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 LXXII: Send in the Clowns

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-12-2013, 03:08 PM
  #1
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,391
vCash: 500
Phoenix LXXII: Send in the Clowns











And to make LS happy ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley
Only if you include the YT from A Little Night Music with the song.



12-08-2008 Hockey in The Desert (Phoenix franchise and finance/business matters)
02-04-2009 Hockey in the Desert II (Phoenix Coyotes franchise and business matters)

05-05-2009 Balsillie puts in $212.5 mil offer for the Coyotes
05-07-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix part II
05-18-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix part III
05-22-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix part IV
06-03-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix part V
06-09-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix Part VI
06-12-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix Part VII: I'm just waitin' on a judge
06-16-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix Part VIII: It's dead, Jim
06-24-2009 Balsillie/Phoenix Part IX: 'Dorf on Hockey
07-25-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part X: The Truth? You Can't Handle The Truth!
08-03-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XI: A Fistful of Dollars?
08-07-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XII: For a Few Dollars More
08-12-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XIII: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
08-21-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XIV: The Wrath of Baum
08-27-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XV - SITREP: SNAFU
09-02-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVI: Barbarian at the Gate
09-08-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVII: Wake Me Up When September Ends
09-10-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVIII: Is that a pale horse in the distance?
09-12-2009 Phoenix bankruptcy Part XIX: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Baum
09-21-2009 Phoenix Bankruptcy Part XX: There Will Be Baum
09-28-2009 Phoenix Bankruptcy Part XXI: 2009 -- A Sports Odyssey
10-26-2009 Phoenix Bankruptcy Part XXII: Long and winding road

11-24-2009 Keeping up with potential owners for NHL Phoenix Coyotes (UPD: Ice Edge signs LOI)
03-14-2010 Part II. Potential owners of NHL's Phoenix Coyotes
03-26-2010 Part III. Prospective Owners - Phoenix Coyotes (UPD Lease vote 4/13; IEH signs MOU)
04-10-2010 Part IV Phoenix Coyotes post bankrtuptcy; UPD COG approves Reinsdorf MOU, not IEH MOU
05-02-2010 Part V Phoenix Coyotes post bankruptcy UPD Reinsdorf out? IEH back in? else Winnipeg?
05-11-2010 Part VI Phoenix Coyotes post bankruptcy
05-23-2010 Part VII Phoenix Coyotes post bankrtuptcy
06-07-2010 Part VIII: Phoenix Coyotes Post-bankrtuptcy
06-22-2010 Part IX: Phoenix Coyotes Post-bankruptcy UPD: Pres Moss fired 6/30 with IEH input
07-26-2010 Part X: Phoenix Coyotes - Between Scylla and Charybdis
08-27-2010 Part XI: Phoenix Coyotes -- Greetings, Starfighter, You have been selected ...
09-16-2010 Part XII: Phx Coyotes - Still haven't found what I'm looking for
10-12-2010 Part XIII: Phoenix Coyotes - The Final Cut?
10-27-2010 Part XIV: Phoenix Coyotes - To Infinity And Beyond....
12-05-2010 Part XV: Phoenix - the battle of evermore
12-14-2010 Part XVI: Phoenix -- Money for Nothing
12-20-2010 Part XVII: Phoenix -- Thread Title Available For Lease
01-09-2011 Part XVIII: Phoenix -- Imminence Front
01-24-2011 Phoenix XIXth: Nervous Breakdown
02-02-2011 Phoenix XX: Two weeks
02-11-2011 Phoenix XXI: When will then be now?
02-22-2011 Phoenix XXII: It's Now or Never
02-28-2011 Phoenix XXIII - Bond: The Phoenix Project
03-03-2011 Phoenix XXIV: How many twists does the scriptwriter have left?
03-07-2011 Phoenix XXV: Anyone in the theatre seen a pale horse?
03-08-2011 Phoenix XXVI: Pain in the AZ
03-11-2011 Phoenix XXVII: Can we all get along?
03-16-2011 Phoenix XXVIII: Lawyers, Bonds and Money
03-20-2011 Phoenix XXIX: What's the next act? I'm tired of the dog & pony show
03-22-2011 Phoenix Part XXX Hulz, you gotta get a gimmick if you want to get ahead
03-27-2011 Phoenix Part XXXI: I feel I'm in a time loop
04-05-2011 Phoenix Part XXXII: Bridge over Troubled Goldwater
04-14-2011 Phoenix XXXIII: Sound of Silence
04-20-2011 Phoenix XXXIV: Project Mayhem
04-25-2011 Phoenix XXXV: Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave...
05-03-2011 Phoenix XXXVI - There's got to be a morning after
05-10-2011 Phoenix XXXVII - The Heat is On

