Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs Montreal Canadiens | March 10, 2021 | 8 p.m. PT | SNP, RDS

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Lol.

 

To be fair that team is still a Claude Julien team. It shows in their work ethic.

 

A Travis Green team works hardest on day one of training camp and then cruises the rest of the way.

....that's all part of the Soft Swedish country club atmosphere we've been cultivating since the Naslund days.   

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

throw phone GIF

Isn't that the Real Estate developer guy who only owns the Canucks to obtain their financial losses as a tax write-off against his profitable house building empire so he can pay less overall corporate tax and who couldn't care less if we lose or win?

Edited by RU SERIOUS
  • Hydration 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I'm with the Green and most of the assistants contacts expire. 

Keep Clark.

Unless someone like Larry Robinson is willing to coach again. 

 

THE ENTIRE COACHING STAFF SHOULD NOT ONLY BE FIRED BUT NEVER ALLOWED TO COACH ANYWHERE!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Isn't that the Real Estate developer guy who only owns the Canucks to obtain their financial losses as a tax write-off against his profitable house building empire so he can pay less overall corporate tax and who couldn't care less if we lose or win?

What? He spent hundreds of millions of dollars to secure the team with stability, which in turn helps employ thousands of people in sports and other businesses. There isn't a tax write off. Furthermore, he purchased the arena himself, as opposed to asking the city to pay for it, unlike Edmonton's arena. Your suspicion on the tax angle doesn't make much sense.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

What? He spent hundreds of millions of dollars to secure the team with stability, which in turn helps employ thousands of people in sports and other businesses. There isn't a tax write off. Furthermore, he purchased the arena himself, as opposed to asking the city to pay for it, unlike Edmonton's arena. Your suspicion on the tax angle doesn't make much sense.

Oh really.................https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/aquilini-family-lose-appeal-in-federal-tax-court-to-offset-capital-gains-in-deal-to-buy-nhl-team

https://rsmcanada.com/our-insights/tax-alerts/tcc-supports-cras-discretionary-power-to-reallocate-partnership.html

 

If you've kept up with the business news in recent years you'd know what the real purpose is for the Aqua-Lini's ownership of the Canucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Unfortunately Montreal is a team we absolutely needed to beat in order to get back in the race.

 

Edmonton and Winnipeg are pulling away so that just leaves Calgary.

Sorry to break the news but our season ended a while ago when we lost every game in in February but 2.    We have a 5.6% chance of making the playoffs after tonight.  In other words - our season is over in a a few weeks.  So just relax and enjoy the few victories to come and criticize the many losses to follow.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cuporbust said:

Sure hope I'm not the only one that has no friggin clue what you just said lol 

Everyone knows you just pass it around the perimeter against us, and every entry is basically a powerplay if you just keep it to the outside. Whip it around until you get off a wicked one timer. How many times have we seen that the past few years as our guys just plug up the middle? A LOT! The quicker team the less effective our D system is against it. The whole league has figured us out, and we're 'fun to play against'.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, xereau said:

Everyone knows you just pass it around the perimeter against us, and every entry is basically a powerplay if you just keep it to the outside. Whip it around until you get off a wicked one timer. How many times have we seen that the past few years as our guys just plug up the middle? A LOT! The quicker team the less effective our D system is against it. The whole league has figured us out, and we're 'fun to play against'.

Very True -   and many others have stated this.  I can't explain why the coaching staff can't see was so blatantly obvious.  Thank god the entire coaching staff will be put on a barge and pushed out to sea after this season - and not a moment too soon!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Oh really.................https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/aquilini-family-lose-appeal-in-federal-tax-court-to-offset-capital-gains-in-deal-to-buy-nhl-team

https://rsmcanada.com/our-insights/tax-alerts/tcc-supports-cras-discretionary-power-to-reallocate-partnership.html

 

If you've kept up with the business news in recent years you'd know what the real purpose is for the Aqua-Lini's ownership of the Canucks.

I read the articles, but I feel that you calling the whole thing a tax writeoff to be a bit misleading. He didn't buy this team to dodge taxes completely. I'm hoping someone else can elaborate this further, but it doesn't sound like what you're describing.

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Two steps forward, one step back. 

 

Got out worked. Preparation matters. Hunger matters. This team isn't talented enough to have off nights and still expect to win. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I read the articles, but I feel that you calling the whole thing a tax writeoff to be a bit misleading. He didn't buy this team to dodge taxes completely. I'm hoping someone else can elaborate this further, but it doesn't sound like what you're describing.

