Thousands paid $50 to secure a season ticket for a Halifax CFL team. Some wonder where the money went
The Windsor Junction, N.S., sports fan wanted to support the team. He also hoped that if the franchise came to fruition, more concerts would come to the city because of the stadium the team needed to construct as part of the venture.
MacCormick wasn't alone in placing a deposit. The Canadian Press reported in December 2018 that 6,000 people had done the same. At $50 a ticket, that's at least $300,000.
CBC News spoke to 10 people who said they paid the deposit. Eight — including MacCormick — said they did not receive refunds.
"When you go a pair at a time, it certainly does add up, and maybe somebody should be accountable to this," said MacCormick.
As the COVID-19 pandemic arrived, the CFL venture disappeared from the public conversation. Two affiliated companies behind the idea — Schooner Sports and Entertainment and Maritime Football Limited — have had their registrations revoked in the Registry of Joint Stock Companies.
Schooner Sports and Entertainment sought municipal and provincial funding to build a 24,000-seat, $110-million stadium in Shannon Park. The space would have been used for community sports and major concerts as well.
In December 2019, Halifax council voted to give the proponents $20 million, but only if a list of conditions were met.
"We're thrilled. We thank council for their due diligence and very spirited debate. We're very excited to move forward," said Schooner Sports and Entertainment partner Anthony LeBlanc.
By April 2020, LeBlanc had taken an executive role with the NHL's Ottawa Senators. However, he remained a director with Maritime Football Limited, the Registry of Joint Stock Companies information shows.
MacCormick said he used to get the odd email from Schooner Sports and Entertainment about things like town hall events. He even received a holiday email encouraging him to buy tickets for loved ones. But the emails eventually dried up.
"Over time, I felt that the deposit was gone and it was $100, not the end of the world, but you know, it just felt like things weren't going to happen," said MacCormick.
The CFL maintains an Atlantic Schooners website. While updates on the state of the franchise are several years old, the site still pulls in fresh stories from the league's website.
Jason Mullis, a diehard CFL fan who lives in Gatineau, Que., also put down a deposit for season tickets. He bought tickets because he wanted to see an East Coast franchise that would create a coast-to-coast league and establish a much-sought 10th team.
Mullis, who has driven across the country to attend games at all CFL stadiums, has a Facebook page called the Cflhobo that he uses to share his passion for the league.
He planned to purchase season tickets for a Halifax franchise, but would have donated most of them given geographic constraints.
Mullis said he's not concerned about the refund money, but said he saw some online chatter from unhappy fans.
"People were upset. 'Oh, I haven't heard nothing. Where's our money?'" he said."But, I don't worry about it. If you really want it back, you can complain enough, you'll get your money back."
CBC contacted officials with Schooner Sports and Entertainment. LeBlanc agreed to an interview, but later sent along a statement instead.
In it, he said the proponents are setting up a portal to honour new refund requests. He said information on the portal will be released shortly.
LeBlanc said that when Schooner Sports and Entertainment shut down in 2023, the company had no assets or liabilities, and had been offering refunds to season ticket holders for five years.
"These deposits were and continued to be refundable, with a significant number of deposit holders seeking refunds," he said in the email. "All of the requests that were submitted through proper channels have been honoured."
LeBlanc said the effort to bring a CFL franchise to Halifax involved "significant and material financial obligations, all of which were honoured." He said Schooner Sports and Entertainment partnered with organizations that included architectural, public relations, government relations and marketing firms.
Schooner Sports and Entertainment also partnered with the CFL on a 2019 game that was held in Moncton, N.B., that led to "significant and material financial losses," said LeBlanc.
The organization decided to spike the CFL franchise, in part, because of a lack of appetite to help fund the project.
"With the onset of the pandemic, all public sector entities made the very prudent decision to pause, and eventually withdrew agreements and suspended ongoing discussions regarding the project," said LeBlanc.
