MLSE purchase the Argos

[bluto]

No more rental fee to MLSE, so there's some savings there.

That isn't how business works...

[R.J]

That isn't how business works...

Huh... ?
TFC doesn't pay rent to MLSE, the Argos did have to, MLSE then pays a fee to the City which used to be percentage based, but it now a set rate. If the Argos are now owned by MLSe, why would they have to pay rent to the parent company ?

[bluto]

Huh... ?
TFC doesn't pay rent to MLSE, the Argos did have to, MLSE then pays a fee to the City which used to be percentage based, but it now a set rate. If the Argos are now owned by MLSe, why would they have to pay rent to the parent company ?

And MLSE just decides to pay that fee to the city out of its own pocket because why?

Having MLSE as the governor of the facility and the club is great. It protects us against a landlord who won't care about giving us a good deal monetarily or one that suits the club. It doesn't mean that we don't have a landlord. It just means that our landlord is family.

[Mightygoose]

And MLSE just decides to pay that fee to the city out of its own pocket because why?

Having MLSE as the governor of the facility and the club is great. It protects us against a landlord who won't care about giving us a good deal monetarily or one that suits the club. It doesn't mean that we don't have a landlord. It just means that our landlord is family.

How I understand it, the landlord in an Argos perspective is now the city. MLSE being the tenant, the Argos are now a brand under the MLSE umbrella. Same as TFC.

I'm hoping the Argos can now get some more permanent signage in the stadium so it could be both teams' home. Maybe some new Grey Cup banners (since we're adding one) that can always stay up.

[bluto]

How I understand it, the landlord in an Argos perspective is now the city. MLSE being the tenant, the Argos are now a brand under the MLSE umbrella. Same as TFC

Neither scenario gets us free rent is all I'm saying. We're paying somebody no matter what.