Followed by the Interregnum between Kings Phoenix the XXXVII-th and Phoenix the XXXVIII-th:

[PYTHON]
The most interesting thing about King Charles, the first
Is that he was 5 foot 6 inches tall at the start of his reign
But only 4 foot 8 inches tall at the end of it because of
Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of England Puritan
Born in 1599 and died in 1658 September
[/PYTHON]

06-09-2011 ESPN's Burnside: Hulsizer submitted new deal; COG city manager dragging it out
06-20-2011 Coyotes related: Westgate faces foreclosure
06-21-2011 Phoenix, worst case scenario

Finally, the realm was restored ...

06-27-2011 Phoenix XXXVIII: Hulsizer Pulls Bid For Coyotes
08-16-2011 Phoenix XXXIX: You Never Give Me Your Money
10-18-2011 Phoenix XL: Rich Man's World
12-07-2011 Phoenix XLI: Bongo Fury
01-06-2012 Phoenix XLII: The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything
02-02-2012 Phoenix XLIII: How to Bake Cupcakes in Less Than Two Weeks
02-28-2012 Phoenix XLIV: Ignorance & Apathy (or I Doan't know & I Doan't Care)
03-28-2012 Phoenix XLV: You can't YANDLE the truth!
04-11-2012 Phoenix XLVI: (Tre)living on a prayer
04-21-2012 Phoenix XLVII: More Threads than Superbowls
05-01-2012 Phoenix XLVIII: Of Mice and Lieberman
05-08-2012 Phoenix XLIX: Smoke & Mirrors
05-21-2012 Phoenix L: AllByDesign?
05-30-2012 Phoenix LI: es, Damn Lies, and Arena Management Fees
06-06-2012 Phoenix LII: Goodnight, Sweet Lieberman
06-08-2012 Phoenix LIII: How the GWInch Stole Phoenix
06-12-2012 Phoenix LIV:E and Let Die
06-19-2012 Phoenix LV: is Has Left the Building
06-26-2012 Phoenix LVI: s is Still Dead (or Maybe Working at a 7-11 in Glendale)
07-04-2012 Phoenix LVII (or MDCCLXXVI): Declarations of (In)Dependence
07-13-2012 Phoenix LVIII; Will jobbing get jobbed?
07-30-2012 Phoenix LIX: The JIG is up?
08-18-2012 Phoenix LX: Pinocchio's Furniture
09-07-2012 Phoenix LXI; We agreed to pay HOW MUCH‽
09-26-2012 Phoenix LXII: Abandon Hope all Ye Who Enter Here
10-16-2012 Phoenix LXIII: Have Become, Comfortably Numb;
11-06-2012 Phoenix LXIV: Will You Still Need Me, Will You Still Read Me, on Thread LXIV?
11-21-2012 Phoenx LXV: The word is... give me a minute.... "Omnishambles"... "Omnishambles"
11-27-2012 Phoenix LXVI: Get Your Kicks On Thread LXVI
12-18-2012 Phoenix LXVII: Route66 - Aftermath
01-15-2013 Phoenix LXVIII - "Watch out for that Tree"
01-25-2013 Phoenix LXIX: Thread of LXIX
01-30-2013 Phoenix LXX: Should they stay or should they go now?
02-01-2013 Phoenix LXXI: Daydream Belever

A couple whole bunch of Phoenix uThreads have popped up in the wake of the "To close, or not to close" mega-thread discussion:

03-16-2012 COG to spend more on Coyotes than public safety?
03-22-2012 Dreger (3/22): NHL to investigate "plan b" for Phoenix
03-23-2012 Sunnicks strikes again "will they stay or will they go now?"
03-28-2012 G&M: Architects of Glendale pro sports disaster won't be around for fallout
03-30-2012 Shoalts: Ice Edge talking about bringing (minor) hockey to the Job should Yotes leave
04-04-2012 Shoalts: Glendale Mayor Scruggs wants city's $$ back
04-05-2012 Coyotes CEO 'confident' team is staying in Glendale
04-05-2012 Puck Daddy: Coyotes battline relocation worries with public optimism
04-06-2012 A strong PHX team in the playoffs may bring a new owner.
04-10-2012 Father of PHX AGM Brad Treliving involved in keeping Coyotes in Glendale?
04-10-2012 PKP offer for Coyotes may be 230 million (mod: to QC w/relo $$)
04-10-2012 Beasley: Coyotes deal within a month
04-11-2012 Glendale, NHL trying to close Phoenix Coyotes deal with Jamison group
04-11-2012 Bettman: no timeline on Phoenix situation (AP)
04-13-2012 Adding up the Numbers in the Phoenix Jamison Bid
04-16-2012 COG's Lieberman calls for demonstration against Coyote deal
04-17-2012 COG - budget payment to Jamison group not to exceed $20m?
04-17-2012 GWI ready to scrutinize new deal
04-18-2012 Coyotes sale soon, five things to watch
04-21-2012 Jamison looking for more investors on Coyotes bid, could be 1-2 months away from deal
04-21-2012 Greg Jamison finally goes public with potential purchase of the Coyotes
04-24-2012 Glendale Busts its Budget; Pledges More Money for Yotes
04-27-2012 Coyotes working to convert bandwagon fans to full time fans
04-28-2-12 4/28: Coyote sale deal getting closer
04-30-2012 Phoenix Coyotes sale finalized May 8th? Hulsizer back in?
05-03-2012 Phoenix CEO/Pres Nealy - something could happen next week
05-04-2012 Feschuk: Phoenix Coyotes doing just fine, thanks
05-04-2012 If the yotes make the finals
05-04-2012 Former Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes assails NHL over Coyotes’ operations
05-07-2012 NHL to announce tentative deal re: sale to Jamison
05-08-2012 Sportsnet: COG promising $306mm over next 21 years
05-08-2012 Wall Street Journal: 'Glendale's Public Hockey Project' = Loss
05-17-2012 Phoenix saga: 5/22 end date
05-17-2012 Jamison signing preliminary sales docs with NHL 5/17 or 5/18
05-21-2012 Goldwater Inst. ready to sue Glendale over arena management deal
05-23-2012 COG council approves preliminary budget with $17m payment for arena management
05-25-2012 Preliminary draft of lease agreement for Jobing.com in hands of COG board
06-04-2012 Phoenix lease details
06-05-2012 Bettmans plan may unravel in Phoenix (vote coming 6/8)
06-06-2012 The angst of Phoenix -- from three major league teams to one (that use city name)
06-06-2012 Forbes: Jamison having trouble raising funds
06-07-2012 GWI letter to Glendale Mayor and Coucilmembers
06-07-2012 Arizona Free Enterprise Club opposes COG deal
06-07-2012 Goldwater Institute Files for Restraining Order
06-11-2012 Coyote name change on hold?
06-13-2012 13 June, Goldwater files suit
06-14-2012 Halverstadt on NHL Home Ice talking Coyotes
06-14-2012 Coyotes deadline "now"? NHL schedule releasing soon
06-15-2012 PBJ: CoG says they'll withstand GWI legal challenge
06-15-2012 AFEC considering ballot (referendum) and COG concil recall
06-18-2012 Phoenix Coyotes, NHL looking for legal counsel to represent team, arena
06-19-2012 Coyotes deal not immediately effective - Referendum to follow?
06-26-2012 COG + GWI agreement on non-emergency status
06-28-2012 Jones/Cobb v Glendale (Coyotes Court Case)
07-04-2012 Coyotes PAC formed
07-04-2012 COG city council candidates voice opposition to Coyotes deal
07-05-2012 Shoalts 7/5 update on Coyotes situation
07-09-2012 Coyotes lease referendum petition not submitted by 7/9
07-11-2012 Glendale rejects group's attempt to overturn sales-tax increase
07-12-2012 PBJ: Jamison group has funding for purchase of Coyotes
07-16-2012 2 COG referendum proponents gearing up for legal battle
07-26-2012 Jones & Cobb decide to NOT file lawsuit after their lease referendum rejected
07-26-2012 PBJ: 7/27 deadline for Coyotes sale?
07-28-2012 PBJ: 7/28: Jamison short $20mm?
07-31-2012 Glendale arena proposal scheduled to expire 7/31, extended another 31 days
08-01-2012 Mayoral candidates speaking out on Coyotes prospective owner
08-08-2012 PBJ: 8/8 Jamison group apparently now has the funds to buy Coyotes
08-10-2012 SBN's Five for Howling: Coyotes sale a done deal
08-16-2012 COG mayoral candidate: Rework proposed lease due to lockout
08-18-2012 CBA uncertainty delaying Coyotes sale?
08-24-2012 8/24: Appeals Court Orders Glendale Sales-Tax Measure to be put Back on Ballot
08-27-2012 8/27 COG extends lease (with NHL) again (pending sale to Jamison group)
08-29-2012 COG seeking change to negotiated proposed arena deal with Jamison
09-04-2012 ESPN Burnside has source that says Jamison's got funding, arena deal to be done
09-11-2012 PBJ: O’odham tribe now involved in Jamison's deal to buy team?
09-29-2012 Final details on Coyotes lease to be settled 10/3?
10-07-2012 Final vote on reworked Jobing.com lease coming 10/23?
10-08-2012 Deja vu, redux = COG talk about extending agreement with NHL another 30 days
11-01-2012 Dater: Phoenix reason for lockout
11-07-2012 Impact of Glendale election on fate of Phoenix Coyotes future
11-26-2012 COG to vote on revised lease 11/27
11-30-2012 Referendum starts process (against) Glendale arena deal with Jamison
12-21-2012 Jamison officially signs Jobing.com lease agreement
12-26-2012 Coyotes could break even, or even profit, if there are no games
12-27-2012 Shoalts: Jamison using US Green Cards to lure investors in Coyotes
01-06-2013 Sportsnet: Jamison group about to finalize Coyotes purchase
01-30-2013 Burnside, LeBrun: Sale of Coyotes to Jamison in Question
01-31-2012 NHL no longer denying relocation a possibility for the Coyotes?
02-01-2013 USA Today's Allen: NHL must continue committment to Phoenix
02-02-2013 Phoenix - Glendale vs Scottsdale
02-08-2013 Grant Woods leading (new) ownership group to (try to) buy Coyotes
02-12-2013 Hulsizer back to looking at buying Coyotes?

