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
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Phoenix XLI: Bongo Fury

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2011, 03:16 PM
  #26
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 28,962
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by awfulwaffle View Post
I'm really getting tired of people complaining about Atlanta. That was your second chance for a hockey team, and you failed, again! Why are you bashing Phoenix so much? We were successful when they played downtown.
The "people", the "fans" didnt fail in either Atlanta or Phoenix. They were consistently served up lousy meals by the Franchisee and decided theyd' had enough, the Master Franchisor perfectly willing to sit on its hands and do nothing about it until the kitchens went up in flames. "Bashing" Phoenix?. Not likely. Not from this poster. Most here think Im quite mad for believing the market can be resurrected, but they show respect & empathize with opposite opinions. I dont quite understand your comment awfulwaffle?..

Killion is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 03:18 PM
  #27
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 18,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Here is the thing. No one but perhaps the NHL knows what is happening. If you think you do, your full of b.s. The Coyotes could be staying in Arizona (at least for a period of years), or they could be out of here and likely in QC by next fall. Anyone who suggests they "know" what will happen is only fooling themselves.

It's fun to speculate, but one could just as easily read Jamison's recent comments as an indication as deal is likely to be done, or an indication that there is no deal (and may never be one). We read what we hope for.

Truth is, I am not expecting some resolution of this issue until perhaps late in the season....not two weeks.
Why would it take until late in the season if there is a bona fide ownership group and a deal that can be made? That is what puzzles me. Surely all of the parties know: 1) the purchase price, 2) what levels of subsidy Glendale might be able to manage, 3) the financial commitments that would be required by potential owners.

There is no good reason that I can think of to delay consummating and announcing a deal for a local sale. There is absolutely no good reason to announce failure to make a local sale and the need to relocate until as late in the season as possible.

Whileee is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 03:33 PM
  #28
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
Yes the NHL will tack on a relocation fee equal to the extra value of that market... But my point is, try as they might, they won't get it in the case of Southern Ontario. If the Coyotes are worth $134M and the Leafs are worth $512M, then another team in the Toronto area is going to be worth ~$400M to start. Which means the NHL will want a relocation fee of $250M? Nobody will pay that. By definition any team being relocated is a distressed asset, and the buyer knows that, and they will be looking for a deal or at least what other teams have been relocated for dollar wise which is in the $170M range.
No, again, I don't agree with that at all. Actually, I'd say a relocated franchise to southern Ontario is worth a little more than an expansion franchise other things being equal. A relocated franchise will typically have more assets in terms of players, pool of prospects, staff such as scouts, etc. If anything the relocated franchise would be worth a little more.

Besides those extra assets -- mainly better players and prospects a relocated franchise brings -- a franchise is a right to operate a team and a fungible asset in itself. It matters not if it is distressed in the Failed Market. The New Market -- i.e., southern Ontario -- will be competing against Other Bidding Markets for both relocation and expansion franchises. The price is not lower for a relocation franchise. The price is whatever someone in each market is willing to pay. The NHL will try to extract the maximum in either case.


Last edited by MAROONSRoad: 12-07-2011 at 03:39 PM.
MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 03:45 PM
  #29
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 28,962
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
There is no good reason that I can think of to delay consummating and announcing a deal for a local sale. There is absolutely no good reason to announce failure to make a local sale and the need to relocate until as late in the season as possible.
I agree. It would do absolute wonders' for the fans', the players, management, potential corporate sponsors, the media, everyone involved to get it done now with an assumption of full ownership upon conclusion of the season & playoffs. Sales & marketing efforts for 2012-13 & beyond could begin in earnest now; event & concert promoters solicited etc etc etc. These incessant alterations to deadlines, lack of substantive comment from anyone involved in the process just reeks of playing the shot clock down like the Flyers ragging the puck in their own end, interminably, in order to try and break Tampas' trap. Only in this case, rather than getting a Bolt to commit & seizing the opening, nah, just more passing of the puck back behind the net, off into a corner, anywhere in the defensive zone. No rush. Literally & figuratively. If its' blown to pieces & theres no way but out & a sale for relo, then get on with it. I suppose they feel attendance is going to crater, ego's are on the line...

