HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Part X: Phoenix Coyotes - Between Scylla and Charybdis

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-07-2010, 09:55 PM
  #726
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
I posted this higher up:

The NHL constitution says:

3.2 Eligibility. Any person, firm, association or corporation that meets the criteria for membership set from time to time by the Board of Governers may be eligible for membership.
I'm not sure that clarifies anything.

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 09:58 PM
  #727
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,737
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
I'm not sure that clarifies anything.

GHOST
When did the NHL every want to do anything that was clear?

But common sense would suggest that the CoG is not a firm, association, nor corporation. Now I guess technically they could create a firm, association, or corporation to act on thier behalf, but allowing this would depend on Bettman's and the BOG's desperation.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 09:59 PM
  #728
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
Buildings fine, but not the teams.


3.2 Eligibility. Any person, firm, association or corporation that meets the criteria for membership set from time to time by the Board of Governers may be eligible for membership.

One reason the NHL doesn't like gov't owned teams is because they are elected and serve term positions. It would be like selling the team and having a new ownership group every few years.
"Buildings fine"?. Sure. They need their Jerry Lewis, Tommy Smothers, Bob Hope stooges in Muni's to pay the freight. The NHL Eligibility by-law seems pretty casual to me, from "time to time" n' all. Appoint the Board of the Municipal Enterprise for 5-8yr terms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Actually, this would likely be just fine under the AZ Gift Clause.

They are not subsidizing a private business - they are purchasing one.

As long as what they are paying is justifiable, they are receiving consideration (ownership of an NHL Franchise) that is commensurate with their payment.

Now, the NHL By-Laws on the other hand ...
Ya, it end-runs all kinds of difficulties, returning ownership to its rightful place. I doubt the league would have a problem with it if it saved the franchise, and possibly 2 or 3 others.

Killion is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:02 PM
  #729
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
When did the NHL every want to do anything that was clear?

But common sense would suggest that the CoG is not a firm, association, nor corporation. Now I guess technically they could create a firm, association, or corporation to act on thier behalf, but allowing this would depend on Bettman's and the BOG's desperation.
By doing that, even with the NHL's blessing (creating a corporation) would paint a funny picture of the NHL enabling a circumvention of their own by-laws, and the slippery slope would begin...and I would expect someone else to start the aforementioned "Territorial Rights", you break em for one, you can break em for others

Thanks cbcwpg (And to anyone else who like to add to this little endeavor )

Tinalera is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:07 PM
  #730
ps241
The Danish Dash!
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,577
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
We dont know & may never know whether Glendale or Reinsdorf pulled the chute Whilee. IMO, it was JR, not the COG. Couldve' been over the $65M combined with a reluctance on the part of Ellman to enjoin with the CFD, any number of factors. Glendale was more than familiar with IE & its' difficulties; no, if they have been "fiddling" as you speculate, it may be a cover for subterranean negotiations or discussions with 1 or 2 other parties. "Never say never", but I have a hard time believing Reinsdorf would be revisiting unless theres' been some sort of deeper fundamental change to the arena bond issues, change in the NHL's latitude with respect to pricing & or terms, a blockbuster TV deal thats being kept under wraps, whatever....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
You might be right, Killion, in which case things are a bit bleaker for the Coyotes' future. If it was simply a matter of Glendale trying to get a better deal from IEH, and having failed to work that out now going back to Reinsdorf, then things might move ahead. If Reinsdorf actually wants a better deal, then it will put an even more enormous burden on Glendale and the Westgate businesses.
guys the only way any of this makes sense to me is if JR did in fact walk away from the deal in earnest (pick your reason of the many available... CFD issues....Ellman getting cold feet etc etc). i think the only way the CoG granted exclusively again to IEH is out of sheer desperation and that would be caused by JR walking away legitimately. i don't see the CoG bluffing and playing hardball with JR and trying to use IEH as a threat....they know JR would see through that. the only explanation that makes sense is that the JR deal fell apart for real

however we shall see.......allot of time left between now and December and even more time between now and the end of next season when they would be forced to make a decision....does anyone think December is really a drop dead date....why December when it would render the balance of next season lame duck and potentially expose the NHL to losses that would exceed $25 million if the fans stopped turning up? i have always felt that date is a bit hinky

ps241 is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:09 PM
  #731
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,737
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinalera View Post
By doing that, even with the NHL's blessing (creating a corporation) would paint a funny picture of the NHL enabling a circumvention of their own by-laws, and the slippery slope would begin...and I would expect someone else to start the aforementioned "Territorial Rights", you break em for one, you can break em for others
Good you bring that up. I could see the press having a field day with that. On one hand Bettman is upset because the NJ Devils used a loophole to circumvent an NHL / NHLPA agreement, yet it would be O.K. for Bettman to circumvent the NHL bylaws because it suits him. I'd like to see this play out.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:10 PM
  #732
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,459
vCash: 500
Referring to post above about the Luke AFB in Glendale....

http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...ise-issue.html

Quote:
The U.S. Air Force last week chose the Glendale base as its preferred site to train F-35 pilots, though an environmental-impact study must be conducted before a final decision is made.
The nearby city of El Mirage is concerned about noise.

