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.

Phoenix LXIV: Will You Still Need Me, Will You Still Read Me, on Thread LXIV?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-20-2012, 11:27 PM
  #976
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AP View Post
Yes but the media in Phoenix has had plenty of time over the last 4 years to ask the hard questions within the time frame of each of the events that took place.
Completely agree with you on that AP.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:28 PM
  #977
DeathToAllButMetal
Let it all burn.
 
DeathToAllButMetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Again, it's just mind-boggling that AZ doesn't have a state law preventing exactly this sort of thing from happening when councils enter lame-duck periods in the months prior to an election and in the interim before the new council is seated. Hell, if you had a majority of council defeated, what's to stop them awarding themselves massive pay raises for the last month of their terms? Or giving themselves a million-dollar going-away party?

It's also insane to think that Jamison and the NHL and the Secret Investors would force themselves on a city that doesn't want them. In a month, a new regime will be in power with a majority of people that clearly want no part of this sham deal. How do Jamison and the Secret Investors move forward in partnership with the city in light of that unavoidable fact? Even if the agreement is signed, they've got to know just how incredibly ****ed up this entire business arrangement will be from day one. The new mayor will very likely take office and declare his first priority to be killing this deal before it bankrupts the city.

Man, this whole saga just gets crazier all the time.

DeathToAllButMetal is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:30 PM
  #978
madhi19
Registered User
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
In looking at the Team / No Team scenarios, there are two key considerations. First, the AMF and Capital Fund for the arena (tied to the Jamison lease) is expected to be considerably more expensive than the arena management costs without the team.

So why does the deal "save" money in the long term. According to the figures presented, they are projecting that without the team they will have much higher General Fund expenditures. I can't recall any rationale for that assumption.

Can someone clarify why Skeete projects that General Fund expenditures will be substantially higher with No Team, even after the arena management costs are considered?
These peoples rejected reality a while ago. Otherwise they would have told Bettman where he can shove his team three years ago when he started asking for 25 million a year! Hell 50 million is enough to wipe a lot of the remaining debt on the freaking building. I keep coming back to gambler mentality to explain the whole psycosis. A gambler on a bad streak will throw good money at bad bets in the hope that his luck will turn so he can cover his previous loss. That how you lose a house and that how you bankrupt a city.

madhi19 is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:32 PM
  #979
DeathToAllButMetal
Let it all burn.
 
DeathToAllButMetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Clark's motivations alone here pretty much make the case for lame-duck rules for councils in AZ. I know she believes in this deal, because she's a moron. But she's also clearly mean-spirited enough (the secret Hispanic conspiracy stuff was sickening) to vote for something like this to take revenge on the city for her humiliating defeat.

DeathToAllButMetal is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:33 PM
  #980
DeathToAllButMetal
Let it all burn.
 
DeathToAllButMetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
These peoples rejected reality a while ago. Otherwise they would have told Bettman where he can shove his team three years ago when he started asking for 25 million a year! Hell 50 million is enough to wipe a lot of the remaining debt on the freaking building. I keep coming back to gambler mentality to explain the whole psycosis. A gambler on a bad streak will throw good money at bad bets in the hope that his luck will turn and he can cover his previous loss.
But why do that when Jamison will just buy the rink for a couple hundred million in a year or two?

Come on, madhi, get with the Clarkonomics already!

DeathToAllButMetal is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:35 PM
  #981
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Can someone clarify why Skeete projects that General Fund expenditures will be substantially higher with No Team, even after the arena management costs are considered?
Is he perhaps working off of projected tax revenue losses should the Coyotes leave with absolutely no dates factored in & projected to offset those losses? I see the app $6M for AM, absolutely nothing, zero, with respect to potential event, trade show, concert dates... only explanation I can think of Whileee.

Killion is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:38 PM
  #982
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Doctor View Post
When I first saw the 'uneducated' comment I thought blues10 was slamming the citizens of Glendale, fortunately I decided to watch the link for I layed into him.

My analysis of the recent election suggests that the citizens are very informed of the issues. Prop 457 passed very handily suggesting there wasn't any confusion over that issue. Likewise Clark was easily defeated, and once again it says educated public about the issues.

The citizens of Glendale are educated about what is going on in their city. The only uneducated one is Joyce Clark herself.
You base your analysis on the outcome you wanted. I'm basing my comment on what I'm observing first hand.

I've seen a lot of complaints here locally regarding confusion over 457. After the election, one of the initiative's proponents even tried to blame the loss on the city clerk for confusing voters with the wording on the ballot.