Killion is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 03:47 PM
  #30
goyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Why would it take until late in the season if there is a bona fide ownership group and a deal that can be made? That is what puzzles me. Surely all of the parties know: 1) the purchase price, 2) what levels of subsidy Glendale might be able to manage, 3) the financial commitments that would be required by potential owners.

There is no good reason that I can think of to delay consummating and announcing a deal for a local sale. There is absolutely no good reason to announce failure to make a local sale and the need to relocate until as late in the season as possible.
Never over estimate the competance of the NHL or the CoG. There also could be other factors involved that include due dilgence of an ownership "group", floating parts such as purchasing Westgate assets, arranging for a CFD to be in place, Bettman's likely preference for JR as an owner, but perhaps a better offer from the Jamison group, terms of the sale by the NHL (not so sure I agree the price is fixed at any point, but more a not less than number in the mind of the NHL), what to do with the $60 million from TSNE, making some commitment to the new owners about the time table for expansion so they can cash in on expansion money for a few years while they serve out their term in Arizona... All kinds of things to speculate. I was just stating my personal belief that it will come down again to the 11th hour, which I do not believe is until sometime in February or March. QC could probably do a Winnipeg for a few years and sell out a small building until their nice new arena is built.

As just an aside, I think the NHL wants to keep the Coyotes in Arizona so they can cash in on expansion ala the 1990's and infuse some cash in the coffers of struggling franchises. They also probably don't want to leave Glendale becasue that would hurt any efforts to keep a team on the Island, or some other new building in NYC.

goyotes is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 03:48 PM
  #31
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
Truthfully, I'm waiting to see a "MLB-like move the Expos" of the Coyotes. That is, the NHL will move the team from Glendale to wherever they want the franchise, then sell it to the highest bidder. It is the easiest and best way to maximize the value of the franchise.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 04:12 PM
  #32
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 28,962
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Truthfully, I'm waiting to see a "MLB-like move the Expos" of the Coyotes. That is, the NHL will move the team from Glendale to wherever they want the franchise, then sell it to the highest bidder. It is the easiest and best way to maximize the value of the franchise.
Thats an interesting suggestion. The only practicable location that would realize maximum value however would be Hamilton & Copps Coliseum. Where else in North America could they go & recoup the roughly $200M theyve sunk into the franchise, demand indemnifications for the Sabres & Leafs and make a killing? And thats just plain risky business unless MLSE & Buffalo have changed their tune on that market; or perhaps Lieweke & AEG/Katz have worked some insider magic?. I doubt it, but Boy, talk about a full circle 180 if they did do that!.... If they moved to the Tacoma Dome, I cant see Levin or anyone else paying $200M absent any guarantee's whatsoever that a Bellevue, Seattle or Tacoma is going to pitch in to pay for reno's to the Dome down there let alone a brand new facility. But sure enough, its an intriguing idea.

Killion is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 04:19 PM
  #33
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Truthfully, I'm waiting to see a "MLB-like move the Expos" of the Coyotes. That is, the NHL will move the team from Glendale to wherever they want the franchise, then sell it to the highest bidder. It is the easiest and best way to maximize the value of the franchise.
I think that wouldn't work. Too many problems. Would the NHL sign a lease in some city? The NHL would never be able to break a lease they sign. Will the NHL find an arena and try to sell naming rights? What if the people that own the arena, won 't give a fair lease to a new outsider. What if the new owners want to build their own arena?

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 04:29 PM
  #34
OttawaRoughRiderFan
Leaving/Goodbye All
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Leaving HF
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,802
vCash: 500
The consensus among hockey insiders is that IF the team moves, it moves to QC.

