HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVI: Barbarian at the Gate (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=677215)

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:13 AM

Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVI: Barbarian at the Gate
 
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=675691
Previous thread.


Due to the expected volume of discussion in this thread, there will be little moderator tolerance for trolling, baiting, flaming, tangents, and spam/OT posts. There may be no warning, but an immediate thread ban.


phoenixcoyotes.com - plans to update through the day.

globesports.com - Shoalts should be updating through the day

HF BOH mod mouser plans to be at hearing and posting here.

From posts, these guys/gals look like they'll be in court room:
http://twitter.com/HKYFN
http://twitter.com/TheYotesDiva
http://twitter.com/brahmresnik


http://www.azb.uscourts.gov/wCalDeta...Y%2007,%202009
Court calendar and agenda for today's hearing

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:15 AM

HKYFN:
NHL lawyer up first states that the NHL has placed a bid in response to the Judge asking what happens if there is no glendale buyer

Egil 09-02-2009 11:17 AM

Resnick says there are over 1000 filings totally over 70000 pages. I think it is safe to say the only winner in this so far has been the Lawyers!

Gump Hasek 09-02-2009 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drsingle (Post 20958165)
No city, group of fans, etc. has any say in the matter.

Not sure where I said that they did?

Of course the NHL don't have to play fair with anyone, but since Balsillie is one of few multi-billionaires trying to gain entry into the group, and given that (IMO) the current NHL ownership landscape is probably shakier than the NHL, & many pundits and fans are willing to acknowledge, logic would dictate that it would be prudent for them to come to an agreement with the gentlemen who runs the fastest growing company in the world.

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:18 AM

HKYFN:
NHL states that NHL bid is set up to make the debtors "whole" and make it as the BK never happened.

mouser 09-02-2009 11:18 AM

NHL changing their offer, will give 100% of net relo profit to the estate if team is moved via NHL bid.

Very big change.

jkrdevil 09-02-2009 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Egil (Post 20958429)
Resnick says there are over 1000 filings totally over 70000 pages. I think it is safe to say the only winner in this so far has been the Lawyers!

They also do in cases like this.

lillypad33 09-02-2009 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mouser (Post 20958462)
NHL changing their offer, will give 100% of net relo profit to the estate if team is moved via NHL bid.

Very big change.

The only change to me that justifies the league purchasing them is huge fees to the city of glendale if they leave before 7 years.

GSC2k2* 09-02-2009 11:22 AM

http://docs.bmcgroup.com/phoenixcoyo...k-9488_880.pdf

The view of the Unsecured Creditors committee:

1. PSE - support, but concerns (contingencies, litigation, other reasons);

2. NHL support, but concerns (would like the payment of money into the estate instead of paying targeted creditors, although they support excluding Moyes and TGO)

3. Ice Edge - do not support due to considerable conditions on bid, but will continue to work.

CGG 09-02-2009 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mouser (Post 20958461)
NHL changing their offer, will give 100% of net relo profit to the estate if team is moved via NHL bid.

Very big change.

Not at all. They'll structure any relo deal to be a relocation fee equal to any amount above $140 million, so the Net Profit will be $0.

I can't see the court placing a lot of value in hypothetical future events that may yield more money for the estate.

David Singleton 09-02-2009 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSC2k2
Leduc, where is that one in the filings? I would like to read that (I have been getting behind).

GSC, it's on page 11, beginning (contextually) on line 7.

Quote:

Mr. Rodier (in the presence of Mr. Balsillie and Mr. Leipold's attorney) threatened that the Canadian Competition Bureau would investigate the NHL if Mr. Leipold refused to close the transaction on these terms. (Balsillie Dep. at 181-82; Leipold Decl. Ex. A at II.G; Leipold Dep. at 67, 173-75, 259-61).
"on these terms" would be referencing new terms that Rodier and Balsillie wanted to put in place instead of the Term Sheet already signed by the parties.

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:24 AM

Resnick:
Coyotes BK: NHL atty Shep Goldfein, one of top sports antitrust experts in US, stepping up to defend NHL's 26-0 rejection of JB.