This is not exclusive to Glendale though. It happens in all elections.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:39 PM
  #983
madhi19
Registered User
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Is he perhaps working off of projected tax revenue losses should the Coyotes leave with absolutely no dates factored in & projected to offset those losses? I see the app $6M for AM, absolutely nothing, zero, with respect to potential event, trade show, concert dates... only explanation I can think of Whileee.
Maybe the NHL threatened to burn the effing place down, salt the earth and even irradiate the air on their way out!

madhi19 is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 11:53 PM
  #984
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
1. "You implied that immediately after the agreement is signed, there is a reasonable expectation that Jamison will purchase the arena, retire the arena debt, and then not collect the AMF. Then why did you lease the Jobing.com arena to Jamison instead of selling it to him?"
2. "How much of the AMF is for arena management and how much is to subsidize the Coyotes operation?"
3. "Why are you allowing Jamison to receive the parking revenue rights, which the City of Glendale has previously valued at $100 million?"
4. "You said that the AMF is $11 million per year, but the total outlay for the AMF is $308 million. Can you explain why those figures don't match?"

I just did...
1) "I didn't imply he would buy it the next day. That is your own implication. However if you want me to clarify it some, he has the right to enter into a purchase agreement for the arena at any time once the AMF is signed."
2) "That is all set out in the AMF which anyone can now read and decide for themselves."
3) "Parking rights have been part of the original lease and remain so."
4) "$11 million is for the initial year of the agreement. The new total $308 million is still less than the $320 million outlined in the original agreement approved in June."

I just answered. If I could answer them, they were softballs......


Last edited by TheLegend: 11-21-2012 at 12:03 AM.
TheLegend is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 06:03 AM
  #985
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Is he perhaps working off of projected tax revenue losses should the Coyotes leave with absolutely no dates factored in & projected to offset those losses? I see the app $6M for AM, absolutely nothing, zero, with respect to potential event, trade show, concert dates... only explanation I can think of Whileee.
No - revenues are presented separately. I think I've figured out the discrepancy:

Using FY22 (though that applies for every year: link) --

Team stays:
Beginning GF balance (1.1)
Revenues 191.9
GF expenses (154.3)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (19.0)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.9)

No team:
Beginning GF balance 1.7
Revenues 189.4
GF expenses (163.9)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (8.8)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.1)

The 2.5M drop in revenues makes sense in the context of assuming no arena events if the team goes. The reduced AMF too. But the GF expenses make no sense -- why would they be 9.6M higher without the team?

Here's why: there's an "expenditure reduction" line item in FY13-FY16, i.e. the effect of service cuts is presented separately. It has much larger amounts if the team stays than if it goes. In other words it's not "Coyotes stay" vs. "Coyotes leave", it's "Coyotes stay + big cuts" vs. "Coyotes leave + smaller cuts". The only reason the first scenario looks better in the long run is because of those bigger service cuts.

barneyg is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 06:29 AM
  #986
OthmarAmmann
Money making machine
 
OthmarAmmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
No - revenues are presented separately. I think I've figured out the discrepancy:

Using FY22 (though that applies for every year: link) --

Team stays:
Beginning GF balance (1.1)
Revenues 191.9
GF expenses (154.3)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (19.0)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.9)

No team:
Beginning GF balance 1.7
Revenues 189.4
GF expenses (163.9)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (8.8)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.1)

The 2.5M drop in revenues makes sense in the context of assuming no arena events if the team goes. The reduced AMF too. But the GF expenses make no sense -- why would they be 9.6M higher without the team?

Here's why: there's an "expenditure reduction" line item in FY13-FY16, i.e. the effect of service cuts is presented separately. It has much larger amounts if the team stays than if it goes. In other words it's not "Coyotes stay" vs. "Coyotes leave", it's "Coyotes stay + big cuts" vs. "Coyotes leave + smaller cuts". The only reason the first scenario looks better in the long run is because of those bigger service cuts.
Fascinating. I have generally given up looking at COG financial projections, although they do seem to have improved significantly under Skeete.

It would appear that they more or less backed into the GF expenditures that would result in nearly equivalent ending fund balances, and obviously there must be significant cuts to fund the AMF. Was this not discussed during the meeting? (who am I kidding... They might as well have discussed cookies and milk)

OthmarAmmann is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 07:02 AM
  #987
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
1) "I didn't imply he would buy it the next day. That is your own implication. However if you want me to clarify it some, he has the right to enter into a purchase agreement for the arena at any time once the AMF is signed."
2) "That is all set out in the AMF which anyone can now read and decide for themselves."
3) "Parking rights have been part of the original lease and remain so."
4) "$11 million is for the initial year of the agreement. The new total $308 million is still less than the $320 million outlined in the original agreement approved in June."

