HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XIV: The Wrath of Baum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-21-2009, 06:38 PM
  #1
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XIV: The Wrath of Baum

Carry on. Previous thread can be found here: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=671925

mouser is online now  
Old
08-21-2009, 06:40 PM
  #2
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
From the Sports Illustrated article mentioned in previous posts

The partner who is favored by the NHL:

"Wasn't it Reinsdorf who filed a lawsuit against the NBA in 1990 when the league tried to limit the number of Bulls broadcasts aired over superstation WGN? The suit, which was finally settled last December, cost the league an estimated $10 million in legal fees. Worse, evidence that came out during the case led to the discovery by the NBA players' association that some owners were underreporting revenues that determined the salary cap. "Jerry was looked upon very favorably prior to the WGN lawsuit," says Jerry Colangelo, the owner of the Phoenix Suns. "But the litigation put up a wall, there is no question. He is basically now inactive in the NBA."


at least he's not Balsillie

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...28/1/index.htm

billy blaze is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 06:41 PM
  #3
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Reinsdorf committed transgressions against the NBA, by suing them with regards to WGN and the Bulls TV rights.
Reinsdorf did not however commit transgressions against the NHL. Important distinction.

mouser is online now  
Old
08-21-2009, 06:43 PM
  #4
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,533
vCash: 500
It's not a transgression against the NHL.

It might be reason for the NBA to exclude him, but why would the NHL care? They weren't the ones doing illegal things.

I guess you've proven that Reinsdorf might be rejected as an owner in the NBA, though. Pity this is an NHL board.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 06:58 PM
  #5
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
extensive summary of the Reinsdorf v NBA series of lawsuits- quite lengthy but interesting

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/...ian%20Bell.pdf

billy blaze is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 07:00 PM
  #6
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,533
vCash: 500
It seems that the COG has successfully managed to get some documents regarding its motion to remove Moyes from the process unsealed.

Unfortunately I don't actually see the documents. But they should be interesting.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 07:02 PM
  #7
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
tidbit I don't believe I've seen reported anywhere:

The Coyotes are currently notifying season ticket holders and prospective season ticket holders that the NHL has officially announced they will cover 100% STH refunds in the event the team doesn't play in Glendale for 09-10. I've read a one page letter from Bill Daly stating such, but the letter doesn't appear to be openly linked on the Phoenix or NHL websites.

In a recent NHL court filing alleging mismanagement of the team by the Debtor's, one of the noted items was that the Debtors had yet to guarantee STH refunds, contrary to common practice in similar bankruptcy situations where a team continues to operate under the bankruptcy court. Seems that the NHL has stepped up and said the league will back refunds if necessary. Given the arbitrated joint-management arrangement of the team between the Debtors and NHL I can understand why they might choose to keep this announcement relatively quiet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Daly excerpt
Dear Coyotes Stakeholder,

Over the past few months, the Phoenix Coyotes have been through a series of events that have no doubt been of concern to our loyal business partners, sponsors, suite holders, season ticket holders, and all fans. I think it is important for you to know that with the backing of the National Hockey League, it is still perfectly safe to conduct business With the Coyotes, whether that means purchasing tickets, suites, sponsorships or pursuing other opportunities with the team. The NHL guarantees that any monies paid to the Coyotes prior to or following the bankruptcy will be reimbursed in the event that the team does not play at Jobing.com Arena in the 2009-10 season. While we do not see that happening, we must acknowledge the possibility no matter how remote it might be.

mouser is online now  
Old
08-21-2009, 07:12 PM
  #8
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,533
vCash: 500
So who would you rather have running the franchise during the proceedings, the guy who pillaged it to boost reports of his losses and otherwise abandoned it, or the league that is stepping in to cover "the little guy"'s costs and reinforce confidence?

Exceptionally smart move by the NHL to do that. It won't go unnoticed.

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 07:38 PM
  #9
pfp
Registered User
 
pfp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post

Exceptionally smart move by the NHL to do that. It won't go unnoticed.
They should have done it a LONG time ago (as in May 5th)

pfp is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 07:52 PM
  #10
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,533
vCash: 500
The league wasn't aware that Moyes was shirking his duties in that regard until recently.

As they mentioned in their motions, to NOT guarantee those tickets was almost unheard of... unless the debtor was attempting to damage the team in bankruptcy rather than get maximum value for it.

Looks VERY bad on Moyes. I thought the motion to remove him from control was supposed to have been heard by now?

Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 08:11 PM
  #11
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
The league wasn't aware that Moyes was shirking his duties in that regard until recently.

As they mentioned in their motions, to NOT guarantee those tickets was almost unheard of... unless the debtor was attempting to damage the team in bankruptcy rather than get maximum value for it.

Looks VERY bad on Moyes. I thought the motion to remove him from control was supposed to have been heard by now?
Why would a bankruptcy bidder, or the debtor in possession, agree to guarantee 100% of new creditor money? (That's what season ticket deposit claims are.)

