not once was the actual footprint of the building expanded. they just kept cramming seats in.


Winnipeg Arena
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Winnipeg Arena
Ol' Barn on Maroons Road


Location 1430 Maroons Road
Winnipeg, MB R3G 0L5
Broke ground 1952
Opened October 18, 1955
Closed November 7, 2004
Demolished March 26, 2006
Owner Winnipeg Enterprises Corporation
Operator Winnipeg Enterprises Corporation
Construction cost $2.5 million CAD (Includes cost of Canad Inns Stadium)
Tenants Winnipeg Warriors (WHL) (1955-1961)
Winnipeg Jets/Clubs/Monarchs (WCHL) (1967-1977)
Winnipeg Jets (WHA/NHL) (1972-1996)
Winnipeg Warriors (WHL) (1980-1984)
Manitoba Moose (IHL/AHL) (1996-2004)
Winnipeg Thunder (WBL) (1992-1994)
Capacity Hockey: 10,100 WHA
Hockey: 15,565 NHL
Hockey: 13,767 AHL

Winnipeg Arena was an indoor arena located at 1430 Maroons Road in Winnipeg, Manitoba, across the street from Canad Inns Stadium. Built in 1955, it was owned by community-owned Winnipeg Enterprises Corporation. At the time of the arena's construction, Enterprises was headed by prominent businessman Culver Riley and had borrowed about $2.5 million, most of it from the City of Winnipeg, to build the Stadium and Arena.[1] At the time, Winnipeg was Canada's third largest city and the new Winnipeg Arena was considered to be the finest facility in the western half of North America. The building's first major tenant was the Winnipeg Warriors (minor pro) of the Western Hockey League (minor pro) from 1955–1961. Its major tenant subsequently was the Winnipeg Jets of the WHA and the NHL from 1972-1996. In 1972 the Winnipeg Arena hosted game 3 of the famous "Summit Series" between Team Canada and the USSR. The game ended in a 4–4 tie. Following the departure of the Jets to Phoenix, Arizona, the Arena's prime tenant from 1996-2004 was the Manitoba Moose of the International Hockey League, and later of the American Hockey League.

The Winnipeg Arena was also home to the Winnipeg Warriors of the (Junior) WHL from 1980 through 1984, and the Winnipeg Monarchs of the same league in the 1960s and 70s. Also a popular location for filming movies, the building was used in the made-for-television Inside the Osmonds and the ESPN film A Season on the Brink. It hosted the fourth WWF In Your House pay-per-view in 1995.

The arena opened October 18, 1955 with the first regular season game between the Winnipeg Warriors (minor pro) and the Calgary Stampeders (hockey). The ceremonial opening faceoff was conducted by J. D. Perrin, President of the Warriors Hockey Club, before a sell-out crowd (including standing room) of 9,671. This was, at the time, the largest crowd in WHL history. The occasion marked the return of professional hockey to Winnipeg after a 27-year absence. The building sat 9,500 at its opening and replaced the obsolete Shea's Amphitheatre. In 1956, J. D. Perrin made an offer to purchase the Winnipeg Arena, Stadium, and Baseball Park Complex from Winnipeg Enterprises. In keeping with the tenor of the times, when public ownership was thought to be advantageous, the offer was rejected.

Renovations in 1979 expanded capacity to 15,565. That same year, a painting of Queen Elizabeth II was commissioned for the Arena by Manitoba's Lieutenant Governor, Francis Lawrence Jobin. Gilbert Burch did the painting, which measured 5x7 metres (one of the largest ever painted of the Queen) and hung from the Arena rafters.

In 1996, after the Jets left, another renovation took place. Club seats were added, and the North End ice level seats were replaced with a club lounge. The portrait of the Queen was also removed; as of 2007, it sits in a Whitby, Ontario storage facility and is for sale.[2]

The Winnipeg Arena earned the nickname of the "White House" amongst locals for its traditional White Out during Jets' playoff games. The Winnipeg White Out is the best known and most loved sports tradition in Winnipeg.


[edit] Decommission and demolition
Due to the opening of the MTS Centre, the Winnipeg Arena's demolition was approved, with the Arena holding its last event on November 7, 2004. The City of Winnipeg took on the $1.45 million expense of demolishing the now-vacant arena. Final demolition was scheduled for 7:15am on Sunday March 26, 2006. However, the dynamite failed to bring the entire structure down. Hours later, construction vehicles pulled down the rest of the structure.

The Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan Board, or "Ontrea Inc.", purchased the Winnipeg Arena site for $3.6 million. The land is expected to be used for retail.


[edit] References
[3] - Manitoba Historical Society

[edit] External links
Video of the failed implosion
Preceded by
first arena Home of the
Winnipeg Jets
1972 – 1996 Succeeded by
America West Arena
Preceded by
Saint Paul Civic Center Home of the
Manitoba Moose
1996 – 2004 Succeeded by
MTS Centre

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnipeg_Arena"
Categories: Indoor arenas in Canada | Indoor ice hockey venues in Canada | Sports venues in Winnipeg | Western Hockey League arenas | National Hockey League venues | Winnipeg Jets | Manitoba Moose | Defunct indoor arenas | Former music venues | Demolished buildings and structures | World Hockey Association venues | 1955 architecture

[jhendrix70]

Would YOU want to sit up here khall555? Didn't think so.........and yet, alot of Winnipeggers did!



See how the Pressbox covered essentially this entire side of the Upper Deck. The other side was just as bad with the Venting, Catwalk, etc.... ( See Picture Above......)




Here is a view from the Upper Deck at the Beautifal Sommet Center........ Quite a difference I'd say.........

[khall555]

May 8, 2008 19:04:48 GMT -5 jhendrix70 said:

Would YOU want to sit up here khall555? Didn't think so.........and yet, alot of Winnipeggers did!



See how the Pressbox covered essentially this entire side of the Upper Deck. The other side was just as bad with the Venting, Catwalk, etc.... ( See Picture Above......)




Here is a view from the Upper Deck at the Beautifal Sommet Center........ Quite a difference I'd say.........

And yet your elected officals said the arena was fine and everyone blamed Gary Bettman when the team left.

Plus maybe everyone will stop judging other cities by attendance because there are other reasons for poor attendance than just "Bad fans". Leipold screwed it up here with the corporate community and sponsors and it was the coporate community that ended up saving the team.

Quit saying Nashville does not care about hockey when you don't know all of the facts. It crystal clear WE DO CARE or the team would be in Hamilton right now.

Anyone have any proof that all the owners were buying tickets for the team??
Why would Boots (who is NOT the majority owner BTW) allow them to do that when he wants to move the team to KC (Which he doesn't BTW)?? Word is it's in the ownership deal that he can Never become the Majority owner. Yet it's reported that he is the sole owner of the team. David Freeman Owns the Nashville Predators

[jhendrix70]

Nashville: Will Be on the Move! ( Horrible Spot for an NHL team ) Enjoy it while it last buddy!

[vivianmb]

Predators' owner under investigation by U.S. authorities: report
San Jose paper says feds looking into Del Biaggio's loans

(Canadian Press)American federal authorities are investigating the business dealings of William "Boots" Del Biaggio III, a co-owner of the Nashville Predators, the San Jose Mercury News reported Friday.

The 40-year-old financier, who was brought in as a saviour of the Tennessee-based NHL franchise last summer when it looked to be on the way to Hamilton, Ont., announced this past Monday he was leaving Sand Hill Capital, a firm he co-founded in 1997 as a lender to start-ups, "for personal reasons."

But the Mercury-News reported that sources "familiar with the investigation" were looking into loans Del Biaggio obtained "in the course of a broader examination of his financial dealings."

Calls to the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Francisco by the paper were not returned, and the Securities and Exchange Commission would not comment.

A Sand Hill Capital spokeswoman told the paper her company was not the target of any investigation, adding, "Boots does have outside personal entities that he controls that have nothing to do with the Sand Hill business."

Del Biaggio's involvement with the National Hockey League goes back a couple of years to when Mario Lemieux was trying to lessen his ownership of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The California financier was one of the investors put up as an alternative to Canadian Jim Balsillie's attempt to purchase the club.

Lemieux ultimately chose to keep the Penguins himself.

Already a minority owner of the San Jose Sharks, in 2007 Del Biaggio was involved in an attempt to put an NHL team in Kansas City, looking at the Nashville Predators as a potential target for relocation.

