The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Phoenix XLIV: Ignorance & Apathy (or I Doan't Know & I Doan't Care)
Of course. Weve all known what it really is and has been since it was first proposed. Obviously for legal reasons it was called AMF as there wasnt any other way to go about funneling that kind of cash to the NHL. Why Goldwater didnt and hasnt dropped a writ on that one is rather curious.
They might, yet. But they probably want to have a more solid case than a market-to-market comparison. They are in the midst of digging for documents and are likely keen on finding any evidence that the COG has some documentation of the true cost of arena management. That would be a smoking gun for a legal case under the "gift clause". My speculation is that the reason that City Council is delaying a study is so that they complete their payment obligations to the NHL before the finally "discover" the true cost. Then they will claim some level of plausible deniability if challenged for overpaying, saying "Gosh, the true cost to manage the arena is only that? We thought it was much more. We'll certainly never do that again, Judge."
They might, yet. But they probably want to have a more solid case than a market-to-market comparison. They are in the midst of digging for documents and are likely keen on finding any evidence that the COG has some documentation of the true cost of arena management. That would be a smoking gun for a legal case under the "gift clause". My speculation is that the reason that City Council is delaying a study is so that they complete their payment obligations to the NHL before the finally "discover" the true cost. Then they will claim some level of plausible deniability if challenged for overpaying, saying "Gosh, the true cost to manage the arena is only that? We thought it was much more. We'll certainly never do that again, Judge."
Solid speculation & hypothetical scenario there Whileee. Remember though we had numerous discussions & debates about the matter back in May/June/July 2010 when it was first agreed to & approved by the COG, and with yet another approval last May the precedent was set and went un-challenged by Goldwater. Though Im no lawyer, I do understand that many cases & of course judgments are based on precedents, and as such, absent challenge over 2 years, I wonder if a case even exists?.
Secondly, I seem to re-call the COG approving the expenditure of app. $65,000 to conduct a study on operating costs, management & potential alternatives to the Coyotes as primary tenants which was of course shelved by City Staff as they claimed it would be detrimental to ongoing sale negotiations. If Goldwater hopes to find a "smoking gun", be it an email between say Beasley & Global Spectrum or an AEG etc, whereby a ballpark arena management fee mightve been casually put forth, due to the wording in the AMUL itself I dont quite see how Glendale could be held culpable even then. I mean, whats the status of that case at this moment anyway and how much more time can Tindall possibly buy through procedural delays & obfuscations?...
I mean, whats the status of that case at this moment anyway and how much more time can Tindall possibly buy through procedural delays & obfuscations?...
Did somebody say "whats the case status"?
3/5/2012 RES - Response 3/5/2012
NOTE: DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
2/28/2012 NOT - Notice 2/29/2012
NOTE: Notice of Partial Compliance with Special Master Report #1
2/27/2012 REL - Reply 2/28/2012
NOTE: DEFENDANTS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR OBJECTIONS TO SPECIAL MASTER REPORT NO. 1
In short, Glendale partially complied with the report but partially didnt. The old "half a bee". So, Goldwater motioned to compel the city to fully comply and Glendale essentially said "nah, we'll just wait for a ruling on our objections"
In short, Glendale partially complied with the report but partially didnt. The old "half a bee". So, Goldwater motioned to compel the city to fully comply and Glendale essentially said "nah, we'll just wait for a ruling on our objections"
... and so how long is it likely to take before a ruling comes down CF?.
And Phil takes a parting shot at City Manager Ed Beasley
Lieberman said he would like to see the council have to vote on any project that costs more than $50,000, and do negotiations personally at the conference table on the fourth floor.
“We don’t have a negotiator in city government who knows how to do it,” he said.
And here I thought the city council appointed Beasley as city manager whose responsibilities include contract negotiation.
I dunno, maybe right after the ISDA ruling that the Greek bailout constitutes a Default Event.
Ya, the Auction for that ones been set for March 19th, and I see Credit Suisse is on the hook over there as they are in Glendale, albeit with far less exposure. I believe Ellman was into them for a mere $500M.... wonder if Hulsizer & this guy Hansen in Seattle are card carrying members of the International Swaps & Derivatives Association?. Sounds like their kinda club.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser
And here I thought the city council appointed Beasley as city manager whose responsibilities include contract negotiation.
Phils' 84. Possibly a "Seniors Moment"?. Nothing more vindictive & spiteful than an angry old man, an angry young man, some in middle age, often pre-teens... oh lets face it, people can be just plain crappy.
And here I thought the city council appointed Beasley as city manager whose responsibilities include contract negotiation.