I just answered. If I could answer them, they were softballs......
You didn't hear my follow-ups yet....

1) "You didn't answer my question. If Jamison has any strong inclination to purchase the arena, why didn't the COG try to negotiate to sell him the arena now? If you did try to negotiate an arena sale, what was Jamison's response?"

2) "I am asking for your analysis of the agreement, and for you to tell our citizens who have not had a chance to read the agreement in plain language how much of the AMF is for running the arena and how much is to support the Coyotes hockey team."

3) "So do you accept that the parking revenue rights are worth $100 million, and if so, doesn't that have to be factored into the level of subsidy provided to Jamison?"

4) "Thanks for the clarification. The Coyotes have not played in the Jobing.com arena this year. Does the COG still have to pay the $11 million if there is no NHL season? What are the total AMF payments in the first five years?"

Whileee is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 07:13 AM
  #988
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
No - revenues are presented separately. I think I've figured out the discrepancy:

Using FY22 (though that applies for every year: link) --

Team stays:
Beginning GF balance (1.1)
Revenues 191.9
GF expenses (154.3)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (19.0)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.9)

No team:
Beginning GF balance 1.7
Revenues 189.4
GF expenses (163.9)
MPC-PFC & Transfers out (35.3)
AMF & capital expenditures on arena (8.8)
equals
Ending fund balance (17.1)

The 2.5M drop in revenues makes sense in the context of assuming no arena events if the team goes. The reduced AMF too. But the GF expenses make no sense -- why would they be 9.6M higher without the team?

Here's why: there's an "expenditure reduction" line item in FY13-FY16, i.e. the effect of service cuts is presented separately. It has much larger amounts if the team stays than if it goes. In other words it's not "Coyotes stay" vs. "Coyotes leave", it's "Coyotes stay + big cuts" vs. "Coyotes leave + smaller cuts". The only reason the first scenario looks better in the long run is because of those bigger service cuts.
I was thinking that might be the case, but thought it was too preposterous. Could they have really asked the council to review projections comparing apples and oranges so blatantly?

So what they have pointed out is the blindingly obvious. If we cut more in expenditures than the difference between the Coyotes deal and another AMF, we'll have a higher general fund balance in the end. No wonder Skeete said that he personally can't support the Jamison deal (beyond the likelihood that he hasn't had much positive response from the wide circulation of his resume, and likes the COG gig).

Whileee is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 07:59 AM
  #989
ducks2010
I buy milk in bags
 
ducks2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
Quote:
http://www.glendaleaz.com/video/
Glendale City Council Workshop
November 20, 2012

7:16
Mayor Scruggs: There are serious significant issues facing this city right now... and not all of them have been revealed... but they will be in a very short amount of time... and I don't know if we are going to be able to go through until January 22nd without having meetings to address the various serious situations in this city right now...
The suspense is killing me... soon all will be revealed.

ducks2010 is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:03 AM
  #990
Fidel Astro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducks2010 View Post
The suspense is killing me... soon all will be revealed.
Two weeks.

Fidel Astro is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:05 AM
  #991
powerstuck
User Registered
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
The 2.5M drop in revenues makes sense in the context of assuming no arena events if the team goes. The reduced AMF too. But the GF expenses make no sense -- why would they be 9.6M higher without the team?

Here's why: there's an "expenditure reduction" line item in FY13-FY16, i.e. the effect of service cuts is presented separately. It has much larger amounts if the team stays than if it goes. In other words it's not "Coyotes stay" vs. "Coyotes leave", it's "Coyotes stay + big cuts" vs. "Coyotes leave + smaller cuts". The only reason the first scenario looks better in the long run is because of those bigger service cuts.
Basically they are using the Coyotes to realize some cuts elsewhere ? Eh...seen this elsewhere.

powerstuck is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:06 AM
  #992
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
Here's why: there's an "expenditure reduction" line item in FY13-FY16, i.e. the effect of service cuts is presented separately. It has much larger amounts if the team stays than if it goes. In other words it's not "Coyotes stay" vs. "Coyotes leave", it's "Coyotes stay + big cuts" vs. "Coyotes leave + smaller cuts". The only reason the first scenario looks better in the long run is because of those bigger service cuts.
Yep, I'm watching the video right now. The "with team" scenario contemplates making immediate large scale cuts. The GF impact of those reductions is compounded annually to the point where at the 15-20 year mark, the fund balance is higher with the team... even though the GF balance is negative and the city has been in austerity for two decades.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas L View Post
Fascinating.
It is a truly amazing display of governance failure. And when the projections don't materialize again, there literally will be nothing left to cut. Might want to start studying Chapter 9