I will elaborate.

Maybe he loves hockey and the Canucks in particular as we all do.

 

Some people just need to aportion blame when things don't go the way they want them to.

 

  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Isn't that the Real Estate developer guy who only owns the Canucks to obtain their financial losses as a tax write-off against his profitable house building empire so he can pay less overall corporate tax and who couldn't care less if we lose or win?

Lol.   Paying tax is still paying tax - rich folks want to have the biggest bills possible because that means they've made more money then otherwise...not to mention since he's owned the Canucks they've being a profiting business - they also are on the payroll, and it's doubled  twice in value (and rolled back a bit).    Still one of the richest franchises despite not seeing the bandwaggoers dollars as much the past five or so years.   

Edited by IBatch
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

People wonder why Jake is inconsistent, look no further than delusional GREEN who has zero answers in game other than to sit Jake 

 

no timeouts 

no resets

no nothing 

 

just sit Jake and stand there looking like the incompetent “coach” he is 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Oh really.................https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/aquilini-family-lose-appeal-in-federal-tax-court-to-offset-capital-gains-in-deal-to-buy-nhl-team

https://rsmcanada.com/our-insights/tax-alerts/tcc-supports-cras-discretionary-power-to-reallocate-partnership.html

 

If you've kept up with the business news in recent years you'd know what the real purpose is for the Aqua-Lini's ownership of the Canucks.

This is one article.   The way it reads they SOLD some properties to PURCHASE the Canucks.    That's how they financed the purchase.   They weren't looking for something to balance the capital gains if they didn't do that right?     It's not like they sold property for a different purchase or just to boost their cash during their restructuring (although it's possible it was for a little of both - amounts aren't indicated).

 

 Nowhere in the article does it state they bought the Canucks to lower their capital gains - it says they sold property - to purchase the Canucks - and then tried to lower their capital gains by using the losses of the company (and that part isn't even very clear - just says they purchased an insolvent company - the assumption of course is that it is the Canucks they are talking about which is reasonable).

 

Its also a reasonable accounting/finance expectation given the restructuring put all their business under one umbrella company (therefore any capital gain or loss should be balanced together).   It doesn't get into the specifics - but my guess is what they tried to do was use a balance sheet transaction with an income statement issue.    Net loss/gain or profit or loss from an income statement always gets scrutinized when it comes investment loss compared to a business loss.   Technically the profit and loss of the Canucks should be weighed against future losses/gains from the Canucks - not a real estate gain or investment gain which is what CCRA for sure took issue with - and is also why the working partners were allowed to use some of the inputs where as the Mom wasn't (their trusts).   Given the one company owned everything - it's a reasonable move to try and use one gain against a different loss - the main issue is investment income/loss is treated differently then business income/loss.   

 

Your dialogue that they "only bought the Canucks for the loss"  isn't accurate.   The gains would never occurred in the first place if they didn't sell to purchase the Canucks right?   And it's a game - trying to be inventive with their capital gains shouldn't bother or be a concern from a fan standpoint - other then we want and need a rich owner who will keep spending to the cap .... which he has and seems like a real fan too. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How does our supposedly “young” team as our “coach” calls them look tired and lazy night after night? 
 

Other teams skate circles around us

 

Seems like Green does not value fitness and has put the team on his doughnut diet 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

I read the articles, but I feel that you calling the whole thing a tax writeoff to be a bit misleading. He didn't buy this team to dodge taxes completely. I'm hoping someone else can elaborate this further, but it doesn't sound like what you're describing.

Done and done (see above).   Biggest flaw in this dialogue is nowhere in the article does it outright say this - other flaw in this dialogue is the capital gains weren't there until he sold the properties to buy the Canucks lol.     Saying the franchise was purchased to have losses against selling some real estate is total malarkey.   All one can say is they tried to lower their taxes against the teams initial losses, but weren't able to completely do that.   What reasonable businessman wouldn't try and lower their tax bill?   It's big enough as it is in Canada, even for rich people, well actually especially for rich people just go and check out the nhl gavin group tax calculator against some of our players ... more then half goes off the top ... 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal outplayed Vancouver 2 games ago yet they lost so Ducharme made adjustments. He changed his lunes to better match up against us 

 

Green ..... well he assumes as is well so he does nothing different and plays right into Ducharme’s hands. What is worse is Green does not even see it in game and adjust

 

it so apparent yet his cult just just lets it slide 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

Isn’t Bo not the Captain should he not speak as well? I mean the Sedins would have spoken after a loss like this

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...