View Single Post
02-05-2013, 03:29 PM
Powers Gold Label
rt's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Location: County Cork
Country: Ireland
Posts: 53,528
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Seattle isn't ready. NHL has handshake agreements with Markham and QC, but has an owner in Seattle who wants a team in the future. They need to buy time, without it seeming obvious. They also need someone to take a legit shot at making the Coyotes work. Enter Gallacher, who gets assurances by the NHL the Coyotes will be portable and there will be a buyer in 5 years. He makes a go of it in Phoenix. Expansion to QC and Markham puts the fanbase at ease, thinking all is safe.

The NHL gets:
- A chance to negotiate with QC and Markham without hiding the Coyotes behind their back.
They want to save the relocation for Seattle or Portland, who need a team to hit the ground running. Canadians will watch anything
- Grooms a new billionaire entrant into the old boys club

- Gets to sit in front of Edmonton, Calgary and anyone else who needs a new arena and point at the great lengths they went to prevent the city from losing on its investment

- A chance to figure out if Phoenix will work with the right conditions.
Possibly a chance that the Suns/ASU/Tribes or some combination thereof express interest in a new arena, letting the NHL ditch the Glendale circus and get on the right side of town
- Doesn't suffer the negative optics of letting another team run off to Canada

Gallacher gets to play around with an NHL team for 5 years or so, and can sell it or move it if he wants. Likely a promise that the NHL won't charge him further relocation fees if he does so, to make the surefire losses in Phoenix more palatable.
Alright, I can see some of that. Here are my issues from an NHL standpoint; the idea is that they get their money back on the Coyotes (170-ish) from Gallacher, and don't have to incur any further losses in owning the team. Sounds good. But if you accept that as their motivation, how can you also accept Gallacher's motivation in this? If he's going to agree to lose money in Phoenix for the next five years, because it is understood he'll be able to sell for relo at a profit, why would the NHL let him make that money, rather than hanging onto the club and making that money themselves? If Gallacher supposes he'll end up ten million ahead, why wouldn't the NHL want to be in that same position? If he figures he'll end up with a huge negative, even after selling for relo, why would he agree to this? Short of "getting to play" for a few years? I can't see that as a reasonable enough motivating factor to believe this guy as real candidate and not another tire kicker.

Now, you did mention the NHL putting themselves in a better bargaining position for expansion once they've unload Phoenix. How much better will it be? I'm trying to figure out how much Gallacher figures he can make by losing money for five years and then selling for relo, versus how much extra the NHL thinks they can get by not being leveraged in negotiations with expansion markets. It doesn't seem to add up.

How can both the NHL and Gallacher come out ahead in a scenario where he's sold the team with the understanding that he can move it in five years?

All of it is Dave Tippett's fault. He's the worst.
rt is offline