Guest AriGold Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Discussion regarding ownership of the Canucks will be allowed but any comments regarding the private life of Aquilini or his family will not be. - Hockeyville88 The Vancouver Canucks have become caught in the middle during the high-profile divorce proceedings of one of the team's owners. Businessman Francesco Aquilini and his wife Taliah are splitting up after about 20 years of marriage. Taliah Aquilini was granted an order on Friday that allows her to demand a precise value for all of her husband's holdings. During the lifetime of the marriage, Francesco Aquilini and his family have built an empire worth billions of dollars, including real estate holdings, agriculture and the Canucks -- estimated by Forbes magazine to be worth about $300 million. Aquilini told CTV News that he's disappointed that his marriage is ending and promised that the divorce won't end with a split in the Canucks' ownership. "With the Canucks, it will be business as usual and the team will continue to operate," he said. The section 57 order granted to Taliah Aquilini says that the pair has no reasonable prospect of getting back together. The couple will return to court on April 3. http://www.ctvbc.ctv...ishColumbiaHome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AriGold Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 In the original thread it said to post it when it could be with a credible source. She wants to own the Canucks, thats pretty big news to canucks fans. Grow up and understand this is a discussion board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Friendly reminder when posting about this topic: Please respect the forum rules and refrain from making personal statements regarding the Aquilini family. This thread is to talk about ownership of the Canucks, not the private lives of the Aquilinis. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Friendly reminder when posting about this topic: Please respect the forum rules and refrain from making personal statements regarding the Aquilini family. This thread is to talk about ownership of the Canucks, not the private lives of the Aquilinis. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AriGold Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Just for clarity's sake, where do we draw the line between personal life and ownership? Because the divorce sort of goes hand-in-and with ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Just for clarity's sake, where do we draw the line between personal life and ownership? Because the divorce sort of goes hand-in-and with ownership. Thanks for asking: I'd say anything speculatory - i.e "they are getting divorced because ______" will not be allowed Statements about their private lives or their personalities - i.e "person X is apparently not nice and I heard that ____" will not be allowed Discussing the ownership as pertaining to the Canucks - i.e "Implications on the team, revenue, ticket prices, team stability, etc." will be allowed Discussions about legal proceedings that have been reported by credible media sources will be allowed Provide sources where possible Hope that clarifies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DollarAndADream Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 What is there even to discuss if we can't talk about him or her? OMGz I loved the Canucks and I hope they don't split ownershipz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Hope she has a case of Schneidermania,lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stexx Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 what is francesco's stake in the canucks? do each of the brothers own a third each?, if so wouldnt be too hard for them to buy out her stake. Sad situation for the family, hopefully it ends peacefully unlike the dodgers debacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kassassin Train Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 How crazy would it be if she became the Canucks owner and a year later the Canucks won the cup? I wonder if she would be the first female professional sports team owner to have a franchise win a championship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Seriously.. What is there possibly to discuss related to the Canucks at this point? Absolutely nothing Anyways I don't really care.. but this is so pointless.. enjoy your evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Ya, this is 'potentially' huge concern for the Canucks org going forward. Generally speaking, anytime sports team owners are involved in a divorce, you have to be concerned about $$. Is the new owner willing to still spend to the cap? Are they going to provide endless amounts of $$ (like they have thus far) to keep this team competitive (i.e. sleep Dr.s, nutritionists etc). Will it effect ticket prices? Will the new owner have the same 'vision' for this team? Not sure how divorces work, are assets frozen to some extent till the divorce is finalized? July 1st is closely approaching, will Gillis have the OK to spend? He can say "it's business as usual" all he wants, but it's not necessarily up to him right, pretty much up to the courts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigneault's Timeout Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 How crazy would it be if she became the Canucks owner and a year later the Canucks won the cup? I wonder if she would be the first female professional sports team owner to have a franchise win a championship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Well this is just speculation here, but Mr. Aquilini's wife apparantly doesn't have any stake in his assets. I doubt it she will get the Canucks. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/business-as-usual-canucks-chairman-says-as-divorce-case-proceeds/article2372334/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stark Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Isn't she appearing on Real Housewives of Vancouver or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBackup Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Here is my source, for some reason it won't be linked to the above post. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/business-as-usual-canucks-chairman-says-as-divorce-case-proceeds/article2372334/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stark Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I don't know about you, but I sort of care about who owns the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surtur Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 wouldn't this have to be allowed by the NHL board of directors or whatever .. any time a team changes ownership...? i don't think it is just hey i want it ok it yours .. type of deal. but who knows .. hope everything ends well and stays out of the media as much as possible. Nucks will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 A British Columbia Supreme Court on Friday granted an order to declare that Francesco Aquilini, chairman of the Vancouver Canucks, and his wife Tali’ah “have no reasonable prospect of reconciliation with each other.” The couple, who were married in 1994, separated in January of 2011. The Aquilini Investment Group owns Canucks Sports & Entertainment, which includes the Vancouver Canucks and Rogers Arena, the building located on prime land in the city’s downtown core. The team is worth $300-million, Forbes Magazine estimated recently. Francesco Aquilini, the eldest of three brothers, runs the team. It is unclear what individual stake he has in the club, along with brothers Roberto and Paolo, and father Luigi. In an interview, Mr. Aquilini said the hockey team would not be affected by the divorce proceedings. “It’s business as usual,” Mr. Aquilini, 51, said in a telephone interview Friday afternoon after the court session concluded. He did not appear in court. “This is a personal and private matter, and I hope the media will respect our privacy. It’s really unfortunate. My wife and I are ending our marriage.” The question of the Canucks, operations and ownership, arise because of the recent fortunes of another prominent North American sports franchise, baseball’s Los Angeles Dodgers. Frank McCourt, former owner of the Dodgers and their stadium, battled with his wife Jamie in their divorce proceedings over the fate of the team. The acrimonious and public fight landed the Dodgers in bankruptcy court. Mr. McCourt agreed to pay Ms. McCourt $130-million to relinquish any claim on the team. Major League Baseball took over the Dodgers last year and the team is being auctioned off through a court process. Tracey Jackson, a lawyer for Tali’ah Aquilini, argued in favour of the granting of the order that declared irreconcilable differences between Mr. and Ms. Aquilini, section 57 under B.C.’s Family Relations Act. Jackson said the order was necessary to protect Ms. Aquilini’s interests while the two sides discuss assets as their divorce proceedings unfold. “It is a complicated structure,” Jackson said of the Aquilini assets. Ms. Aquilini, 43, is the owner of the family home but otherwise has no stake in any significant assets, the court was told. The couple has five children, four of whom are younger than 18. After court on Friday, she would not say what her aims were, or why the case was proceeding publicly. “It’s just not appropriate for us to talk,” Ms. Aquilini said as she walked with her lawyer. Jackson said in court that she sought the order because there had been a “marked changed in behaviour and attitude” by Mr. Aquilini in recent months, as the parties worked through the divorce. The lawyer alleged there were questions about Mr. Aquilini’s actions around “structuring” of his assets. The two sides are scheduled to return to court April 3 for a judicial case conference, a mediation-type session. For such a conference, financial statements by attendees must be sworn. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/business-as-usual-canucks-chairman-says-as-divorce-case-proceeds/article2372334/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canIcrytoo Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I'd just like to know where you got the idea that she that the not to be mentioned person wants the Canucks??? Not once did it mention her the not to be named persons interest in the Franchise, in any of the articles posted or in the video on the news. So Im assuming you assumed out of pure speculation? sorry let me edit this for the anal folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.