MORE TOP STORIES
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Percentage of Canadians who see the U.S. as a top threat triples: poll
WASHINGTON — As U.S. President Donald Trump pursues his global trade war and talk of annexation, a new poll suggests the percentage of Canadians who view the United States as a top threat has tripled since 2019. While this year's survey by the Pew Research Center suggests that 55 per cent of Canadians still say the U.S. remains this country's most important ally, it also says that 59 per cent now see the U.S. as a threat — up from 20 per cent in the 2019 poll. "Canada sort of stands out as one place where views of the U.S. have changed significantly and substantially," said Janell Fetterolf, a senior researcher at the centre. Pew polled people in 25 countries and the United States was cited as the most important ally in 12. It was the most commonly named threat in eight countries — including America's closest neighbours, Canada and Mexico. Canada was an early target of Trump's tariffs and taunts. He repeatedly called former prime minister Justin Trudeau "governor" and said he wanted to make Canada a U.S. state. Trump hit Canada and Mexico with duties he claimed were in relation to fentanyl in March, only to walk back the tariffs for goods that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade a few days later. Both countries are also being targeted by Trump's tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. The Pew Research Center said many people polled in Europe named Russia as a top threat, and those in the Asia-Pacific region commonly named China. Poll respondents were more likely to name the United States as an economic threat, while Russia was more likely to be considered a threat to national security and China was commonly cited as a mix of both. Pew, a Washington-based non-partisan think tank, surveyed 28,333 adults across 24 countries — not including the United States — from Jan. 8 to April 26 by phone, online and in person. The centre also surveyed 3,605 Americans from March 24 to March 30 by phone, online and in person. Israelis were especially likely to name the U.S. as their country's most important ally. Israelis also stood out for their particularly positive ratings of the U.S. and its president. Most Israelis polled named Iran as the top threat. Japanese and South Koreans polled also overwhelmingly stated that the U.S. was their most important ally. Despite Canadians' increasingly negative views of the U.S., Americans remain positive about Canada. Fetterolf said Canada is one of the allies most commonly named by Americans, just behind the United Kingdom. She added that previous polling has shown 74 per cent of Americans have a favourable opinion of Canada. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 8, 2025. Kelly Geraldine Malone, The Canadian Press
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Amazon Faces Scrutiny as Canada's Competition Watchdog Deepens Probe
Canada's competition watchdog secured a court order to help its investigation into whether Inc. is abusing its dominant retail position in the market. The order requires Amazon to produce records relevant to the watchdog's probe, which started in 2020 and concerns Amazon's Marketplace fair pricing policy. The Competition Bureau is investigating whether the policy discourages third-party sellers from offering products at a lower price on other sites — therefore lessening price competition among online marketplaces, according to a statement.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Vancouver Canucks mailbag, part 2: Centre trade options? Quinn Hughes vs. Gavin McKenna?