And, hey, why not, for completeness:

03-05-2010 NHL sues Jerry Moyes


Last edited by kdb209: 02-12-2013 at 03:23 PM.
kdb209 is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:17 PM
  #2
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,736
vCash: 350
Can't answer to the validity of this persons sources, but he does ask a good question...

http://arizonasports.com/63/1609727/...ale--blame-NHL

And again, the story revolves around how Greg Jamison "failed to raise enough money" to buy the franchise, etc.

But are we absolutely certain that he failed to raise the money? Or did his investors refuse to hand over the money? Based on conversations I've had with NHL sources, maybe the more accurate account might be that Team Jamison became the latest prospective ownership group to refuse to meet the NHL's stated asking price of $170 million.

In our Coyotes coverage, we almost always blame the buyer, right? Actually, make that buyers. Meaning, just fill-in-the-blank: Mr. _____ (Hulsizer, Reinsdorf, Balsillie, Jamison, Ice Edge Inc.) couldn't seal the deal.

Other times, we haven't hesitated to blame the realtor, if you will. And, no doubt, the City of Glendale has demonstrated its share of political dysfunction and budget ineptitude.

But what about the seller? In this blame game, doesn't the NHL itself share some culpability in a Coyotes sales process that has gone sideways again and again?


The $170M point is....

Like any transaction, if an asset isn't selling, then maybe it isn't priced to sell.

Someone needs to ask Uncle Gary this question.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:19 PM
  #3
Shawa666
Registered User
 
Shawa666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Québec, Qc, Ca
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,298
vCash: 490
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
Can't answer to the validity of this persons sources, but he does ask a good question...

http://arizonasports.com/63/1609727/...ale--blame-NHL

And again, the story revolves around how Greg Jamison "failed to raise enough money" to buy the franchise, etc.