When Balsillie emerged again as a buyer for the Predators in the same year (signing a letter of intent with owner Craig Leipold on May 24), Del Biaggio and two partners threw their lot in with a group of local investors led by David Freeman, chief executive officer of 36 Venture Capital LLC, to purchase the club and keep it in Tennessee.

At the time of sale, the Mercury News said, the partners' investment was worth about $60 million US. Del Biaggio sold his share of the Sharks.

Balsillie, through his lawyer, accused NHL commissioner Gary Bettman of sabotaging his bid and forcing Leipold to sell to the local group and Del Biaggio. Bettman denied this.

In an interview with the Globe and Mail last November on the occasion of Canadian investor Doug Bergeron being added to the Nashville ownership group, Del Biaggio was indirectly critical of Balsillie.

"I don't mind telling the Globe and Mail I'm very excited to have a Canadian billionaire as part of my group," Del Biaggio said. "It's refreshing to have someone who respects the NHL, respects the process and the tradition of the NHL."

[dbp1990]

I LOVED THE UPPER DECK AT THE ARENA!

Best seats in the House always were 1st row Center Ice on the Decks!

Man that thing rocked in the playoffs..........

[Hobble]

Maybe if the feds find something wrong with their situation, maybe the Preds will be on the move!!!

[jhendrix70]

May 30, 2008 23:01:30 GMT -5 Hobble said:

Maybe if the feds find something wrong with their situation, maybe the Preds will be on the move!!!

And it most certainly won't be to KC!

[scottie65]

ey Preds investor sued
Del Biaggio's disputed loan is unrelated to team
BY GETAHN WARD • AND JOHN GLENNON • STAFF WRITERS • MAY 31, 2008
Read Comments(8) Recommend (4) Print this page E-mail this article
SHARE THIS ARTICLE: Del.icio.us Facebook Digg Reddit Newsvine What’s this?
A key investor in the Nashville Predators faces a lawsuit in California that accuses him of doctoring documents to obtain a $3 million loan late last year.

The loan to William J. "Boots" Del Biaggio III came on Nov. 28. In early December, Del Biaggio and other investors finalized the purchase of the Nashville hockey team for $193 million.



Del Biaggio resigned this week as general partner from a boutique lending company he co-founded, Sand Hill Capital, citing personal reasons.

Most of the investors in the hockey team are Nashville business executives, but Del Biaggio of California is the second-largest investor, with about a 27 percent stake. There's no evidence that the loan was related to the Predators purchase.

In the lawsuit filed with Santa Clara County Superior Court earlier this week, DGB Investments Inc. said that Del Biaggio had used a securities account that claimed a $3.3 million balance at San Francisco-based investment bank Merriman, Curhan, Ford & Co. as collateral for a loan for a commercial venture. But after he failed to make payment at the end of last month, citing significant financial and other problems, DGB said it learned that the securities account had never belonged to Del Biaggio.

DGB said the account was "doctored to make believe that the account statement be longed to Del Biaggio," according to the lawsuit.

Del Biaggio did not return phone calls or e-mails, nor did his attorney.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Attorneys Office in San Francisco have launched an investigation into a "retail client and broker" of Merriman, the company said in a filing with the SEC on Thursday.

Merriman said that its own internal inquiry shows that a "broker appears to have assisted a retail client in obtaining loans from third parties using information from the accounts of other retail clients." The SEC also is looking at Merriman's trading in certain stocks and supervisory system.

Merriman and Scott Cacchione, a Merriman broker and managing director whose clients included Del Biaggio, are listed as co-defendants in the lawsuit. Cacchione has been suspended from the company.

preds see no impact

Bill Daly, NHL associate commissioner, said he had been in contact with David Freeman, the largest Nashville owner of the Predators, about the matter, but did not plan to comment more.

The Predators said Del Biaggio's departure from Sand Hill Capital would have no impact on the team.

"We understand Boots Del Biaggio has resigned from Sand Hill Capital for
personal reasons. Until he comments further, there is nothing for us to add or comment on," the team said in a statement.

The key legal question is whether Del Biaggio obtained the $3 million loan by fraud, said Gary Brown, a securities attorney with Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz in Nashville.

