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 LXIX: Thread of LXIX

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-30-2013, 02:21 PM
  #726
GuelphStormer
Registered User
 
GuelphStormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
Dude I watched every Curling event I could during the Olympics BTW. How can you not love a game we ALL can play. I cant skate backwards so hockey and I wont mix. I played Football, baseball, basketball, and golf. If only we had hockey here when I was a kid. I'd love to play Goalie. Or right winger.
... given all the smack you've posted here, i think you have until just about 11:59pm on Jan 31st to learn how ... i look forward to your saturday morning blog.

GuelphStormer is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:21 PM
  #727
WildGopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
San Jose Sharks announce ownership change
http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/ci...nership-change
Posted: 01/30/2013 10:54:01 AM PST
It's hard to read tea leaves, but when the departing owners say they're going to remain "the team's biggest fans" and "ardent supporters," it doesn't sound like they're planning to move to another franchise, either as owners or managers.

WildGopher is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:24 PM
  #728
BnGBear1970
YUP!
 
BnGBear1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
I believe and DONT QUOTE me that Jamison was keeping everything close to his vest for various reasons.
Try and get NHL to lower price tag some, grab as many investors as possible without scaring any off, and also to protect the investors who sold shares of the Sharks in case they had doubts or something went awry. Lastly to not give any GWI or other Canadian funded lobby time to work their witchery. Yes you Darcy Olson you merc.
I won't quote you on it, and I'm not saying Jamison doesn't have his reasons to keep quiet on who's part of the team, but...

-On the NHL asking price: it's been well-established that $170 million means $170 million from them. They had ample opportunity over the last 3 years to lower the price, and haven't. Jamison pressuring them with a tactic like this would've just landed the team in Quebec months ago.

-On getting more investors: why would seeing more knowledgeable hockey people in the group scare anyone away? If I have millions of dollars sitting around, and I hear a group wants me to invest in the Coyotes, seeing the bulk of the ownership that led to the San Jose Sharks being one of the top teams in the NHL is actually going to open my checkbook quicker. Hearing there are other investors but he can't name names is likely to make me think I'm being scammed.

-On protecting investors from the Sharks group: again, say SOMETHING. Even if it's as basic as "they are currently involved with another NHL franchise and must purge their interests there before being named" is better than no information at all. It doesn't name them specifically, and if it went south, they could just as easily stay with the Sharks without having ever been truly linked to the deal.

-On the conspiracy theory angles: Look, we've had a couple of shining moments where you didn't come off as a loon. You disagree with Darcy Olson, and for the most part, so do I. However, Olson and the GWI were not lying in wait to attack this deal based on who owns the team. They're going after the council for giving away money they don't truly have for a sports team that may or may not bring in tax revenues to offset the cost. And certainly, the only Canadian "witchery" coming for the Coyotes is a man that wants to bring an anchor tenant to his city's new arena, which he's invested heavily into through a two-tiered naming rights agreement. You have issues with Canada, that much is clear. However, the entire of the population, from St. John's to Dawson City, is not plotting to bring the NHL completely north of the border. There is an understanding that lots of the league's teams are stronger in the US than they would be in Canada. They just don't want to see a team struggle when one or two cities there could do better. If the Cardinals were in Vancouver and playing to 20,000 at BC Place every night while UofP stadium was being built, I'm sure you'd feel like that team should come to Glendale. As an American with a Canadian wife that doesn't care one way or the other for the NHL and a 4-month-old Canadian-American daughter, I'll say this once: there are plenty of scapegoats for this team in the US. Don't use baseless attacks on Canada in general to make the point that the Coyotes should stay.

BnGBear1970 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:27 PM
  #729
hockeylife9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
"It's been a great 11 years being involved with the San Jose Sharks and the NHL but we feel this is the right time for us to step away and focus on other avenues," the statement read. "Although we are no longer involved with the ownership group of the organization, we remain among the team's biggest fans and will continue to be ardent supporters of the franchise."


To me, the bolded part sounds as if they are not pursuing any avenues that include the NHL at this time. I would imagine that if I was just changing teams that I have an investment in, I would only state that the SJS part and not include the NHL at all.
Just my opinion and how I interpret it.

hockeylife9 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:32 PM
  #730
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildGopher View Post
It's hard to read tea leaves, but when the departing owners say they're going to remain "the team's biggest fans" and "ardent supporters," it doesn't sound like they're planning to move to another franchise, either as owners or managers.
Maybe they're staying in SJ and are just throwing money at GJ? I don't know. It's probably not related, and is just coincidentally interesting timing.

