If a team is wanted bad enough, an owner/group will pay $100M+. $50M is way too low for putting a 2nd team in Toronto. $100M+ is the low end and it wouldn't surprise me if it was more. The amount of money the team would make/draw off of the Leafs is more than enough to justify that high of a payment.
I think the key phrase there is "bad enough". That's why there isn't a long line of owners already - maybe they can make a profit long-term but most billionaires aren't lining up to make an up to $150m upfront investment ($100m Leafs + $50m expansion? Maybe more?) The only way it happens is if the guerilla is big enough (ie: Rogers) or if they get it as part of a mega-development deal (which this is, although how a billionaire organization swoops in to take most of the financial brunt is a bit unclear)
Between this and the Quebecor plan should be interesting to see what happens.
Ottawa's expansion fee was $50M. They didn't have to pay anything for territorial rights though.
I could have sworn they did. But you're right, it was probably something where Leafs ownership complained but backed down in the face of the expansion fees coming in.
I'd love to see another Canadian team back east. If Florida can sustain 2 hockey teams, Ontario should have 3. If you think a place like Markham can handle it, I can see why. I just wonder why they wouldn't go for a different city like Missassauga or something. (Yes, I know they would have to build an arena)
Infrastructure is probably the issue. Sounds crazy, but you could probably get away with two NHL teams the same way that the Staples Center gets away with the Lakers and Clippers. Going out to Mississauga is still inside the Leafs zone, I think, but could be a tougher draw without a massive development plan.