OttawaRoughRiderFan is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 04:31 PM
  #35
nhlfan79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by awfulwaffle View Post
I'm really getting tired of people complaining about Atlanta. That was your second chance for a hockey team, and you failed, again! Why are you bashing Phoenix so much? We were successful when they played downtown.
That horse has been beaten down to atom-size by now. But just to prevent further perpetuation of the myth, we had a litigious ownership group spread out over three cities that INTENTIONALLY sabotaged any possibility of the team becoming successful, all for the sole purpose of selling off an asset they never wanted (but had to take in order to get their precious basketball team and arena rights) at the very earliest possible moment. They even went so far as to enter into sham exclusive negotiating periods for the Hawks and arena in order to shut out any potential bidder for all three properties.

Since this all went down, not one BUT TWO potential sales of the Hawks and arena have failed (the second one via a laughable seller-financed purchase agreement that the NBA itself nixed). Conveniently, ASG recently declared that the Hawks and arena are no longer for sale, thereby achieving their ultimate end game.

nhlfan79 is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 04:56 PM
  #36
Hank Chinaski
Global Moderator
No mistakes...
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Granola Belt
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,795
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Truthfully, I'm waiting to see a "MLB-like move the Expos" of the Coyotes. That is, the NHL will move the team from Glendale to wherever they want the franchise, then sell it to the highest bidder. It is the easiest and best way to maximize the value of the franchise.
"Wherever they want the franchise" seems to be an elusive concept right now.

The obvious answer would be Southern Ontario/Hamilton/GTA. It's pretty much a slam dunk in terms of finding the highest bidder, and said bidder would be getting a solid ROI. However, we all know what the NHL's current stance is on that. QC? It's potentially a soft landing place, I wouldn't go as far as saying the NHL wants the team there.

Hank Chinaski is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 05:21 PM
  #37
Warhead77
Jets4Life
 
Warhead77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The River City
Posts: 796
vCash: 500
One thing to point out:

Don't think for a second that the NHL will not move another franchise so soon after moving the Thrashers to Winnipeg.

They relocated three franchises, Quebec (1995); Winnipeg (1996); Hartford (1997), one after the other and were inches away from moving the Oilers in 1998 -- ironically all original WHA teams.

I wouldn't be surprised if this year is it for the Coyotes.

Warhead77 is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 05:39 PM
  #38
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 28,962
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Jets View Post
...ironically all original WHA teams.
Ironic huh?. Theres no 'I' in 'Vendetta' NJ...

Killion is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 05:51 PM
  #39
TheLegend
Moderator
Megathread Gadfly
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Orbiting BoH
Country: United States
Posts: 5,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevyD View Post
The consensus among hockey insiders is that IF the team moves, it moves to QC.
I suppose you polled them all personally. Or what you're actually saying is...... in your opinion..... you feel there's a consensus. [however.... in this case I agree with you.]

As goyotes said..... nobody has any real info as to what is actually going on between the NHL and the two known groups looking to buy the Coyotes.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 05:55 PM
  #40
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Why would it take until late in the season if there is a bona fide ownership group and a deal that can be made? That is what puzzles me. Surely all of the parties know: 1) the purchase price, 2) what levels of subsidy Glendale might be able to manage, 3) the financial commitments that would be required by potential owners.

There is no good reason that I can think of to delay consummating and announcing a deal for a local sale.
Other than there is just no deal yet. The second something is done to keep the team in Glendale, it will be announced.

As far as the 3 items you mentioned I think those are known entities, but IMO the Jamison group is having trouble getting the money together, and Reinsdorf is sitting on the sidelines and will not do anything until he and the CoG are the last 2 chess pieces on the board. JR is waiting for Jamison to go away and the CoG to come crawling.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 07:03 PM
  #41
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 34,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
And now, only one thread way from:

Phoenix XLII: The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything

And, damn it, I'm reserving that thread title even if I have to take up Fugu's persistent arm twisting generous offer to become a Mod to do it.

