Should there be Revenue Sharing limits?
View Single Post
11-14-2012, 06:21 PM
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Originally Posted by
I dont think he has the money so he might not ever get to be an owner. The inability to close the deal might not fall exclusively on his shoulders but I'm tired of the " two more weeks" refrain.
Other people kicked the tires and passed. If jamison is as good as you say then hopefully the COG wont have to sweeten the pot the way they have been.
The growth doesn't happen overnight. It doesn't matter whether you are tired of the drama. It does matter whether Jamison has backers who can stomach the loss. The deal is related to the stomach the backers have. How much are they willing to lose waiting for Jamison to turn it around? How much is Glendale willing to subsidize the time frame? I suspect that Jamison has a pretty good grip on an expected growth rate and the losses that would need to be absorbed in a road to profitability.
I will repeat that I am not happy with Phoenix. The history put up huge roadblocks to future success. I don't know that it is worth it to spend more to turn it around, but I won't criticize current actors for mistakes of the past. My take is that the 2 of 3 contributing pieces for success in Phoenix are present. The missing piece is a workable arena deal. Jamison has hockeyops and stadium usage. He will need to get better at attracting sponsorships.
As a small stipulation on the argument. A smart investor buys low and sells high. If anything, Phoenix is a huge buy low situation. The counterpoint is that the state of being low is frequently a precursor to complete collapse. The minefield that the smart investor tries to navigate.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by SJeasy