__________________
This poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:32 PM
  #731
ahplk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glacial View Post
Well, it wasn't the Coyotes' decision to build the arena in Glendale, but it was their decision to relocate there. Glendale seemed to fall prey to irrational exhuberance and not realize their geography wasn't suitable for sports that play many games a week (i.e. anything but football). The arena predated the football stadium though. They wanted out of the Suns' arena lease and didn't really look where they were going. On the drive down there, they passed by Admiral Ackbar who was holding a sign saying "It's a trap!".


And Jetsfan88 was right back when the Thrashers were relocated. Everyone had their eyes on the Coyotes as the new Jets (hey, everything old is new again) but they signaled people to look to another team. They seemed to have inside info on the TNSE/Thrasher negotiations, which IIRC caught everyone by surprise except for I think 1 article somewhere that suggested Thrashers -> Jets as a possibility, an article people skoffed at because "surely the Coyotes will be the team relocated to Winnipeg". They seem to have been unusually silent on the Coyotes matter for quite some time.
The first (at least MSM-wise) to talk about Atl to Wpg was Al Strachan on HNIC back in Oct. '09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTKT0kjqkKU.

ahplk is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:32 PM
  #732
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 9,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeylife9 View Post
"It's been a great 11 years being involved with the San Jose Sharks and the NHL but we feel this is the right time for us to step away and focus on other avenues," the statement read. "Although we are no longer involved with the ownership group of the organization, we remain among the team's biggest fans and will continue to be ardent supporters of the franchise."


To me, the bolded part sounds as if they are not pursuing any avenues that include the NHL at this time. I would imagine that if I was just changing teams that I have an investment in, I would only state that the SJS part and not include the NHL at all.
Just my opinion and how I interpret it.
If you already own a successful franchise (on and off the ice), why would you sell it so that you could purchase one with a somewhat troubled past and uncertain financial prospects? Jamison might be a charming man, but he ain't "the Amazing Kreskin".

Whileee is online now  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:34 PM
  #733
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Seriously CF, I don't know if you have been to Westgate, but if the Coyotes leave and unless they can turn the Job around somehow and book concerts regularly (which I highly doubt, but that's just my opinion), Westgate is in for a world of hurt. I don't think that is opinion. I think that is fact. I will become a wasteland, especially during week nights.

Right now Westgate is a three legged chair, even with an arena anchor tenant. Ellman never developed it as a true mixed use complex. There is very little office, and hardly any residential to support the retail. Even with the Coyotes, that development has major issues which I think leads to the opinion it will fail if the Coyotes leave because it is tettering on the brink already.
Actually, I have. I'll probably be there again in March when I go to Scottsdale to watch a few Giants game. I generally try to grab a Coyotes game on that annual trip.

For the Mordor on Earth angle, the numbers simply don't support it at all: Colston Post

I understand that "Westgate will fail without the Coytoes" is the easiest rhetoric to generate in this saga but there's really no substantial evidence to support it. Conversely, there's a mountain of evidence to show that the JIG lease is about the worst fiscal decision the city can make.

Also, the idea that a Super Bowl Host Committee bid is contingent upon the arena status is just profoundly ignorant. It shows absolutely zero comprehension for how Super Bowl bids are made and awarded. But I like hearing how it's "been quietly used to bring a lot of people into line."

CasualFan is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:35 PM
  #734
QcBlizzard
Regis-tered fan
 
QcBlizzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Saguenay, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,794
vCash: 500
Speaking of the Sharks shares sale, selling shares in a multi million pro sports team is not like selling a bicycle. Takes time.

You don't wait 24 hours to deadline to do this.

QcBlizzard is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:37 PM
  #735
Chaosmonkey
Registered User
 
Chaosmonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
..I dont know about the sweeping though.
The sweeping in curling is pretty straight forward.

As previously mentioned, drinking is a big part of curling. When the skip senses that his team is sobering up too much, he gets them to work up a thirst by sweeping the ice. If they are really sober, you can hear him shout "Hurry! HARD!" because he knows its crucial they get their drink on. After the shot, they crush some beers and the team starts playing better.

Chaosmonkey is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:37 PM
  #736
BnGBear1970
YUP!
 
BnGBear1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QcBlizzard View Post
Not only this, selling shares in a multi million pro sports team is not like selling a bicycle. Takes time.

You don't wait 24 hours to deadline to do this.
You don't, but since it takes time, it could make for trouble selling them within a two-month span.