You might have missed the subtlety of Lieberman's poke at Beasley. He's saying that Ed doesnt know what the heck he's doing.
If you consider $435MM in unfunded baseball park debt, the $200MM or so service left on Jobing, plus the $50MM paid to a team that is almost certainly going to relocate in a few months, Phil's got a pretty good point. Beasley is a civic disaster.
You might have missed the subtlety of Lieberman's poke at Beasley. He's saying that Ed doesnt know what the heck he's doing.
If you consider $435MM in unfunded baseball park debt, the $200MM or so service left on Jobing, plus the $50MM paid to a team that is almost certainly going to relocate in a few months, Phil's got a pretty good point. Beasley is a civic disaster.
So, they let this guy be the city manager and have the keys to the vault you're telling me?
You might have missed the subtlety of Lieberman's poke at Beasley. He's saying that Ed doesnt know what the heck he's doing.
If you consider $435MM in unfunded baseball park debt, the $200MM or so service left on Jobing, plus the $50MM paid to a team that is almost certainly going to relocate in a few months, Phil's got a pretty good point. Beasley is a civic disaster.
I didn't miss it, certainly wasn't subtle
Phil has a knack for expressing himself like that cranky old uncle you fortunately only see at family reunions. Would be curious if there's somewhere we can find his past votes/positions on hiring Beasley and the various expansions Glendale took on. He's been on the city council since 1992.
March 09, 2012
Lisa Halverstadt @LisaHalverstadt Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
#NHL deputy commish, #Glendale spokeswoman both say there’s nothing new to share on #Coyotes negotiations.
It's pretty much the worst State Secret ever because they wrote Team losses right into the contract: AMUL
For example, Section 2.3(a)(4) describes how player salaries are treated to calculate Actual Cash Losses. It doesn't get more blatant than that. Anyone who says that the $25MM is an "arena management fee" is either really dishonest or really ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion
Of course. Weve all known what it really is and has been since it was first proposed. Obviously for legal reasons it was called AMF as there wasnt any other way to go about funneling that kind of cash to the NHL. Why Goldwater didnt and hasnt dropped a writ on that one is rather curious.
AHEM ........ I suggested months ago we all needed to find out where the $25 million was really going to.
And here I thought the city council appointed Beasley as city manager whose responsibilities include contract negotiation.
And here I thought..... since it's been on the agenda enough.... the City Manager updated the council every two weeks or so during their workshop sessions.
So that begs the question.... why didn't good ol' Phil bother to ASK Beasley his questions then if he was so concerned about it?
Either....
1) Phil slept through the workshops.
2) Phil wants the public to believe he never had anything to do with the mess they're in.
The job of politicians everywhere is to retain power. Sometimes that requires a....forgetful...memory. And it always requires a certain immunity from embarrassment.
Phil has a knack for expressing himself like that cranky old uncle you fortunately only see at family reunions. Would be curious if there's somewhere we can find his past votes/positions on hiring Beasley and the various expansions Glendale took on. He's been on the city council since 1992.
Glendale probably posts it in the meeting minutes, Seems like a really safe bet that Phil went right along with it - I certainly recall the heart warming Vote for Logan. The City Council didn't exactly deploy a proper checks & balances system, so its great to hear Phil's outrage over the results of a plan he endorsed. Glendales act is just fascinating to watch. And there is still more hijinks to come.
And here I thought..... since it's been on the agenda enough.... the City Manager updated the council every two weeks or so during their workshop sessions.
So that begs the question.... why didn't good ol' Phil bother to ASK Beasley his questions then if he was so concerned about it?
Either....
1) Phil slept through the workshops.
2) Phil wants the public to believe he never had anything to do with the mess they're in.
OR..... 3) All of the above.
Beasley and Lynch don't answer questions posed by city councilors. It might hinder the sensitive ongoing lease negotiations with potential buyers.
Beasley and Lynch don't answer questions posed by city councilors. It might hinder the sensitive ongoing lease negotiations with potential buyers.
Up to a point thats understandable I believe, however, in Executive Session full transparency should be required. Perhaps it is, and the likes of Lieberman are simply playing games in responding to questions, making statements?.
Up to a point thats understandable I believe, however, in Executive Session full transparency should be required. Perhaps it is, and the likes of Lieberman are simply playing games in responding to questions, making statements?.
In listening to Clarke, I believe it is. Lieberman insists on pandering to the old school, who refuse to acknowledge that at this point regress is not the best way to thwart progress.
I have no problem with those who wear bib overalls to the council meetings and love Lieberman, in fact they have some great wisdom. I do believe the COG past the point of those often logical beliefs some time ago however and that there is no turning back.
