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 XLI: Bongo Fury

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2011, 10:55 AM
  #76
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevyD View Post
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!!!

This is why you aren't taken seriously.

Quote:
Of course you do. Why should this time be any different than all the rest?
Just because you can't be taken seriously doesn't mean you're never correct.

TheLegend is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:03 AM
  #77
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
You are making quite the assumption there; claiming that "nobody has any real info as to what is going on" behind the scenes is quite definitive, as if you somehow know this to be a certainty. Perhaps someone does have real info as to what is going on behind the scenes but they just haven't published it yet? Heh.
Media sitting on info?? Wishful thinking.....


Last edited by TheLegend: 12-08-2011 at 11:13 AM.
TheLegend is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:13 AM
  #78
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Could it really be taking all of these months for a prospective owner to negotiate a deal with the NHL? What would take so long? Presumably, the NHL has already decided on the minimum selling price, so that shouldn't take months to negotiate. Perhaps the issue relates to relocation rights in case things don't turn around in Glendale. Perhaps the new owners are trying to get assurances from the NHL about their future options to determine the upside in case they decide to relocate in the future. That would be a very messy and unpredictable situation to try to negotiate up front.
From the article one could presume Glendale is all set with Jamison (and maybe even Kaites/JR) but the NHL is looking to be assured they aren't going to be doing this all over again in the near future. [Given Jamison had a problem with one investor cooperating with the NHL's vetting process and had to replace him a few weeks ago.]

I'm not saying I'm buying into it.... just looking at a possible interpretation of it.

TheLegend is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:13 AM
  #79
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
I'm still trying to figure out how serious businessmen ever thought that could fly.
The overarching sense of entitlement without risk, a philosophy shared & supported by the NHL enabling & facilitating these time wasters' was/is both breathtaking & appalling. Unfortunate as well that Glendale didnt wake up a Hell of a lot earlier and drop their demands with the "Forever&Ever" Lease amen...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I'm still not convinced, though I am sure Quebec City will get a team in the not too distant future.
Im in your camp on that one as well #4. I'd say the odds are in QC's favor what with an owner/temporary home/new building/excellent "boutique" market & natural rivalries particularly with Montreal (those "Battle of Quebec" series produced some of the best hockey Ive ever seen) but still... I have lingering doubts about it being a given. We dont know whats' going on behind the scenes & its more than probable, with various close to or completely NHL ready arenas across the US that interest exists. Youve' named several in other threads, as have others, and made compelling cases for their feasibility. That not a whisper of it reaches the press is really not that surprising.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WJG View Post
So I guess we can still expect another vote? I know they're just formalities anyways because they'll always vote yes, but I just figured we were done with them at this stage.
I dont know what to make of her comments quite frankly, and like you, Im wondering why any vote would be required unless Jamison & the NHL have decided to dispense with the 10yr AMUL, GJ negotiating a fully blown AMULA with Beasley, HOWEVER, a vote would be required to approve an Arena Management Fee, so perhaps the hang-up lies somewhere in between the $25M the leagues receiving (which we know wont be carried on past this season) and a much more realistic & equitable amount....


Last edited by Killion: 12-08-2011 at 11:23 AM. Reason: Typo;
Killion is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:14 AM
  #80
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Could it really be taking all of these months for a prospective owner to negotiate a deal with the NHL? What would take so long? Presumably, the NHL has already decided on the minimum selling price, so that shouldn't take months to negotiate. Perhaps the issue relates to relocation rights in case things don't turn around in Glendale. Perhaps the new owners are trying to get assurances from the NHL about their future options to determine the upside in case they decide to relocate in the future. That would be a very messy and unpredictable situation to try to negotiate up front.
I think the delay is that Jamieson needs to find some more investors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
You are making quite the assumption there; claiming that "nobody has any real info as to what is going on" behind the scenes is quite definitive, as if you somehow know this to be a certainty. Perhaps someone does have real info as to what is going on behind the scenes but they just haven't published it yet? Heh.
We do get some interesting visitors.

Fugu is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:25 AM
  #81
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,376
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
We do get some interesting visitors.
I was obviously joking.

The NHL is controlling the flow of information. Just because it has yet to have been reported in the press one way or another means little; Phoenix' fate may in fact already (recently) have been decided with finality behind closed doors but only the NHL will determine when and how it is to be announced.


Last edited by Gump Hasek: 12-08-2011 at 11:31 AM. Reason: added one word
Gump Hasek is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:38 AM
  #82
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
I was obviously joking.

The NHL is controlling the flow of information. Just because it has yet to have been reported in the press one way or another means little; Phoenix' fate may in fact already (recently) have been decided with finality behind closed doors but only the NHL will determine when and how it is to be announced.

No, not really. We had some trickling of info long before the deal was finalized. I still remember the absolute claims that ATL was not for sale, let alone a relocation target. About a year before it happened too.

Fugu is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:43 AM
  #83
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Material Defender View Post
What a trainwreck of an article.

Compare and contast these two quotes:

Quote:
"I wish people would understand when they say, ‘Oh, that Glendale,' she said. "But it's not, we're just waiting."
Quote:
"The city is engaged in ongoing negotiations," Frisoni said. "It would be inappropriate for us to comment."
So is the city engaged in ongoing negotiations or is the city just waiting? I'm confused.