As has been pointed out, it's likely nothing, but it wouldn't be shocking if the hold-up were two members of the Sharks organization purging their shares in time to join Jamison.

BnGBear1970 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:39 PM
  #737
CorbeauNoir
Registered User
 
CorbeauNoir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QcBlizzard View Post
Speaking of the Sharks shares sale, selling shares in a multi million pro sports team is not like selling a bicycle. Takes time.

You don't wait 24 hours to deadline to do this.
That's what boggles me about all this, if GJ really is genuinely pulling the trigger why wait until (almost literally) the 11th hour to do it?

CorbeauNoir is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:41 PM
  #738
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 9,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnGBear1970 View Post
You don't, but since it takes time, it could make for trouble selling them within a two-month span.

As has been pointed out, it's likely nothing, but it wouldn't be shocking if the hold-up were two members of the Sharks organization purging their shares in time to join Jamison.
Seriously... do you think that trading ownership in the Sharks (a team that you have nurtured and grown for over a decade) for ownership of the Coyotes sounds like a sound and likely decision?

Whileee is online now  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:43 PM
  #739
Evil Doctor
89 years later...
 
Evil Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cambridge, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
Oh dear lord, the drama!

When I logged on here and saw how many new pages there were in the past 3 hours, I figured Greg had his press conference....

...but no....

...apparently it was all centred around a certain blogger who signed up for the first time...


Evil Doctor is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:46 PM
  #740
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Anyone care to speculate on the fact that two long-time owners of the Sharks just sold their interests today? Could they be following GJ? Could this be something that needed to happen to allow for the GJ group to purchase the Coyotes?

Timing is interesting, if nothing else.....
My understanding is Compton and Sclavos intend to focus on Radar Partners (and the firms venture startups like Duo Security). But, that's just what I've heard. I have no actual sources.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:46 PM
  #741
ahplk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnGBear1970 View Post
You don't, but since it takes time, it could make for trouble selling them within a two-month span.

As has been pointed out, it's likely nothing, but it wouldn't be shocking if the hold-up were two members of the Sharks organization purging their shares in time to join Jamison.
Wouldn't it make sense for Jamison to sell off the 5% (or whatever amount it is that he needs to sell in order to bring him below a 30% stake in the Sharks so as to be considered a non-controlling owner) of his shares at the same time?

ahplk is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:50 PM
  #742
Vinc360
Registered User
 
Vinc360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,480
vCash: 500
To be fair, does buying this team at all when you're struggling to put together the money sound like a sound and likely decision? This entire thing has been filled with twists, I wouldn't be surprised if there was yet another one added to the mix.

Vinc360 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:51 PM
  #743
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Private Equity
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
One last thing and Im sorry if I didnt answer every hater of American hockey or Arizona hockey but...

Hearing it's stupid to have a few people lose jobs / millionaires. Maybe the dumbest comment of all today. Sure 4 policemen and I believe a librarian will not be able to have FULL TIME work but how can you compare that to all the front office, arena workers, concession, cleaning crew, restaurant workers, etc etc ETC that will be out of work if they leave?
Who's to say that a competent Arena Manager wouldn't facilitate enough bookings to minimize (hopefully sustain) the impact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
Losing a major sport would cripple Glendale.
Apparently having one does too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by howlinhockey View Post
Also Glendale will get a % of naming rights and if Jamison and his group want to purchase the Arena they will recoup the $180 million spent to build the arena. #1 is to secure ownership. #2 is to recapture STH and sponsors lost to Moyes and his lunacy. #3 is to get Glendale turning a profit again.
You really need to stop hangin' with the BeavisPAC

Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Ellman never developed it as a true mixed use complex. There is very little office, and hardly any residential to support the retail. Even with the Coyotes, that development has major issues which I think leads to the opinion it will fail if the Coyotes leave because it is tettering on the brink already.
Ellman had a case of "Eyes bigger than the stomach" with this whole thing. Too much, too soon and the timing was unfortunate you could say.

Speaking of Ellman, I just remembered that I read an article some time ago that one of the reasons why Scottsdale City Council balked at Ellman's plan was there was an intent clause that he was going to flip it in 2013? I'll do my best later to recall where I read it an post it accordingly.

Major4Boarding is online now  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:56 PM
  #744
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinc360 View Post
To be fair, does buying this team at all when you're struggling to put together the money sound like a sound and likely decision? This entire thing has been filled with twists, I wouldn't be surprised if there was yet another one added to the mix.
For all we know, the NHL could be dangling 100% seller financing, and there are still not enough fools to take on the risk.

I'm fascinated by this situation.