....beer.


Fugu is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 08:14 PM
  #42
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 16,337
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
IMHO, Quebec fans should focus on building the new Colisee rather than wasting time focusing on acquiring a franchise, Only PKP/Quebecor will own/operate any proposed Quebec franchise...... Just because it took 20 + years for Ottawa to approve Quebecor's application to build a new Colisee, what happens to the arena now branded as Le Colisee that has been standing for 60 + years, Do you really want to spend another set of figures to bring the current facility back to arena specifications just to demolish/implode that when the new 21st Century Colisee finally opens..... think of Pittsburgh, here, it wasn't until a year ago, if that, that the Civic Arena, just as the Spectrum, the year before that in Philadelphia, saw its demise, for some promise, that at last check in Philadelphia, was promised, but never delivered..... that's wht Glendale is trying to avoid happening there w/ Jobing.com Arena, what becomes of that building if there's no anchor tenant, just like Westgate was foreclosed upon for lack of interest.....How would Quebec fans feel if Le Colisee (either the existing one, or the proposed new arena) feel if nobody elected to show up there, even for hockey.... why do you think arenas and management companies like Global Spectrum/AEG are in that line of business, but all AEG is known for is their entertainment business, rather than their arena management philosophy... Quebec fans should know how that felt when the Nordiques were sold to Denver, just as Atlanta fans felt about the Flames/Thrashers leaving for Calgary and Winnipeg..... how is no hockey in Atlanta helping Phillips Arena compete for events....

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 09:14 PM
  #43
Bob1321
Registered User
 
Bob1321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 492
vCash: 500
man they start this summer!!!!

you are not update on the situation lol

Bob1321 is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 09:37 PM
  #44
WpgJet
Registered User
 
WpgJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 56
vCash: 500
Would some temporary agreement like a 2 year lease-to-own scenario be possible for someone like Jamieson?

WpgJet is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 09:39 PM
  #45
OttawaRoughRiderFan
Leaving/Goodbye All
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Leaving HF
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
I suppose you polled them all personally. Or what you're actually saying is...... in your opinion..... you feel there's a consensus. .
No... I know for a fact. I met Pierre McGuire, Bob McKenzie, Darren Dreger, John Shannon, Nick Kypreos, Mike Milbury and Bob McCown (to name a few) for dinner last night. We went for Thai. We all went Dutch.

Anyway, at one point I asked the group where the team would play next year. They ALL said Quebec City.

So... not my opinion... FACT!!!



Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
[I agree with you.]
Of course you do. Why should this time be any different than all the rest?


Last edited by OttawaRoughRiderFan: 12-07-2011 at 10:09 PM.
OttawaRoughRiderFan is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 09:53 PM
  #46
Jesus Christ Horburn
Registered User
 
Jesus Christ Horburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,912
vCash: 500
I don't know if Quebec City is happening for sure, But with the way the new alignment has 16 teams in the West and 14 in the East, I think it takes KC, Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, Houston and other potential cities out West out of the equation.

Jesus Christ Horburn is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 10:05 PM
  #47
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,120
vCash: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
Just because it took 20 + years for Ottawa to approve Quebecor's application to build a new Colisee,
What on earth are you talking about? Ottawa was not involved at all. This is strictly city and provincial. No federal approval required.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
what happens to the arena now branded as Le Colisee that has been standing for 60 + years, Do you really want to spend another set of figures to bring the current facility back to arena specifications just to demolish/implode that when the new 21st Century Colisee finally opens.....
If it's that or PKP not getting an NHL team to provide content for his new sports channel, you better believe he'll pay $5 million for temporary repairs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
how is no hockey in Atlanta helping Phillips Arena compete for events....
One reason that ASG ran the Thrashers out of town was pecisely because they figured they could net more profit from 25 concert/wrestling/MMA/tractor-pull/etc events than from 45 hockey games. According to Pollstar Magazine
Quote:
ATLANTA, January 27, 2011 – Atlanta’s Philips Arena has once again earned international acclaim as a top ranked entertainment venue according to industry-leading publication Pollstar magazine. For the 2010 calendar year, Philips Arena has been named as the No. 4 concert and events venue in the United States, based on attendance figures released by Pollstar magazine in its January 17th edition.