Let's move beyond the free-agent frenzy and settle in for a long Vancouver Canucks offseason. Last week we put out the call for Canucks questions recapping the offseason. Of course, because the VIPs always deliver, we received an overwhelming volume of queries. We broke the mailbag into two parts and tried to get into some of the most interesting questions we received in exhaustive detail. Advertisement Part 1 of our offseason recap mailbag ran yesterday, and we'll finish it off with some Man versus Machine, Quinn Hughes versus Gavin McKenna and some other real and hypothetical Canucks topics that you were wondering about. Here is your Canucks offseason mailbag. Note: Submitted questions may be edited for clarity and style. Drancer, if you could only choose one, which one would you choose and why? 1. Signing Quinn Hughes to an extension (7-8 years) 2. Being able to draft Gavin McKenna — John W. This is a very fun, if not especially realistic, hypothetical. While I might not have a ton of faith in Vancouver's odds of contending this upcoming season, I'm fairly confident that they won't be poor enough to be in range of winning the draft lottery and moving up far enough to select Gavin McKenna at the apex of the 2026 NHL Draft. So it's not as if the Canucks has a choice between two paths, one of which leads to retaining Quinn Hughes and the other of which leads to McKenna. Most top-level NHL players remain with their current franchise well before they hit unrestricted free agency. It takes a pretty unique set of circumstances, like we saw in Calgary with Matthew Tkachuk, for a player to bolt from their current team, and that's something that was very firmly reinforced around the NHL over the past month. That said, given that both of Hughes' NHL brothers play for the same franchise, it's fair to note that he is looking at a pretty unique set of circumstances. We'll have time to dwell on that over the next 12 months, though, let's get to this specific exercise. If you could choose between getting Hughes' autograph on a long-term extension or holding the No. 1 pick at the 2026 NHL Draft, which choice would provide more value to a franchise? When it comes to preposterous hypotheticals, there's only one man to call at The Athletic, and that's Dom Luszczyszyn (who else?). Luszczyszyn, as you all know, has the Net Rating model. He's also generous enough to indulge me and the VIPs by allowing us to peer into his data set, pose a fun question and get a hard output. This way, we can see if we might be able to get an objective answer to a complicated and purely hypothetical set of considerations. Advertisement Let's start with the value of a long-term Hughes extension. Given that Hughes is now a Norris Trophy winner and is clearly the most impactful two-way defender in the sport, there's no comparison available to us in terms of what his next deal should look like. The only possible comparison would be Cale Makar, and Makar, like Hughes, becomes extension-eligible following his second contract on July 1, 2026. Until Makar signs, Hughes' third contract exists in a hypothetical marketplace that hasn't been set yet. Given that, let's just liberally assume that his next deal is going to be a seven-year pact at $14 million per season (or $98 million total), for the sake of this exercise. It's a massive number, of course, and an unprecedented one for an NHL defender. According to the Net Rating model, however, it's also an amount that Hughes is a very good bet to live up to (and more) given how freakish his abilities are at both ends: Just over the first five years of this hypothetical Hughes extension, Vancouver's captain would provide over $7 million in surplus value, according to the Net Rating model. He'd also remain one of the NHL's absolute best defenders throughout that time frame. So, how does that stack up with what we should expect from McKenna? Obviously, it's very difficult to project a player's future over a comparable time horizon based on their draft-minus-one performance at the CHL level, but we can feel very confident that McKenna is a special, special player. Recording 129 points in 56 games in the WHL in a season that McKenna entered as a 16-year-old is true supernova-level production. McKenna is reportedly planning to play NCAA hockey this upcoming season. We'll see how he fares at the college level (pretty safe bet that he will absolutely dominate), but he certainly seems to be on that sort of Connor Bedard-like can't-miss trajectory entering his draft year. Even though we should confidently be able to project that McKenna is above the level of even an average No. 1 pick, let's just conservatively plug in what we've seen historically from first overall selections over the years. Quietly, this goes to the heart of how special Hughes is. He has and looks likely to continue to provide the Canucks with a level of value commensurate with what we'd expect from a No. 1 pick. Given that the nature of hockey development means that most of the transformative superstars in this game become famous at the age of 15 or 16, that Hughes has become this level of star is an