Hawker14 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 02:57 PM
  #745
BnGBear1970
YUP!
 
BnGBear1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Seriously... do you think that trading ownership in the Sharks (a team that you have nurtured and grown for over a decade) for ownership of the Coyotes sounds like a sound and likely decision?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahplk View Post
Wouldn't it make sense for Jamison to sell off the 5% (or whatever amount it is that he needs to sell in order to bring him below a 30% stake in the Sharks so as to be considered a non-controlling owner) of his shares at the same time?
Again, I think it's happy coincidence that they sold today. However, the response was specific to saying you don't start the process of selling your share of one team to buy into another the day before pen has to go to paper for the lease agreement to be valid. I doubt these men WOULD do this, and IF they are, I don't know why Jamison hasn't.

BnGBear1970 is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 03:02 PM
  #746
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Seriously... do you think that trading ownership in the Sharks (a team that you have nurtured and grown for over a decade) for ownership of the Coyotes sounds like a sound and likely decision?
Unless the league slashed the price of the Yotes by at least half, I can't see the point in selling one to buy the other.

Confucius is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 03:02 PM
  #747
GuelphStormer
Registered User
 
GuelphStormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnGBear1970 View Post
-On the NHL asking price: it's been well-established that $170 million means $170 million from them. They had ample opportunity over the last 3 years to lower the price, and haven't. Jamison pressuring them with a tactic like this would've just landed the team in Quebec months ago.
we dont know that the price is $170M. that's the old speculation based on a $140M BK purchase price, plus $30M losses during the first year, which was what TNSE paid for the Thrashers ... and of course we all backed that out as having come from the valuation of the Yotes at $170M, all in. but that was almost two years ago.

by any account one chooses, even taking glendale's subsidy of $45M (or $50M? or is it just $25M? who knows), losses since the league took ownership have clearly exceeded that initial $30M figure ... and a more reasonable estimate is likely in the $60M to $80M range.

so, given commish's promise that his bosses wouldnt lose a dime on this, that would bring the purchase price today in around $200M to $220M. i also seem to recall a number floating around last spring of $230M that PKP was said to have been eye-balling.

regardless, I would fully expect the price for this team to be much closer, if not over, $200M than the oft-cited $170M, so I dont see anything less than $170M as being even a remote possibility.

GuelphStormer is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 03:04 PM
  #748
powerstuck
User Registered
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Serbia
Posts: 2,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Seriously CF, I don't know if you have been to Westgate, but if the Coyotes leave and unless they can turn the Job around somehow and book concerts regularly (which I highly doubt, but that's just my opinion), Westgate is in for a world of hurt. I don't think that is opinion. I think that is fact. I will become a wasteland, especially during week nights.

Right now Westgate is a three legged chair, even with an arena anchor tenant. Ellman never developed it as a true mixed use complex. There is very little office, and hardly any residential to support the retail. Even with the Coyotes, that development has major issues which I think leads to the opinion it will fail if the Coyotes leave because it is tettering on the brink already.
I honestly don't have the numbers, and I don't know if you have them. But, if anyone was able to bring numbers from September to December 2011 and September to December 2012 of :

a) Westgate traffic
b) Westgate sales
c) Tax collected by Glendale from Westgate sales

I can bet your for sure, those numbers will be within 5% margin from one year to the other. And in 2011 there was hockey, in 2012 there was not. Does that means that without Coyotes the Westgate would crumble on itself ? I really really really doubt it.

powerstuck is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 03:04 PM
  #749
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,157
vCash: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahplk View Post
Wouldn't it make sense for Jamison to sell off the 5% (or whatever amount it is that he needs to sell in order to bring him below a 30% stake in the Sharks so as to be considered a non-controlling owner) of his shares at the same time?
A controlling owner isn't necessarily just over 30% stake. If he is to have effective control of the Coyotes after the sale, he would be considered a controlling owner (even if he didn't own any of the team). In which case he'd have to sell his complete stake in the Sharks.

cheswick is offline  
Old
01-30-2013, 03:05 PM
  #750
Glacial
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 658
vCash: 500
Wow. A lot of pages to read since last night and a whole lotta nothing. No Jamison or Bettman sightings yet either.

Is this where we find the Bettman getting off the plane from NY/NJ is actually some purchasing agent for a sprockets company named Ronald Bettman flying to Phoenix to purchase sprockets from a guy named Jim Jamison of Sprockets International and it was all a false trail? Have we been reading the tea leaves or regurgitated cud from a cow that got into some loco weed?

Glacial 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 09:59 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.