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 LXVI: Get Your Kicks On Thread LXVI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2012, 09:07 PM
  #976
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blues10 View Post
Teflon Eduord. Skeete unknowingly set up to take the fall.
Ed sure knows how to roll, that's for sure. Tell everyone beneath you to make it happen, but don't put your name to anything.

"I fully endorse this plan of action, but I'm not signing nothin'"

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 09:31 PM
  #977
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Lets do the math again....
He loses 60,000 a game from the 366,000 a game he gets. Yes I know he still has to manage the place with other things for that 366,000 a game but I didn't see any performance clause penalties other than the 60,000 a game. Maybe he could get away with no other bookings.

Who cares when they give it to him? and I'd have a hard time believing he had to start paying the city before they started paying him.
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?



If he gets paid in April or the end of the SC playoffs, he can avoid paying the City the $60,000 per game penalty by buying the team when the lockout ends. Or if the lockout is still on as Jan. 31, 2013 nears, he can buy the team near that date and limit the amount he pays in penalties.

Funny, how some fans seem to think Jamison shouldn't mind paying a $60,000 per game penalty, so he can what, ease the minds of message board fans ?
Shut up his critics?

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 09:54 PM
  #978
GF
Registered User
 
GF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?
Why is he trying to buy a team that never turned a profit in 16years if he doesn't want to lose money... Why didn't he buy the team when the lease was more favourable if he doesn't want to lose money?

With the lockout, even the big markets will suffer when the game returns. In Arizona, it will probably be terrible. I can't imagine he's actually believing he can turn things around. We'll all know for sure in 3 fortnights.

GF is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:26 PM
  #979
sipowicz
The Original
 
sipowicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,879
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?


LOL!! Like the other guy said, if he didn't want to lose money he sure as heck shouldn't be trying to buy the Coyotes. Some of you guys crack me up.


Last edited by sipowicz: 12-17-2012 at 11:38 PM.
sipowicz is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:26 PM
  #980
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
Ed sure knows how to roll, that's for sure. Tell everyone beneath you to make it happen, but don't put your name to anything.

"I fully endorse this plan of action, but I'm not signing nothin'"
... well done, and nicely prefaced. pretty sure Ive read that line
somewhere before, mebbe a movie, whatever, and most amusing it be.

Killion is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:31 PM
  #981
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GF View Post
We'll all know for sure in 3 fortnights.
your new here, Welcome!,
BUT ... uh, no, not likely.....


Killion is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:31 PM
  #982
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?



If he gets paid in April or the end of the SC playoffs, he can avoid paying the City the $60,000 per game penalty by buying the team when the lockout ends. Or if the lockout is still on as Jan. 31, 2013 nears, he can buy the team near that date and limit the amount he pays in penalties.

Funny, how some fans seem to think Jamison shouldn't mind paying a $60,000 per game penalty, so he can what, ease the minds of message board fans ?
Shut up his critics?
Especially since we all know he does not have any money.... and no investors...

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:43 PM
  #983
saskganesh
Registered User
 
saskganesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the Annex
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
well technically he would only be losing someone else's money, as he is just the frontman.

From a certain perspective, that's smart business.

saskganesh is online now  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:46 PM
  #984
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Especially since we all know he does not have any money.... and no investors...
Nothin more dangerous than a Man with nothing to lose Pat. But in this case, if he's put nothing but time into it himself, and either investors with bad cases of the shakes or perhaps as you suggest none at all, then whats he playing at? Whats the point of this charade? So the league can point to Glendale when selling the franchise for relo in demanding a coupla hundred million? As in "were staying in Arizona with our $300M arena management fee unless you cough up Mr. Peladeau" or what?... which come to think of it, actually makes a lot of sense. In a totally bent, highly manipulative, disingenuous & ultra-diabolical fashion...

Yes. Interesting idea that.... Mu mu muhahaHAHAHAAAAAAA....

Killion is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:00 AM
  #985
BigWheeler
Rookie User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
It doesn't matter who owns the team.
It doesn't matter how much they pay for the team.
It doesn't matter how bad or how good the team gets.

Hockey in the desert just doesn't work. It never will.

MOD

I remember watching a Canucks vs Coyote game, and it was about 50-75% empty. The remaining 25-50% people there were mostly Canuck fans. It was a pathetic sad display for ANY professional team.

No one wants to play there, and those that do, you have to question their reasoning behind it. Are they just there for the pay cheque, are they on the decline of their career so they don't want to hear any bad critics in the media?

Shane Doan is the only player that has opted to play there when he had the opportunity to play elsewhere. And the reason? It wasn't for the team. It was because his kids are going to school and growing up in a nice community, so he didn't want to disturb their education and way of life. It also doesn't hurt to own your own ranch!

Would Canada serve as a better location? Obviously. Do I want it there? Only under the condition that it's not simply there to milk more Canadian's from their hard earned money, simply to prop up the majority of the American-based teams.

Canada should only accept another team under the condition that the league contracts, or else relocates a few more teams.