The team is bankrupt and in bankruptcy. Caveat emptor for any party that sends the franchise a check.

In the real world, of course, Balsillie would happily agree to provide refunds of Glendale deposits to prevail in the auction and get the team. It might be an issue in fantasyland, but it won't be in the real world.

Greschner4 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 08:53 PM
  #12
GSC2k2*
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Why would a bankruptcy bidder, or the debtor in possession, agree to guarantee 100% of new creditor money? (That's what season ticket deposit claims are.)

The team is bankrupt and in bankruptcy. Caveat emptor for any party that sends the franchise a check.

In the real world, of course, Balsillie would happily agree to provide refunds of Glendale deposits to prevail in the auction and get the team. It might be an issue in fantasyland, but it won't be in the real world.
Since you wish to reference the "real world", I agree that what happens in the "real world" is a worthy topic to discuss.

You ask why the debtor in possession would want to guarantee such transactions? The answer is quite simple, although I would point out that the answer is both with respect to why they would do so and why they in fact do so in the "real world".

The answer?

Most debtors in possession find considerable value in maintaining the value of the business as a going concern. This is derived not from any desire to do the right thing or anything like that, but rather purely out of self-interest: they understand that a business will be more valuable as a going concern if the customer base is maintained and the viability of the business is sustained to the fullest extent possible. The only real way to assuage customers' concerns is to guarantee the team's obligations of this type (i.e. season ticket deposits).

Mind you, debtors who want to destroy the value of a business in its current locale or who don't wish to maintain those customers (for example, if they wish to sell the business to someone who will move it ) would not care about such things. Of course, they would also be breaching their fiduciary duty to the creditors of the team, but again some debtors don't place much importance on that particular duty.

GSC2k2* is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 09:10 PM
  #13
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Why would a bankruptcy bidder, or the debtor in possession, agree to guarantee 100% of new creditor money? (That's what season ticket deposit claims are.)

The team is bankrupt and in bankruptcy. Caveat emptor for any party that sends the franchise a check.

In the real world, of course, Balsillie would happily agree to provide refunds of Glendale deposits to prevail in the auction and get the team. It might be an issue in fantasyland, but it won't be in the real world.
I'm afraid you're simply wrong.

A debtor trying to maintain value of his property is doing so to generate as much bidding interest as possible, to maximize return.

By not doing this, Moyes is demonstrating he is NOT attempting to maintain value of his property, because Moyes does not want more bidders, he favors one bidder.

This is most definitely a major issue "in the real world" as the league and the city of Glendale have called into question whether or not Moyes is fulfilling his fiduciary duty, and if he isn't, that control of the team be wrested from him. Failing to do this has reflected extremely poorly on Moyes and may lead to the claims of collusion with Balsillie being found valid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daly
Similarly, in a significant departure from virtually all operating chapter 11 cases, the Debtors have never sought permission to honor their customer obligations by assuring that fans who pay in advance for tickets would be repaid if the team were not to play in Glendale next season. Instead, the Debtors, through their gratuitous mailing, threaten the season ticket holders who made pre-petition deposits with the loss of their advances in order to discourage them from completing payment for their tickets post-petition.
http://docs.bmcgroup.com/phoenixcoyo...9488_682_0.pdf

It looks so bad for Moyes. Collusion.


Last edited by Crazy_Ike: 08-21-2009 at 09:18 PM.
Crazy_Ike is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 09:44 PM
  #14
Death128
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 106
vCash: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by From the Last Thread
Here is another example that might help. A few years ago we were in the process of hiring a women at work when one of our clients informed us that he knew her and she has sued four different employers of sexual harrassment. Do you think we hired her? Hell no....who needs that headache.
I just wanted to comment on this. Women have historically faced a lot of sexual harrassment in the workplace. It's unfortunate that you didn't hire a person because of past victimizations of this person.

Death128 is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 10:04 PM
  #15
billy blaze
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
I'm afraid you're simply wrong.

A debtor trying to maintain value of his property is doing so to generate as much bidding interest as possible, to maximize return.

By not doing this, Moyes is demonstrating he is NOT attempting to maintain value of his property, because Moyes does not want more bidders, he favors one bidder.

This is most definitely a major issue "in the real world" as the league and the city of Glendale have called into question whether or not Moyes is fulfilling his fiduciary duty, and if he isn't, that control of the team be wrested from him. Failing to do this has reflected extremely poorly on Moyes and may lead to the claims of collusion with Balsillie being found valid.



http://docs.bmcgroup.com/phoenixcoyo...9488_682_0.pdf

It looks so bad for Moyes. Collusion.
lots of accusations by NHL, not alot of meat-

- can't tie Balsillie to Goldwater
- implication that Coyotes can't make money in Phoenix- (well they've tried for over a decade)
- claim that they have not marketed the team, sought other buyers, or sell tickets (why would they, they want the team to move)
- told the season ticket holders that the team might be leaving ( a possibility)
- wanted the team to fly aircraft that are each configured with all first class interiors, electrical outlets, and club work areas with tables.- NHL wants regular charters
- took 2 million dollars from the team pre-bankruptcy- but in Moyes mind he had lent the team money

billy blaze is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 10:29 PM
  #16
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Why would a bankruptcy bidder, or the debtor in possession, agree to guarantee 100% of new creditor money? (That's what season ticket deposit claims are.)