Quote:
Political leaders in neighboring communities quickly denounced El Mirage. They said the F-35 Lightning II would secure the future of Luke - a $2 billion-a-year economic engine - after the military phases out its F-16s.

http://www.glendalestar.com/articles...ews/news01.txt

This article has a bit more on the EIS and selection process. Final decision on the use of Luke AFB as the training location won't be determined until "early" 2011. (Estimated 8000 jobs.)

That is well beyond the 31 December 2010 deadline the NHL has set.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:12 PM
  #733
David_99
Registered User
 
David_99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbrutis View Post
Glendale will buy the team before that happens.
Why do I keep remembering that it would be illegal for Glendale to own the team? Back when it was still Jim vs JR vs IE, then Jim vs no one until the NHL stepped in, I remember people asking "Why doesn't Glendale just buy them" and I'm certain there was a justifiable reason that nixed that option and it was put to bed. All of a sudden it's an option again. What exactly am I remembering?

David_99 is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:16 PM
  #734
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
"Buildings fine"?. Sure. They need their Jerry Lewis, Tommy Smothers, Bob Hope stooges in Muni's to pay the freight. The NHL Eligibility by-law seems pretty casual to me, from "time to time" n' all. Appoint the Board of the Municipal Enterprise for 5-8yr terms.



Ya, it end-runs all kinds of difficulties, returning ownership to its rightful place. I doubt the league would have a problem with it if it saved the franchise, and possibly 2 or 3 others.
This is interesting speculation, but how many folks really believe that a municipality with a population of 250,000 with a somewhat marginal fan base would be willing to shell out $170 million to own and operate an NHL franchise? Remember, this is not a profitable business; quite the opposite. By calculations inherent in Reinsdorf's MOU the cost to buy and operate the franchise over the next 5-7 years would be about $265 million. Now show me a municipal politician that has the gumption to invest that much money while knowing that the enterprise will almost certainly not turn a profit for the next couple of election cycles. Oh, and consider the interesting debates about how much money they should spend on the team payroll.

Whileee is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:17 PM
  #735
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
The Glendale buying the team idea is absurd. End of story.

Mork is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:20 PM
  #736
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Referring to post above about the Luke AFB in Glendale....

http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...ise-issue.html



The nearby city of El Mirage is concerned about noise.




http://www.glendalestar.com/articles...ews/news01.txt

This article has a bit more on the EIS and selection process. Final decision on the use of Luke AFB as the training location won't be determined until "early" 2011. (Estimated 8000 jobs.)

That is well beyond the 31 December 2010 deadline the NHL has set.
What possible relevance could any of that have to this thread?

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:27 PM
  #737
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_99 View Post
Why do I keep remembering that it would be illegal for Glendale to own the team? Back when it was still Jim vs JR vs IE, then Jim vs no one until the NHL stepped in, I remember people asking "Why doesn't Glendale just buy them" and I'm certain there was a justifiable reason that nixed that option and it was put to bed. All of a sudden it's an option again. What exactly am I remembering?
COG had no funds to "buy" the team (barely "breaking even").

Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
What possible relevance could any of that have to this thread?

GHOST
That there may be a "two billion dollar annual economic machine" that would revitalize the entire region, financially. Them that has entertainment options (and venues) might expect more attendance, etc. (leading to adding $$s in city and private bank accounts)

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:34 PM
  #738
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
When did the NHL every want to do anything that was clear?

But common sense would suggest that the CoG is not a firm, association, nor corporation. Now I guess technically they could create a firm, association, or corporation to act on thier behalf, but allowing this would depend on Bettman's and the BOG's desperation.
Fortunately for the NHL it does seem to allow an Unincorporated Not-for-Profit Association.

kdb209 is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:40 PM
  #739
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
COG had no funds to "buy" the team (barely "breaking even").



That there may be a "two billion dollar annual economic machine" that would revitalize the entire region, financially. Them that has entertainment options (and venues) might expect more attendance, etc. (leading to adding $$s in city and private bank accounts)
I'm not sure that's two billion in new money. F-16 are being fazed out. The issue is whether the base will get the contract for the next generation of planes. Again, we are getting a little off topic.