knorthern knight is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 10:08 PM
  #48
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 28,962
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WpgJet View Post
Would some temporary agreement like a 2 year lease-to-own scenario be possible for someone like Jamieson?
You mean to basically provide Terms, say over 24/36/48mnths or whatever?. Problematical for the NHL as they purchased the club using a Line of Credit themselves & have been dipping into it ever since to cover costs. I suppose it might be possible if Jamison provided at least 40-50% down and assumed/took over the NHL's LOC with BankAmerica (provided the bank goes for it & approves Jamisons backers) however that too is a huge stretch. The NHL's BOG's would want to see a cash-to-financing split that makes sense with plenty of reserve capital and or credit available to the Coyotes purchaser. I seem to recall discussing this at length eons ago, the league having policies/guidelines on these issues with minimums allowed on a cash-finance % to purchase.

If as rumored Jamisons having difficulties raising these funds via private placement investors, and in light of the credit crunch & state of the franchise, I dont think they'd find a bank anywhere willing to extend them credit unless they put up about 120% security against the loans required, and even then it wouldnt fly. Not in this economy. Not on the Coyotes. No, the leagues gotta get its cash back in full upon sale and the owners have to have reserves of at least another $200M+ in liquidity or IMO it just doesnt happen. The league could provide a discount if they applied the TNSE relo fee to paying down their LOC with BofA shaving $60M off the price, however, its pure speculation to assume as much, and certainly its virtually impossible at this time to look to Glendale for anything in the way of a subsidy.

Any prospective buyer needs cash. In tough.

Killion is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 10:08 PM
  #49
OttawaRoughRiderFan
Leaving/Goodbye All
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Leaving HF
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJG View Post
I don't know if Quebec City is happening for sure, But with the way the new alignment has 16 teams in the West and 14 in the East, I think it takes KC, Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, Houston and other potential cities out West out of the equation.
I agree the new allignment plays into a QC relocation.

OttawaRoughRiderFan is offline  
Old
12-07-2011, 10:12 PM
  #50
blues10
Registered User
 
blues10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
You mean to basically provide Terms, say over 24/36/48mnths or whatever?. Problematical for the NHL as they purchased the club using a Line of Credit themselves & have been dipping into it ever since to cover costs. I suppose it might be possible if Jamison provided at least 40-50% down and assumed/took over the NHL's LOC with BankAmerica (provided the bank goes for it & approves Jamisons backers) however that too is a huge stretch. The NHL's BOG's would want to see a cash-to-financing split that makes sense with plenty of reserve capital and or credit available to the Coyotes purchaser. I seem to recall discussing this at length eons ago, the league having policies/guidelines on these issues with minimums allowed on a cash-finance % to purchase.

If as rumored Jamisons having difficulties raising these funds via private placement investors, and in light of the credit crunch & state of the franchise, I dont think they'd find a bank anywhere willing to extend them credit unless they put up about 120% security against the loans required, and even then it wouldnt fly. Not in this economy. Not on the Coyotes. No, the leagues gotta get its cash back in full upon sale and the owners have to have reserves of at least another $200M+ in liquidity or IMO it just doesnt happen. The league could provide a discount if they applied the TNSE relo fee to paying down their LOC with BofA shaving $60M off the price, however, its pure speculation to assume as much, and certainly its virtually impossible at this time to look to Glendale for anything in the way of a subsidy.

Any prospective buyer needs cash. In tough.
That was IEH's problem too, no cash money.

blues10 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 02:00 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.