"Certainly, the broker would be liable if he actually did what the complaint said that he did," Brown said. "Whether his employer is liable depends on whether they knew about it or whether they failed to appropriately supervise him."

The lawsuit was signed by Douglas G. Bergeron, an officer of DGB Investments who last year had planned to become part of the Predators ownership group. Bergeron also is chief executive officer of San Jose-based VeriFone.

Del Biaggio said at the time that "Doug is a good friend of mine and an incredible businessman. He has an incredible track record."

Bergeron spoke to The Tennessean in October about joining the Predators group, saying, "We think it'll be a fantastic opportunity for the investment group, and we're pretty sure we're going to prevail here. We're just tying some loose ends up."

Bergeron ultimately did not join the group that purchased the Predators.

"He never became a part of the group. I don't know the details. I don't know where or why the process stopped,'' said Predators spokesman Gerry Helper.

www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080531/SPORTS02/805310370/1028

[scottie65]

Key Preds investor sued
Del Biaggio's disputed loan is unrelated to team
BY GETAHN WARD • AND JOHN GLENNON • STAFF WRITERS • MAY 31, 2008
A key investor in the Nashville Predators faces a lawsuit in California that accuses him of doctoring documents to obtain a $3 million loan late last year.

The loan to William J. "Boots" Del Biaggio III came on Nov. 28. In early December, Del Biaggio and other investors finalized the purchase of the Nashville hockey team for $193 million.



Del Biaggio resigned this week as general partner from a boutique lending company he co-founded, Sand Hill Capital, citing personal reasons.

Most of the investors in the hockey team are Nashville business executives, but Del Biaggio of California is the second-largest investor, with about a 27 percent stake. There's no evidence that the loan was related to the Predators purchase.

In the lawsuit filed with Santa Clara County Superior Court earlier this week, DGB Investments Inc. said that Del Biaggio had used a securities account that claimed a $3.3 million balance at San Francisco-based investment bank Merriman, Curhan, Ford & Co. as collateral for a loan for a commercial venture. But after he failed to make payment at the end of last month, citing significant financial and other problems, DGB said it learned that the securities account had never belonged to Del Biaggio.

DGB said the account was "doctored to make believe that the account statement be longed to Del Biaggio," according to the lawsuit.

Del Biaggio did not return phone calls or e-mails, nor did his attorney.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Attorneys Office in San Francisco have launched an investigation into a "retail client and broker" of Merriman, the company said in a filing with the SEC on Thursday.

Merriman said that its own internal inquiry shows that a "broker appears to have assisted a retail client in obtaining loans from third parties using information from the accounts of other retail clients." The SEC also is looking at Merriman's trading in certain stocks and supervisory system.

Merriman and Scott Cacchione, a Merriman broker and managing director whose clients included Del Biaggio, are listed as co-defendants in the lawsuit. Cacchione has been suspended from the company.

preds see no impact

Bill Daly, NHL associate commissioner, said he had been in contact with David Freeman, the largest Nashville owner of the Predators, about the matter, but did not plan to comment more.

The Predators said Del Biaggio's departure from Sand Hill Capital would have no impact on the team.

"We understand Boots Del Biaggio has resigned from Sand Hill Capital for
personal reasons. Until he comments further, there is nothing for us to add or comment on," the team said in a statement.

The key legal question is whether Del Biaggio obtained the $3 million loan by fraud, said Gary Brown, a securities attorney with Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz in Nashville.

"Certainly, the broker would be liable if he actually did what the complaint said that he did," Brown said. "Whether his employer is liable depends on whether they knew about it or whether they failed to appropriately supervise him."

The lawsuit was signed by Douglas G. Bergeron, an officer of DGB Investments who last year had planned to become part of the Predators ownership group. Bergeron also is chief executive officer of San Jose-based VeriFone.

Del Biaggio said at the time that "Doug is a good friend of mine and an incredible businessman. He has an incredible track record."

Bergeron spoke to The Tennessean in October about joining the Predators group, saying, "We think it'll be a fantastic opportunity for the investment group, and we're pretty sure we're going to prevail here. We're just tying some loose ends up."

Bergeron ultimately did not join the group that purchased the Predators.

"He never became a part of the group. I don't know the details. I don't know where or why the process stopped,'' said Predators spokesman Gerry Helper.

www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080531/SPORTS02/805310370/1028