But are we absolutely certain that he failed to raise the money? Or did his investors refuse to hand over the money? Based on conversations I've had with NHL sources, maybe the more accurate account might be that Team Jamison became the latest prospective ownership group to refuse to meet the NHL's stated asking price of $170 million.

In our Coyotes coverage, we almost always blame the buyer, right? Actually, make that buyers. Meaning, just fill-in-the-blank: Mr. _____ (Hulsizer, Reinsdorf, Balsillie, Jamison, Ice Edge Inc.) couldn't seal the deal.

Other times, we haven't hesitated to blame the realtor, if you will. And, no doubt, the City of Glendale has demonstrated its share of political dysfunction and budget ineptitude.

But what about the seller? In this blame game, doesn't the NHL itself share some culpability in a Coyotes sales process that has gone sideways again and again?


The $170M point is....

Like any transaction, if an asset isn't selling, then maybe it isn't priced to sell.

Someone needs to ask Uncle Gary this question.
The asset is reasonably priced. The franchise that is. That doesn't necessarily mean that this franchise must play in Phoenix.

Shawa666 is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:20 PM
  #4
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post

Someone needs to ask Uncle Gary this question.
The league has gone dark. I don't expect anything substantial from them until it's time to announce the move.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawa666 View Post
The asset is reasonably priced. The franchise that is. That doesn't necessarily mean that this franchise must play in Phoenix.
It's not. Not even remotely. The only reason the price is so high is because the league is the owner and can move the team, pocketing the profit.

XX is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:40 PM
  #5
JimAnchower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post

Someone needs to ask Uncle Gary this question.
Let's look at it this way. The NBA bought the Hornets in Dec 2010 for $300 million and sold them in early 2012 for $330 million to the Saints owner Tom Benson. So the NBA seemed to know what it could sell the franchise for an keep it in New Orleans and it picked up a decent profit for it's efforts. The NHL, on the other hand, has only attracted clowns and shysters to the Coyotes, none of them seemingly close to a deal at any point.

JimAnchower is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:45 PM
  #6
ahplk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
I seem to remember Winnipeg having the lowest ticket prices in the league and poor attendance before they left too.... Jets fans should be thankful they got their team back and get off their high horse. The Coyotes have a group of hardcore fans that will be just as upset as Winnipeg fans were if their team leaves. There's no need to act superior.
Take this as you will, but attendance wasn't that poor for a team with ownership issues and a terrible arena (see Coyotes attendance the last few seasons, minus the terrible arena part) compared to the rest of the league. In fact, it was closer to the league average than it is today.

If you take Winnipeg's attendance (84.5% capacity) from the '94-95 season, divided by the NHL's average attendance for that season, Winnipeg played to 87.9% of that number (below average).

If you take Winnipeg's attendance (sold out arena) from this season, divided by the NHL's average attendance for this season, Winnipeg plays to 84.9% of that number (even more below average...oh my!).

The only "poor" attendance numbers were from the lame duck '95-96 season, after we had already said good-bye to the team...

^ ...the saddest video on YouTube.

There's no way I can defend the ticket prices...I remember cheap tickets being sold at 7-11 and Bi-Way ($10-15 a game?) which is not much different than Phoenix twenty years after the fact.

ahplk is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:50 PM
  #7
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimAnchower View Post
The NHL, on the other hand, has only attracted clowns and shysters to the Coyotes, none of them seemingly close to a deal at any point.
The reason we do this dance with the clowns is due to the above market asking price. I'd like an explanation from the league as to why the city is forced to bear the burden of the legal battle. The only reason the NHL paid $140 million was to appeal to the BK court.

XX is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 03:53 PM
  #8
Yote Devil
Registered User
 
Yote Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Prescott/Tempe,AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 121
vCash: 500
Nice thread title!

Yote Devil is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:06 PM
  #9
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,009
vCash: 500
a moment ot-the Judy Colins version done on the muppet show was actually pretty cool back then-very somber


Great title for the thread-very fitting the way this thing has gone on....