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:43 PM
  #740
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Fortunately for the NHL it does seem to allow an Unincorporated Not-for-Profit Association.
Why is that "fortunate" for the NHL?

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:45 PM
  #741
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
Why is that "fortunate" for the NHL?

GHOST
The NHL is legally an Unincorporated Not-for-Profit Association.

kdb209 is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:46 PM
  #742
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The NHL is legally an Unincorporated Not-for-Profit Association.
Yes, I know that. I'm missing your point and how that relates to the Coyotes' ownership situation.

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:49 PM
  #743
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
The COG is never going to purchase the team nor would the NHL allow it. Time to talk about something remotely realistic?

GHOST
http://www.fogcityjournal.com/.../th...d-sports-teams

Heres the link for the "The case for community owned sports teams" GHOST, seeing as how the subject interests you so much. You have to scroll down a wee bit.

Killion is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:53 PM
  #744
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,737
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The NHL is legally an Unincorporated Not-for-Profit Association.
This means the NHL can own the team, but the CoG can't, I guess...

Without putting all the details here, basically the Bylaws governing the CoG allows them to own and operate buildings as long as they have "public" usages. IE: libraries, pools, the arena, etc., but the bylaws don't allow them to own businesses except those deemed to be public utilities. I'm not a lawyer, and there is a lot to read in bylaws, but I'm sure owning an NHL team would not be concidered a public utility.

Quote from the mayor in a letter dated July 2001:

http://www.glendaleaz.com/Mayor/docu...onJuly2001.pdf

Besides the 17,500- seat arena, Ellman will build a minimum of 1.6 million square feet of retail space, restaurants, hotels, Class A office space and quality residential areas. They have acquired the land and will design and construct all development on it. Upon completion, Glendale will reimburse Ellman up to $180 million and own the arena. The facility will be available to the city for other public uses throughout the year.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 10:53 PM
  #745
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
http://www.fogcityjournal.com/.../th...d-sports-teams

Heres the link for the "The case for community owned sports teams" GHOST, seeing as how the subject interests you so much. You have to scroll down a wee bit.
It seems to interest YOU a lot. I don't see the NHL allowing cities to own NHL franchises. Are you suggesting that could be the new trend? Community ownership as in Green Bay or with the Oilers is a different subject.

GHOST

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 11:03 PM
  #746
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post

I have always felt that date is a bit Hinky.
The Hinky Meter sprung its sprockets some time ago on this one PS. Gary'll just pop his cheek with his index finger in December, hold it up to the wind like Travolta at the Disco & give er'.


Killion is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 11:07 PM
  #747
Scottrocks58*
Six
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
I'm not sure that's two billion in new money. F-16 are being fazed out. The issue is whether the base will get the contract for the next generation of planes. Again, we are getting a little off topic.

GHOST
Yea, that seems about right, 2 bil into the economy. I trained near Ft. Monmouth in NJ and that was about what the fort did for the Jersey shore. The point is that it will generate more revenue for Glendale. Luke is a sprawling, enormous base. I go to Luke Day every other year and I can tell you that it is bustling. The pilots train with live ammo on ranges south of Maricopa, so there is always a flow in and out of squadrons, people and money.

Arizona is wide open and has those live gunnery and bombing ranges, so Luke is ideally situated to take on each new plane, as it has for the F-15,F- 16 and, about 15 years back, the A-10. They currently keep the F-16 but all other planes rotate in and out.

Scottrocks58* is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 11:09 PM
  #748
headsigh
leave at once!
 
headsigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Atlanta
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 9,868
vCash: 500
Are the Oilers community owned? IIRC green bay in NFL and a handful of European teams were city property.

Glendale buying would be even less likely than a move.

They've made it clear they aren't interested in footing the bill with a separate ownership.

Is it possible the NHL can own the team like they did last year, then sell it to a buyer who works a deal through with CoG?

headsigh is offline  
Old
08-07-2010, 11:13 PM
  #749
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post

Are you suggesting that could be the new trend? GHOST
I do believe its coming Ghost. Not in any sweeping format. But the fact is, cities are getting sick & tired of having their constituents held hostage by predatory owners of THEIR teams. Much of a cities pride & identity is tied to their teams. In Glendales case, it may not be feasible or practicable, may not even be legal for all I know, but its worth thought/exploration. Desperate times n' all.

Killion is online now  
Old
08-07-2010, 11:18 PM
  #750
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
Yes, I know that. I'm missing your point and how that relates to the Coyotes' ownership situation.

GHOST
I was being facetious.

The NHL is not violating it's own Constitution by owning the 'Yotes.

kdb209 is online now  
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 01:33 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.