incredible accomplishment. He is truly special. For what it's worth, while this graph is just a raw average of what you'd project a No. 1 pick to provide across their first eight NHL seasons, Luszczyszyn provided us as well with a 90th percentile outcome in case we want to put our finger on the scale and assume that McKenna is somewhere in a range between Auston Matthews and Connor McDavid on entering the NHL. If that's the case, and his draft-minus-one season production implies it's certainly possible, then you'd be looking at something north of $21.5 million in average value provided across the player's first eight seasons with a Net Rating score approaching plus-25 per season. Advertisement Basically, if McKenna hits his upside case on entering the NHL, this isn't a difficult question. As incredible as Hughes is, you'd take the younger Hart Trophy candidate. It's closer, however, if McKenna performs like an average No. 1 pick. In that case, McKenna would still hold the edge in terms of his efficiency, because of the logic of his entry-level contract and restricted free agent protections. In comparison with Hughes, who will be paid at a level more closely commensurate with his actual impact and value in his unrestricted free agent seasons, McKenna would be a better bet to provide surplus value. In terms of raw impact, however, it comes down to a timeline thing. If you're poised with a high-quality, deep team that has a chance to win the Stanley Cup in the next three years, you'd rather have Hughes, an NHL superstar at the peak of his powers. If your timeline is a bit further out, however, you'd probably prefer the upside and developmental runway that a younger player like McKenna possesses. All and all, the answer here is probably '2.' That it's this close and needs to be qualified, however, is a testament to Hughes' excellence and value. How much discipline do you think management will have if the team starts off poorly? Do you think that re-signing Team America signals that they are willing to be patient, or, if there is an early injury to one of their centres, do you think they will feel pressured to make a suboptimal/short-sighted trade in pursuit of the playoffs? — Alexander M. I think we need to throw out the concept of 'discipline' as it would usually apply to a team that's in transition and needs to look toward the future. No matter what, whether the Canucks start off well or poorly, management is going to be motivated and aggressive to turn over every rock in search of centre upgrades. Regardless of what the Brock Boeser, Thatcher Demko and Conor Garland extensions signal about the posture in the big picture, the main signal to be mindful of about the Canucks' posture is that they only dealt a fourth-round pick — and held firm to all of their additional futures — despite their evident short-term needs this summer. They used all of their draft picks, and they held tight to all of their prospects. There's at least some talk internally that the Canucks have to prioritize the future. That, quietly, in any event, they are in something of a rebuilding phase in the wake of the J.T. Miller trade. To me, that means we should expect Vancouver to be pretty careful about trading its top prospects or its 2026 first-round pick unless the return is a young centre with true top-end potential. Advertisement Rank the percentage likelihood of each of the following players to make the NHL next year (based on the current roster and depth chart): Jonathan Lekkerimäki Linus Karlsson Aatu Räty Max Sasson Arshdeep Bains D-Petey Tom Willander Victor Mancini — Noah W. This is a fun exercise, so let's indulge it. For what it's worth, I'm going to interpret 'make the NHL next year' as 'spend at least 50 games on the NHL roster.' I'll assign a percentage and then give a one-sentence explanation for why I view it that way. Lekkerimäki: 60 percent. Needs to have a strong summer and add a fair bit of core strength, but has all of the tools to be a middle-six contributor with power-play utility as soon as next season. Karlsson: 50 percent. Defensively reliable and sneaky dangerous at the net front, Karlsson was definitely a favourite of Rick Tocchet, but does Adam Foote share those feelings? Räty: 95 percent. Räty would have to lose the job to not be an NHL fixture for Vancouver next season. Sasson: 40 percent. Canucks have high hopes for Sasson, but I'm not convinced they view him as a centre full-time at the NHL level and he's waiver exempt whereas Karlsson and Arshdeep Bains aren't. That makes it harder for him to win a full-time NHL job. Bains: 65 percent. Bains will require waivers and would be at very high risk of being claimed if he were exposed following training camp. He has a lot of fans among professional scouts around the league. It isn't easy to see the fit, but I just don't see the Vancouver allowing that to happen. D-Petey: 95 percent. Not only is Elias Pettersson, the defender, going to be on this roster all season, but he's going to dress on opening night. Willander: 75 percent. The Canucks flat out expect both Pettersson and Willander to make their opening-night