MOD

No legit business man is going to buy Pheonix without the ability to move it. And as a Canadian, we shouldn't allow any more teams in Canada unless the other teams are going to pay their own bills. Vancouver fans pay an average of $90 per ticket for ****** seats. How much of that is going to American teams just so they can ice a full lineup?


Last edited by Crease: 12-18-2012 at 09:42 AM. Reason: Trolling
BigWheeler is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:12 AM
  #986
OthmarAmmann
Money making machine
 
OthmarAmmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Hawk View Post
Down with OPP
Yes, yes, yes. Killion, make it happen.

OthmarAmmann is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 06:32 AM
  #987
Evil Doctor
89 years later...
 
Evil Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cambridge, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Hawk View Post
Down with OPP
What do you have against the Ontario Provincial Police?

Evil Doctor is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 07:00 AM
  #988
GF
Registered User
 
GF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
your new here, Welcome!,
BUT ... uh, no, not likely.....

Well, we might not know for sure, but in 3 fortnights, if (when) GJ still hasn't bought the team, it will (should) be about then that the mythical bird will hit the propeller.

GF is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 07:47 AM
  #989
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?

If he gets paid in April or the end of the SC playoffs, he can avoid paying the City the $60,000 per game penalty by buying the team when the lockout ends. Or if the lockout is still on as Jan. 31, 2013 nears, he can buy the team near that date and limit the amount he pays in penalties.

Funny, how some fans seem to think Jamison shouldn't mind paying a $60,000 per game penalty, so he can what, ease the minds of message board fans ?
Shut up his critics?
It's funny how both sides in this mini-debate are not only misinformed, but also lazy -- this stuff is public so you might as well want to check out the lease to see if your argument works.

1) the $60,000 per game penalty does not apply to 2012-13. JIG starts earning AMF from closing date no matter what. It's probably the reason why he agreed to a lower AMF ($11M vs. $14M in 2nd year). He has no reason to wait until the lockout is over (unless... -- see below).

2) for 2012-13, the arena management fee of $11M is prorated for the number of days from closing to 6/30/2013 (divided by 365). If JIG signs in January they get a 5.5 million AMF (6 months). Every month he waits, that's 900k less. He has no reason to wait (unless.. -- see below).

So either
a) Jamison has the money to buy the team but would still be losing money after banking the AMF;
b) some of Jamison's investors want to wait for the new CBA before they give it a go; or
c) Jamison doesn't have the money.

All 3 of those options are plausible IMO.

barneyg is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 08:09 AM
  #990
pondnorth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Why should Jamison want to lose ANY money if he doesn't have to?



If he gets paid in April or the end of the SC playoffs, he can avoid paying the City the $60,000 per game penalty by buying the team when the lockout ends. Or if the lockout is still on as Jan. 31, 2013 nears, he can buy the team near that date and limit the amount he pays in penalties.

Funny, how some fans seem to think Jamison shouldn't mind paying a $60,000 per game penalty, so he can what, ease the minds of message board fans ?
Shut up his critics?
Nice to see a graduate of Clarkonomics posting his best guess.What a joke.

pondnorth is online now  
Old
12-18-2012, 10:50 AM
  #991
checkerdome
Registered User
 
checkerdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWheeler View Post
It doesn't matter who owns the team.
It doesn't matter how much they pay for the team.
It doesn't matter how bad or how good the team gets.

Hockey in the desert just doesn't work. It never will.

MOD

I remember watching a Canucks vs Coyote game, and it was about 50-75% empty. The remaining 25-50% people there were mostly Canuck fans. It was a pathetic sad display for ANY professional team.

No one wants to play there, and those that do, you have to question their reasoning behind it. Are they just there for the pay cheque, are they on the decline of their career so they don't want to hear any bad critics in the media?

Shane Doan is the only player that has opted to play there when he had the opportunity to play elsewhere. And the reason? It wasn't for the team. It was because his kids are going to school and growing up in a nice community, so he didn't want to disturb their education and way of life. It also doesn't hurt to own your own ranch!

Would Canada serve as a better location? Obviously. Do I want it there? Only under the condition that it's not simply there to milk more Canadian's from their hard earned money, simply to prop up the majority of the American-based teams.

Canada should only accept another team under the condition that the league contracts, or else relocates a few more teams.

MOD

No legit business man is going to buy Pheonix without the ability to move it. And as a Canadian, we shouldn't allow any more teams in Canada unless the other teams are going to pay their own bills. Vancouver fans pay an average of $90 per ticket for ****** seats. How much of that is going to American teams just so they can ice a full lineup?


I don't know why hfboards so embraces censorship when a poster simply writes the truth about the non-viable Arizona hockey market.

Maybe the belief is that if Arizona can be described as a great hockey market on these boards; that will somehow and in someway alter the sad but inescapable reality of a major, ongoing fail?

Maybe we'd even be watching NHL hockey right now, if the league didn't feel the necessity to compensate for these guys being along for the ride; on someone else's nickel.