Tinalera is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:13 PM
  #10
QcBlizzard
Regis-tered fan
 
QcBlizzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Saguenay, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
The reason we do this dance with the clowns is due to the above market asking price. I'd like an explanation from the league as to why the city is forced to bear the burden of the legal battle. The only reason the NHL paid $140 million was to appeal to the BK court.
The NHL can have at least that price moving this franchise elsewhere.

Franchise does not belong to the city. Not fun for Glendale I know but it is what it is.

I'd love to watch Glendale sue the NHL once the team left.

We'll never know what the story would been if Glendale bought the franchise. I don't know the BK case details.

Screwed from the very beginning..

QcBlizzard is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:28 PM
  #11
powerstuck
User Registered
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawa666 View Post
The asset is reasonably priced. The franchise that is. That doesn't necessarily mean that this franchise must play in Phoenix.
To be honest, the guy that bought the St-Louis Blues got a much much better deal. Actually, he got the arena, the opera hall and an NHL team for $140M.

But this question raises another one : Does anyone else still thinks NHL IS NOT working on putting a team in a chosen city and are simply awaiting final approval (Read : Sale of Sacramento Kings to Hansen).

powerstuck is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:33 PM
  #12
Mightygoose
Registered User
 
Mightygoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ajax, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,274
vCash: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
To be honest, the guy that bought the St-Louis Blues got a much much better deal. Actually, he got the arena, the opera hall and an NHL team for $140M.

But this question raises another one : Does anyone else still thinks NHL IS NOT working on putting a team in a chosen city and are simply awaiting final approval (Read : Sale of Sacramento Kings to Hansen).
I tend to lean on those lines as well and the Kings sale to Hansen is related. The NHL will be pretty silent from now until just after April 19 (NBA BoG meeting).

After that date, I can see the parts moving along at a much faster pace

Mightygoose is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:40 PM
  #13
blues10
Registered User
 
blues10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,030
vCash: 500
For those hoping that JR re-enters the game. Last week on HNIC it was reported by Glen Healy that JR was willing to invest in the Coyotes. However, Healy reported that JR would only pay .50 cents on the dollar. That would either work out to $70 million or $85 million depending if it was a selling price of $140 or $170 million.

So that would make Leblanc. Hulsizer and JR all involved.

This price would coincide with what local bidders were willing to pay for the Thrashers. In fact it would be a little higher.

I wonder how close GJ is to closing the deal. He did say he was continuing to work on it didn't he?

blues10 is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:42 PM
  #14
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QcBlizzard View Post
The NHL can have at least that price moving this franchise elsewhere.

Franchise does not belong to the city. Not fun for Glendale I know but it is what it is.
The city should not be held hostage for subsidies necessary to meet the $170 million asking price. How many worthwhile investors would be willing to pay twice what the team is worth? None, and what we get is the clowns attracted to this situation thus far. The NHL is externalizing the cost of defending its franchising rights by passing it on to Glendale. An absolutely absurd and reprehensible approach, given that the city built a distressed team a shiny new facility. People here are cheering this on for some reason. QC and other markets should absolutely have a shot at a team, but not this way.

XX is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:47 PM
  #15
metalfoot
Karlsson!
 
metalfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,544
vCash: 500
XX: 100% agreed. The NHL has blood all over its hands if the Coyotes should bay their last in Glendale this spring.

metalfoot is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:51 PM
  #16
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,736
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawa666 View Post
The asset is reasonably priced. The franchise that is. That doesn't necessarily mean that this franchise must play in Phoenix.
The asset is reasonably priced if you are QC or Seattle, but it is not reasonably priced for being in Glendale.

It's no different than a house. Why is the exact same house in City A $190,000, but in City B its $450,000? Because that is what the market will bare AND still allow the seller to sell. If the seller in City A asks for $400,000 what happens? The house sits on the market unsold for 4 seasons. Everything in the world only has value if someone is willing to pay for it.

The only reasons I see for the NHL to insist on the price of $170M are:

1- When Bettman bought the team out of BK he promised his bosses ( the owners ) that he was going to make them whole on the sale including expenses. Truth be told, IMO 80% of the other owners don't give a rat's behind about the Coyotes staying in Glendale. Maybe they did in the beginning, but after 4 years... they just want their money back.