lineup. Mancini: 40 percent. That Mancini remains waiver-exempt is a key factor to keep in mind here. That, in addition to the emergence of Pettersson, who can play the right side, and how much the Canucks have invested in Willander is going to make it difficult for Mancini to remain at the NHL level without injuries further up the lineup next season. Advertisement What are the chances this team is surprisingly good next year (much like we were pleasantly surprised two seasons ago)? — Gerry V. This depends on how you describe 'surprisingly good' next year. Based solely on their betting odds, the market handicaps Vancouver as being about 50/50 to be a playoff team. So that means they're squarely a fringe playoff team, and we shouldn't be surprised either way if they qualify for the postseason or if they miss out. If the standard is 'win the division and be a real threat to make the conference final,' the way the Canucks did in 2023-24, well, then we're talking about a more remote possibility. The oddsmakers have Vancouver priced out at 15-to-1 to win the division, which is an implied probability of about 6 percent. Given that they're 28-to-1 to win the West as the outrights markets currently have it, we can probably split the difference and assume the oddsmakers would peg it at about 20-to-1 or so that Vancouver wins the Pacific Division and gets to within a game of the conference final the way it did two years ago. Yes, Lloyd Christmas, I am telling you there's a chance. Man vs. Machine: Seeking underutilized centers with great potential, such as the J.T. Miller trade in 2019. ChatGPT suggest Marco Rossi, Anton Lundell and Dylan Cozens. What about you? — Aksel W. Those are good suggestions, but very obvious ones. I'd want to start with the Sam Bennett profile guys, the high draft pedigree players that have yet to deliver on their promise. Alex Turcotte and Jesperi Kotkaniemi are the standout bets to place in that category. I'd then move on to the players that I like based on their skating ability and doggedness, but might ultimately have some limitations. The two Winnipeg Jets restricted players — Morgan Barron and Rasmus Kupari — are standouts among this category of player for me, as is New Jersey Devils centre Paul Cotter. I'm also very high on Colorado Avalanche centre Jack Drury. Joe Veleno is another name that I'd put in this category, and he's an unrestricted free agent after being bought out by the Seattle Kraken. He could be worth a look, though I'm not sure the offence will ever play up to permit him to be a top-nine guy. Then there's the true J.T. Miller comparables, namely, players that aren't currently being used at centre but may have the chops to grow into a full-time role at centre. Another Jets player in Cole Perfetti would fit this category. I think Connor McMichael, who broke out on the wing last season in Washington, could ultimately end up as a full-time NHL centre. On the lower end, I'd also throw in Matt Rempe here as a wild-card pick. Rempe has a big reputation, but he's actually a player that I think has been a bit miscast as a heavy-only type. He had real puck skill at the WHL level, and I think he could be an interesting project as a centre. I'd love to see him given like 50 games in the AHL tasked with producing offence and improving his defensive play in the middle, because I'm convinced there could be something there. Advertisement Outside of Petey, whom amongst Canucks forwards (rostered or prospects), are the best pure passers? — Stefan R. Garland is clearly the best playmaking Canucks forward outside of Elias Pettersson. The gap between the two is real, but it's perhaps somewhat narrower than you think given that Garland has easily maintained a first-line assist rate at five-on-five and ranks among the top 65 NHL forwards over the past four years by primary assist rate. A dark horse candidate to be a legitimate NHL-level playmaker down the line is Bains. He's a legitimately gifted distributor, but rarely takes the chances required to make plays when he's been given a shot at the NHL level. Who's your biggest long shot, but still actually a possibility, to make the team out of camp? I'm not talking about Räty, Sasson, Lekkerimäki or even Willander, I want a deep cut, like a Vilmer Alriksson or someone! And what would they have to do to make the team? — Sam B. Not to toot my own horn, but I had Räty as a dark horse to make the team out of training camp last summer, and that one hit. If I had to pick a realistic dark horse for this year, and I want to qualify this by reserving the right to alter my dark horse pick in late August or early September when I'm actually projecting the 23-man roster ahead of training camp, I think I'd be leaning Braeden Cootes at this point. Cootes might not be physically ready to play in the NHL just yet, but he's got the pedigree, he plays the position at which Vancouver's need is greatest (centre), he's right-handed (which is a significant plus) and he's a mature competitor by all accounts. He's got the profile to at least force the Canucks into a difficult decision as training camp goes along, I suspect.