Last edited by checkerdome: 12-18-2012 at 11:01 AM.
checkerdome is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 10:55 AM
  #992
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
It's funny how both sides in this mini-debate are not only misinformed, but also lazy -- this stuff is public so you might as well want to check out the lease to see if your argument works.

1) the $60,000 per game penalty does not apply to 2012-13. JIG starts earning AMF from closing date no matter what. It's probably the reason why he agreed to a lower AMF ($11M vs. $14M in 2nd year). He has no reason to wait until the lockout is over (unless... -- see below).

2) for 2012-13, the arena management fee of $11M is prorated for the number of days from closing to 6/30/2013 (divided by 365). If JIG signs in January they get a 5.5 million AMF (6 months). Every month he waits, that's 900k less. He has no reason to wait (unless.. -- see below).

So either
a) Jamison has the money to buy the team but would still be losing money after banking the AMF;
b) some of Jamison's investors want to wait for the new CBA before they give it a go; or
c) Jamison doesn't have the money.

All 3 of those options are plausible IMO.
Fans and media have no idea why Jamison and his partners are holding off on closing the sale. What we do know, is that it's Dec. 18th, 2012 and Jamison does not have to close the sale until Jan. 31, 2013.


After the embarrassment of the Spano fraud case and earlier failures to find a buyer who'd keep the team in Phoenix, I expect the NHL front office has been very aggressive in investigating Jamison, his partners and their finances.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 10:57 AM
  #993
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondnorth View Post
Nice to see a graduate of Clarkonomics posting his best guess.What a joke.

Almost as big a joke as the crying from the relocation crowd, when a struggling team gets a new local owner or locked into a 20-30 yr local lease

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 10:59 AM
  #994
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Fans and media have no idea why Jamison and his partners are holding off on closing the sale. What we do know, is that it's Dec. 18th, 2012 and Jamison does not have to close the sale until Jan. 31, 2013.

After the embarrassment of the Spano fraud case and earlier failures to find a buyer who'd keep the team in Phoenix, I expect the NHL front office has been very aggressive in investigating Jamison, his partners and their finances.
Sure. Doesn't change the fact that you (and others) were wrong in that discussion about the $60k/game penalty.

barneyg is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:01 AM
  #995
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by preissingg View Post
I don't know why hfboards so embraces censorship when a poster simply writes the truth about the non-viable Arizona hockey market.... Maybe the belief is that if Arizona can be described as a great hockey market on these boards; that will somehow and in someway alter the sad but inescapable reality of a major, ongoing fail?
Ah. Normally I would just delete a post like this preissingg.... but enough with the "censorship" huh?... posts are edited/deleted etc only when someone goes beyond the pale, catches a wave on the slipstream, decides some free-jumping without a chute might be fun. To suggest however that hf is a "shill" for NHL interests, that it enables the repetition of falsehoods, agents of disinformation, plausible deniability experts, lacks objectivity, is intellectually deceitful, corrupt, well, I can assure you nothing could be farther from the truth. Believe me if that was the case Id blow this thing sky high. The site, in case youve forgotten is hfboards.hockeysfuture.com, not nhl.com.... savvy?

Killion is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:07 AM
  #996
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,458
vCash: 500
oh, and one more thing preissingg....



Hey! What the?....

Killion is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:08 AM
  #997
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Almost as big a joke as the crying from the relocation crowd, when a struggling team gets a new local owner or locked into a 20-30 yr local lease
They may get a new "local" owner, but in reality, no one is ever locked into a lease. You can always get out.

This isn't the Hotel California.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:09 AM
  #998
checkerdome
Registered User
 
checkerdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
oh, and one more thing preissingg....



Hey! What the?....


[MOD - see, right here, indictable offence. You must post
verbiage WITH an emoticom. Even if its XYZ smiley face.)

checkerdome is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:12 AM
  #999
ajmidd12
Know-It-All
 
ajmidd12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hungover
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
They may get a new "local" owner, but in reality, no one is ever locked into a lease. You can always get out.

This isn't the Hotel California.
Haha, love it!

You're more right than you know, nothing stops him from throwing the team right back into bankruptcy and tossing the keys back at Bettman.

Here's a prediction for you guys, in 3-5 years the team will be back in bankruptcy with Jamison crying "at least we tried", and we'll be right back at square one.

ajmidd12 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 11:12 AM
  #1000
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post

After the embarrassment of the Spano fraud case and earlier failures to find a buyer who'd keep the team in Phoenix, I expect the NHL front office has been very aggressive in investigating Jamison, his partners and their finances.
I sincerely doubt the NHL has been at all dilligent in investigating the Friends of Jamison potential ownership group. Sure, they've likely approved Jamison since he's already in the club and doesn't have any money. But have they looked at the money behind the alleged deal? I don't think so. The reason? We haven't heard any rumours, other than the TO's, about who the potential investors might be. Get a bunch of NHL people asking questions about potential team owners and some info is bound to leak out. Why would the NHL waste any time on this when it (still) looks completely unlikely that the team will be able to close ever?

CGG 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 08:11 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.