2- The NHL is keeping the price high for the sole purpose of selling it in a relocation and have no intentions of keeping it in Glendale. They have been able to use the CoG's desperation to finance losses for two years and people's desire to get something using other peoples money ( re: Hulsizer, IEH, etc. ) to buy time until the team can be moved.


Last edited by cbcwpg: 02-12-2013 at 04:58 PM.
cbcwpg is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 04:53 PM
  #17
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
The city should not be held hostage for subsidies necessary to meet the $170 million asking price.
I appreciate the sentiment, and even more or less agree with it. However, the city is not without blame here. They could have told the judge they like the Balsille offer, or at least used it as a lever to get more out of the NHL.

At some point, every enterprise faces the reality of having its bad decisions catch up with them.

 
Old
02-12-2013, 05:03 PM
  #18
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
2- The NHL is keeping the price high for the sole purpose of selling it in a relocation and have no intentions of keeping it in Glendale. They have been able to use the CoG's desperation to finance losses for two years and people's desire to get something using other peoples money ( re: Hulsizer, IEH, etc. ) to buy time until the team can be moved.
This is absolutely abhorrent but it appears to be the case. You have to give credit to them for playing the long game so well. They had an easy out, should Glendale not cough up that $50 million. That bought enough time to get the arena juices flowing in other markets. I'm sure they would have sold to Reinsdorf, but once that ship sailed, we moved on to plan B. At any point during this entire process, the league could have cut the price and saved several of the deals. But they aren't interested in that. They want the $170 million, come hell or high water. If they have to trash a city in the process, so be it.

Without the CFD nonsense, Reinsdorf's bid was roughly ~$100 million. I'm sure there would be plenty of buyers at that price point, given the improved situation all around. I don't know how a city can take any pledge of support from the NHL seriously after this.

XX is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:09 PM
  #19
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,030
vCash: 500
Thread title fits the crime perfectly, now lets find the perps!

mesamonster is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:11 PM
  #20
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
This is absolutely abhorrent but it appears to be the case. You have to give credit to them for playing the long game so well. They had an easy out, should Glendale not cough up that $50 million. That bought enough time to get the arena juices flowing in other markets. I'm sure they would have sold to Reinsdorf, but once that ship sailed, we moved on to plan B. At any point during this entire process, the league could have cut the price and saved several of the deals. But they aren't interested in that. They want the $170 million, come hell or high water. If they have to trash a city in the process, so be it.

Without the CFD nonsense, Reinsdorf's bid was roughly ~$100 million. I'm sure there would be plenty of buyers at that price point, given the improved situation all around. I don't know how a city can take any pledge of support from the NHL seriously after this.
I agree totally on this. NHL as a league is not honest, not forthcoming, and will take advantage of any one or anything they can.

However, as others have said, the CoG itself gave away the 50M....

MNNumbers is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:13 PM
  #21
QcBlizzard
Regis-tered fan
 
QcBlizzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Saguenay, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
The city should not be held hostage for subsidies necessary to meet the $170 million asking price. How many worthwhile investors would be willing to pay twice what the team is worth? None, and what we get is the clowns attracted to this situation thus far. The NHL is externalizing the cost of defending its franchising rights by passing it on to Glendale. An absolutely absurd and reprehensible approach, given that the city built a distressed team a shiny new facility. People here are cheering this on for some reason. QC and other markets should absolutely have a shot at a team, but not this way.
XX

Not my intent to start a snowball throwing game with you,

Glendale's problem is not the NHL, its the lack of people in the ?&*&% arena they built.

You wanna say "not their fault, they never had a decent ownership"? Go ahead.

The NHL not dropping the price for GJ (if he did had money somewhere) is the evidence Gary Bettman throw the towel.

Whats the real value of this franchise in PHX? 20M$ 10M$ maybe zero?

The NHL will never sell the team 20M.

But if you want to get into the blame the NHL game, go ahead, and sing all together BLAME NHL BLAME NHL. At least, it won't be BLAME CANADA.

... posted with a sense of humour... with respect to XX, who is a true hockey fan, like many Coyotes fans who post here.