The team is bankrupt and in bankruptcy. Caveat emptor for any party that sends the franchise a check.

In the real world, of course, Balsillie would happily agree to provide refunds of Glendale deposits to prevail in the auction and get the team. It might be an issue in fantasyland, but it won't be in the real world.
As someone who renewed his season tickets at the end of last season and before the bankruptcy, the only "real world" communication I've had from the folks who have my money specifically in connection with that fact was a letter informing me I had until Aug. 14 to file a claim in bankruptcy court if I wanted to try and get my money back.

Fantasyland, eh?

Still waiting for that letter from Balsillie that he'll happily refund my money if he gets the team.

RR is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 10:47 PM
  #17
nye
Registered User
 
nye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Siberia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
The Wrath of Baum
Still waiting to see some of that. He doesn't seem to be an Old Testament sort of judge. More of a New Testament 'turn the other cheek so you stay in the bidding' sort. Unless, of course, your filings interfere with the holiday schedule.

nye is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 10:57 PM
  #18
Brodie
watcher on the walls
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
Best title yet.

Brodie is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 11:02 PM
  #19
King_Stannis
Registered User
 
King_Stannis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie View Post
Best title yet.
I disagree. "Once Upon a Time in the West" (Get it, Phoenix...west) was hanging out there as the last of the true Leone spaghetti westerns, it was a no brainer. Or so I thought.

Why exactly is Baum wrathful? Isn't he a judge, fair and impartial? Don't get me wrong, I love STII:WoK, but mouser...dude...failure.

King_Stannis is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 11:25 PM
  #20
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by King_Stannis View Post
I disagree. "Once Upon a Time in the West" (Get it, Phoenix...west) was hanging out there as the last of the true Leone spaghetti westerns, it was a no brainer. Or so I thought.

Why exactly is Baum wrathful? Isn't he a judge, fair and impartial? Don't get me wrong, I love STII:WoK, but mouser...dude...failure.
It's like a bipolar thing, Star Trek and spaghetti westerns....we go back and forth. Your title may be a good one as things wind down, as the last of this soap opera perhaps?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RousselRising View Post
As someone who renewed his season tickets at the end of last season and before the bankruptcy, the only "real world" communication I've had from the folks who have my money specifically in connection with that fact was a letter informing me I had until Aug. 14 to file a claim in bankruptcy court if I wanted to try and get my money back.

Fantasyland, eh?

Still waiting for that letter from Balsillie that he'll happily refund my money if he gets the team.
Ah, but then he'd be accused of meddling with the fans of a team he doesn't own yet.

 
Old
08-21-2009, 11:27 PM
  #21
berklon
Registered User
 
berklon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 858
vCash: 500
May I suggest the next thread title be "There Will Be Buam"? Named after "There Will Be Blood" (which seems appropriate as it is).

berklon is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 11:30 PM
  #22
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
It's like a bipolar thing, Star Trek and spaghetti westerns....we go back and forth. Your title may be a good one as things wind down, as the last of this soap opera perhaps?



Ah, but then he'd be accused of meddling with the fans of a team he doesn't own yet.
Typical smart*** response to a smart*** line in a post.

RR is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 11:42 PM
  #23
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
So...did anything substantive actually happen this week, or are they saving the good stuff for sweeps week?

 
Old
08-21-2009, 11:48 PM
  #24
Colt45Blast
Tippett's Tool
 
Colt45Blast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Mexico
Posts: 25,988
vCash: 500
Assuming the NHL wins at what is being sought by the league, what can the NHL sue both Moyes and other liable parties involved?

What would be the most the league can collect in damages and so fourth?

Assuming the league can sue the pants off Moyes and company where would the money go specifically if any received in a judgment ?

Thanks in advance to whoever answers!
Posted via Mobile Device

Colt45Blast is offline  
Old
08-21-2009, 11:52 PM
  #25
Jaym3000
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArizonaPride View Post
Assuming the NHL wins at what is being sought by the league, what can the NHL sue both Moyes and other liable parties involved?

What would be the most the league can collect in damages and so fourth?

Assuming the league can sue the pants off Moyes and company where would the money go specifically if any received in a judgment ?

Thanks in advance to whoever answers!
Posted via Mobile Device
If this battle is any indicator, I think it will be a long time before they see any money.

Jaym3000 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.