HKYFN on dismissal of JB as potential owner:
States that the motion is not about ballsack philanthropy, his running of RIM and or if he is a Moral person. It is about NHL bylaw 35

David Singleton 09-02-2009 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gump Hasek (Post 20958445)
Not sure where I said that they did?

Of course the NHL don't have to play fair with anyone, but since Balsillie is one of few multi-billionaires trying to gain entry into the group, and given that (IMO) the current NHL ownership landscape is probably shakier than the NHL, & many pundits and fans are willing to acknowledge, logic would dictate that it would be prudent for them to come to an agreement with the gentlemen who runs the fastest growing company in the world.

You didn't, no. I apologize for giving you that impression.

That specific point regarded the overall tone of threads- "the NHL owes Hamilton, Canada, Phoenix, etc.".

That misbelief makes it difficult to wade through and find the really informative posts.

Just a little frustration showing.

I apologize again.

Gnashville 09-02-2009 11:29 AM

I know there are old but are there any links to the depostions, By Balsillie, Rodier, Bettman, Leipold, ect???

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gnashville (Post 20958566)
I know there are old but are there any links to the depostions, By Balsillie, Rodier, Bettman, Leipold, ect???

Yep. Go to the "Coyotes Legal Documents" (stickied) thread and there's a link to *all* the filings.

Mr Wentworth 09-02-2009 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 20958457)
HKYFN:
NHL states that NHL bid is set up to make the debtors "whole" and make it as the BK never happened.

Is Glendale a debtor in this scenario?

EDIT:
Quote:

Originally Posted by mouser (Post 20958461)
NHL changing their offer, will give 100% of net relo profit to the estate if team is moved via NHL bid.

HHhmmm...sounds like a backhanded acknowledgement of Glendale being a debtor.

LadyStanley 09-02-2009 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Invisible Poster (Post 20958587)
Is Glendale a debtor in this scenario?

As proposed by NHL, no. They want to negotiate new lease deal and keep team in Glendale.

(However, their "stick" is the threat to leave after one year, at which time Glendale could be ruled a debtor.)

lillypad33 09-02-2009 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 20958615)
As proposed by NHL, no. They want to negotiate new lease deal and keep team in Glendale.

(However, their "stick" is the threat to leave after one year, at which time Glendale could be ruled a debtor.)

I hope that the judge rules that the NHL can have them if they stay in Glendale for 7 years OR pay 100 million in damages...

bcrt2000 09-02-2009 11:36 AM

from @trippmickle:

Quote:

#Coyotes J Baum is picking apart Goldfein regarding the term sheet Leipold said Balsillie never signed. Baum is Qing Leipold's word
2 minutes ago from web

#Coyotes J. Baum: Can I take it from the dec by the BOG that Mr Balsillie and Mr Rodier don’t have the requisite char and integrity req'd?
8 minutes ago from web

NHL #Coyotes atty Goldfein: this is not about Mr Balsillie’s philanthropy, which is very admirable. …It goes to trustworthiness.”
11 minutes ago from web

Skadden/NHL atty Shep Goldfein is about to begin explaining the NHL's rejection of Jim Balsillie as a qualified owner
13 minutes ago from web

Egil 09-02-2009 11:41 AM

Sounds like the judge isn't buying the he said she said stuff related to Nashville.

BigMac1212 09-02-2009 11:41 AM

Quick question:

Is this just a hearing, or will things be resolved today?

mouser 09-02-2009 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigMac1212 (Post 20958738)
Quick question:

Is this just a hearing, or will things be resolved today?

Many important things are supposed to be resolved, The Judge might take days to write up a formal ruling on some of them though.

Brodie 09-02-2009 11:55 AM

Baum doesn't seem to like the idea of taking Leipold's word as gospel.

lillypad33 09-02-2009 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brodie (Post 20958930)
Baum doesn't seem to like the idea of taking Leipold's word as gospel.

I don't understand why not... I mean the NHL did their due diligence. What could fall through the cracks?

Brodie 09-02-2009 12:01 PM

Quote:

Coyotes BK: Now on alleged Leafs veto. Judge: Why not fix NHL constitution if there's no veto? Goldfein: It refers to expansion, not relo.
Resnik


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:21 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.