Last edited by QcBlizzard: 02-12-2013 at 05:21 PM.
QcBlizzard is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:25 PM
  #22
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesamonster View Post
Thread title fits the crime perfectly, now lets find the perps!





kdb209 is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:25 PM
  #23
GuelphStormer
Registered User
 
GuelphStormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
The asset is reasonably priced if you are QC or Seattle, but it is not reasonably priced for being in Glendale.

It's no different than a house. Why is the exact same house in City A $190,000, but in City B its $450,000? Because that is what the market will bare AND still allow the seller to sell. If the seller in City A asks for $400,000 what happens? The house sits on the market unsold for 4 seasons. Everything in the world only has value if someone is willing to pay for it.
i think its more like a motorhome. one that can be moved. a million dollar coach parked on a lot in phoenix isnt gonna be worth much more or less than if someone drove it to, hmmm, say, quebec or hamilton. the nhl is simply pricing it based on what they paid for it as well as what they can likely get for it if someone wants to drive it up the road.

edit to add: they'd be stupid to do otherwise.


Last edited by GuelphStormer: 02-12-2013 at 05:30 PM.
GuelphStormer is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:25 PM
  #24
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
The reason we do this dance with the clowns is due to the above market asking price. I'd like an explanation from the league as to why the city is forced to bear the burden of the legal battle. The only reason the NHL paid $140 million was to appeal to the BK court.
So who should fill the gap between the $140 million (now $170 million) and whatever the franchise is actually worth. Either the league eats that cost or it gets passed to the city in some way. You want to know why the city should eat it, I conversely want to know why the league (and consequently the other 29 teams) eat it?

aqib is offline  
Old
02-12-2013, 05:28 PM
  #25
XX
... Waiting
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 48th State
Country: United States
Posts: 27,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QcBlizzard View Post
Glendale's problem is not the NHL,
On the contrary, the NHL is nearly the sole cause of this. Glendale built the arena under the guise that an NHL team would be the main tenant, and signed the club to a 30 year lease accordingly. The NHL, for whatever reason, allowed Moyes to place the team into bankruptcy which voided the lease that the city was counting on. The league then held the team hostage, with all parties aware that TNSE was ready and willing to take a team at any point. During this fiasco, Atlanta boiled over and the NHL's hand was forced. Do we send Phoenix or Atlanta? For the sake of keeping up appearances, and with the benefit of the money from Glendale, the league sent Atlanta packing. Now they've been forced to wait until a new market is ready and willing, which QC seems to be.

At no point was the NHL, throughout this entire process, forced to legitimately look for a local buyer. If you consider their moral imperative as a corporation (profits for stakeholders) then their actions to this point are actually rather predictable. Why sell the team for a discount when you can extract full price and then some from a new market? Optics be damned. If Winnipeg or QC had built an arena specifically for a team, only to watch that team snake off, you guys would be screaming bloody murder. I think the league crosses over into dangerous territory, legally speaking, when they front buyers as legitimate (and deals as solid) when they have no intention of realistically selling the team to a local buyer. They managed to coax $50 million out of a city under duress, and this is somehow okay because the council deserved it?

Why should a city watch a major investment crumple before their very eyes because the NHL didn't handle Moyes correctly? Why should the city be coerced into giving up hefty subsidies because the NHL didn't do its job? Normally, a corporation would just write off that $70 million as the cost of defending their legal franchising rights. Why do you think the NBA, NFL and MLB were all hovering around, curious about the outcome? I believe at one point they even sent letters in support of the NHL. The right to dictate where you do business is worth everything. But when you have the opportunity to externalize that cost and pass it off to the public, why not? It's absolutely predictable, if you consider the amoral and pathological nature of a corporation.

I am thoroughly disgusted by this. The illusion that the league cares about the markets in which it operates has been totally shattered for me. It will be nearly impossible for me to support a business that conducts itself in such a way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aqib View Post
So who should fill the gap between the $140 million (now $170 million) and whatever the franchise is actually worth. Either the league eats that cost or it gets passed to the city in some way. You want to know why the city should eat it, I conversely want to know why the league (and consequently the other 29 teams) eat it?
I'm curious to see your argument supporting the NHL (or any other business) in offloading costs onto taxpayers.

XX 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 02:04 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.