CasualFan is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:19 AM
  #993
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
Yep, I'm watching the video right now. The "with team" scenario contemplates making immediate large scale cuts. The GF impact of those reductions is compounded annually to the point where at the 15-20 year mark, the fund balance is higher with the team... even though the GF balance is negative and the city has been in austerity for two decades.



It is a truly amazing display of governance failure. And when the projections don't materialize again, there literally will be nothing left to cut. Might want to start studying Chapter 9
This is a significant point. All of Glendale's credit cards are maxed out, and they are slashing their budget to the bare bones to afford the Jamison lease. I guess it's no surprise that Skeete has finally turned against the lease, and Knaack and Martinez are seeming a bit nervous. Skeete will have to face a city work force that is losing many jobs, and then a new mayor and council that oppose the deal. Knaack and Martinez will have to answer for the financial mess, reduced services and city job losses while Jamison gets millions. These folks are paying a very high price to keep the Coyotes in Glendale.

It will be fascinating to see if Skeete maintains his opposition to the deal, and then have council members vote in favor. Essentially, that would mean that two outgoing council members push through a deal that their (interim) city manager thinks is not advisable. Even if the lease is approved on November 27, it seems so unlikely to survive the aftermath.


Last edited by Whileee: 11-21-2012 at 08:33 AM. Reason: Added thought.
Whileee is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:21 AM
  #994
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducks2010 View Post
The suspense is killing me... soon all will be revealed.
They were eluding to the fund transfer problem being much larger than just the Risk and Workers Comp funds. The inference was that there were many questionable transfers in the ledgers, apparently related to the spring training facility.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:47 AM
  #995
ducks2010
I buy milk in bags
 
ducks2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
Quote:
http://www.glendaleaz.com/video/
Glendale City Council Workshop
November 20, 2012

45:25
Mayor Scruggs: Amazing... Information flowing where information was locked up in a black box before.
Regarding the city's new "Follow Your Money" website... Derogatory comment towards Beasley?

ducks2010 is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:51 AM
  #996
ducks2010
I buy milk in bags
 
ducks2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinalera View Post
This gets my vote!


Well, we'll see what happens Nov 27 I guess, might clear some things up.....maybe.....in some universe....
+1 for Phoenix LXV: OMNISHAMBLES

ducks2010 is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:19 AM
  #997
JMT21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
On what planet does Clark think GJ would actually buy the arena to relieve the COG of the debt and the AMF. Not much benefit their for GJ at all.

Maybe they should have considering selling the arena to GJ for $1.00 allowing him full control of all revenue that can be generated. Would cost COG less $$$ than this monstrous AMF. But I think the AMF gives GJ pretty close to full control and access to the majority of all revenue already.

Lieberman needs to come back and be there to vote as I don't think the new person taking his seat is eligible. Hopefully the new mayor will continue to shout from the rooftops that he will fight tooth and nail to overturn this lease should it go thru.

Odds that GJ reveals his investors before signing the lease? 10/1

Seems like only yesterday that Scruggs exalted that losing the Coyotes would cost the 500-600M over 30 years...... my how times have changed.

JMT21 is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:27 AM
  #998
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,011
vCash: 500
Adding insult to injury, Congress and the folks who have us staring off the fiscal cliff are toying with the idea of taking away the tax exempt status that Municipal bonds enjoy. If such a move were to come to fruition the COG and all other municipalities will see their borrowing costs go up dramatically. Joyce Clark, one of no brain, morals and a committed Socialist would applaud such measures in the same vein that she has so absent mindedly supported tendering a lease to an individual who is the front man for people we do not know. The same JC who is blindly attempting to lead Glendale over a cliff of their own making! Joyce please leave yesterday!

mesamonster is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:31 AM
  #999
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,427
vCash: 350
Its a job well done, but we cant afford it, Skeete said of the city quest to keep the team.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...nclick_check=1

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 09:42 AM
  #1000
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,169
vCash: 500
Phoenx LXV: The word is... give me a minute.... "Omnishambles"... "Omnishambles"

kdb209 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 03:28 AM.

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.