The Tennessean finally sees the other side

by Dirk Hoag on Aug 20, 2007 7:06 AM EDT

Having posted a number of different stories on the same subject since last Thursday, the Tennessean finally produced a somewhat balanced look at David Freeman's proposed changes to the Sommet Center lease, which are critical to the group's chances of buying the Predators.

The meat of the piece is right here:

Freeman said his group is seeking three significant changes from the status quo:

• About $3 million from the city that would be used to help minimize past losses.

• Full responsibility for incentives to improve the financial performance of the arena.

• A guarantee from the city of an average 14,000 in paid attendance per game each season so the club does not lose its substantial NHL revenue-sharing rights, in exchange for eliminating any right for the team to ever leave Nashville.

For those who believe Freeman is trying to spring some kind of last-minute, moneymaking scheme on the city, it's worth noting that his group — and not the city — has insisted on including provisions in a new lease that would:

• Forbid new ownership to raise ticket prices above the league average.

• Require new ownership to maintain a team payroll at least $5 million above the league's salary floor if paid attendance averages 16,000 per game.

• Require new ownership to donate all excess positive cash flow up to its $3 million request back to organizations in the Middle Tennessee community.

It's too bad these details weren't included in Friday's article about this process, which got picked up off the wire and run across North America in an especially negative light.

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

What does "a guarantee from the city of 14,000 paid attendance" constitute? Does the city have to buy up the remaining tickets on days that figure isn't reached? If not, how exactly can the city guarantee this?

by Eric on Aug 20, 2007 12:57 PM EDT reply actions

I believe under the current terms of the lease the city would actually purchase tickets in order to reach the 14,000 mark under the "cure clause", and this proposal (initial as it is) doesn't offer up any change on that front.

They wouldn't buy tickets for each game that is in danger of coming in under 14K, but would rather focus on the season-long average.

by The Forechecker on Aug 20, 2007 4:11 PM EDT reply actions

How can the Predators agree to give profits to the city of Nashville? The NHL revenue sharing program already has dibs on those profits, intending to spread them around less fortunate clubs. That would seem to me to be a conflict within this agreement, and one that would most definitely go the NHL's way.

by Joe on Aug 20, 2007 6:54 PM EDT reply actions

That's a good question, Joe, which might be best directed to someone like Tom Benjamin, who is more in tune with the revenue-sharing aspects of the new CBA than I am.

I would suspect that the profits in question would come after any necessary payments made to the NHL, but that's just a guess on my part.

by The Forechecker on Aug 20, 2007 11:41 PM EDT reply actions