CGG is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 11:48 AM
  #84
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I think the delay is that Jamieson needs to find some more investors... We do get some interesting visitors.
Yes I agree. An old & experienced hand like that in conjunction with the NHL itself are all more than cognizant of the parameters in getting a deal done, the lime already poured establishing side-lines, yardage & goal lines; the idiosyncrasies in dealing with Glendale. Beasley on his way out, an election pending, the GWI watching their every move. I believe the only thing holding up a sale to GJ is in fact financing, and clearly, he's seriously challenged, up against it in trying to attract investors... As for the "interesting visitors", I pay big bucks to my network carrier, the nice folks at SETI to cleanse my URL address from ever appearing. Just a series of schizophrenic letters, forward slashes & random numbers re-directed through the Gamma Quadrant & back into the Milky Way. Are you telling me its been disabled?.

Killion is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 12:01 PM
  #85
goyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGG View Post
What a trainwreck of an article.

Compare and contast these two quotes:





So is the city engaged in ongoing negotiations or is the city just waiting? I'm confused.
Spot on. The reporting of this story on both sides of the border has been really bad. There is little effort to press for real facts. Reporters are content to rehash old information, throw in a sound bite, and spin it in whatever direction they desire. Editorial rather than reporting. You would think it wouldn't be that hard to get some people on the record, if not just in fear of reporting "No comment" to a few choice and well worded questions.

goyotes is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 12:02 PM
  #86
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
I was obviously joking.
Well, Im not Gumper', because these "visitors" Fugu refers to with their bizarro URL's?;


Killion is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 12:02 PM
  #87
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Yes I agree. An old & experienced hand like that in conjunction with the NHL itself are all more than cognizant of the parameters in getting a deal done, the lime already poured establishing side-lines, yardage & goal lines; the idiosyncrasies in dealing with Glendale. Beasley on his way out, an election pending, the GWI watching their every move. I believe the only thing holding up a sale to GJ is in fact financing, and clearly, he's seriously challenged, up against it in trying to attract investors... As for the "interesting visitors", I pay big bucks to my network carrier, the nice folks at SETI to cleanse my URL address from ever appearing. Just a series of schizophrenic letters, forward slashes & random numbers re-directed through the Gamma Quadrant & back into the Milky Way. Are you telling me its been disabled?.

I get a legit IP address for you.

Fugu is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 12:25 PM
  #88
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,925
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Could it really be taking all of these months for a prospective owner to negotiate a deal with the NHL? What would take so long? Presumably, the NHL has already decided on the minimum selling price, so that shouldn't take months to negotiate. Perhaps the issue relates to relocation rights in case things don't turn around in Glendale. Perhaps the new owners are trying to get assurances from the NHL about their future options to determine the upside in case they decide to relocate in the future. That would be a very messy and unpredictable situation to try to negotiate up front.
I don't get it either and I'm not buying it. The mayor says after all this time the potential buyer and the NHL are still trying to nail down a price? Not likely. The NHL has a price they are willing to accept and the buyers know what that is. Sounds like the Mayor is positioning the CoG to say " see it's thier fault " when it all dies.

Or maybe we are still stuck in the same circle after 3 years. The NHL won't sell the team until the buyer has a lease agreement with the CoG and the CoG won't make a lease agreement with the buyer until the team is actually bought.

cbcwpg is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 01:07 PM
  #89
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I think the delay is that Jamieson needs to find some more investors.

Or to hit powerball or mega millions.......

Tommy Hawk is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 01:49 PM
  #90
roccerfeller
jets bromantic
 
roccerfeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,038
vCash: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Well, Im not Gumper', because these "visitors" Fugu refers to with their bizarro URL's?;

LOL

classic.

roccerfeller is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 01:58 PM
  #91
RandR
Registered User
 
RandR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGG View Post
What a trainwreck of an article.

Compare and contast these two quotes:

Quote:
"I wish people would understand when they say, ‘Oh, that Glendale,' she said. "But it's not, we're just waiting."
Quote:
"The city is engaged in ongoing negotiations," Frisoni said. "It would be inappropriate for us to comment."
So is the city engaged in ongoing negotiations or is the city just waiting? I'm confused.
Coming from an "executive communications director", saying that "The city is engaged in ongoing negotiations" makes her as useful to this story as the city manager who "could not be reached for comment".

RandR is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 04:09 PM
  #92
He Lied to Mario
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
The summary....

Nothing happening. Zip, zilch, notta.

Some comments from the NHL.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=604921&print=true

"We're continuing discussions with a couple of potentially interested purchasers," Daly told the media

I find it interesting that instead of having "purchasers" we now have "potentially interested purchasers". Speak english man. This is like being kinda pregnant. You are either buying the team or you are not. You are either negotiating or you are not. To get to this point and have a couple of groups that are just potentially interested doesn't bode well.

"We moved the Thrashers (to Winnipeg) pretty late last year. We're not looking at any deadlines right this minute," Bettman said.

This is even a more interesting comment. Considering that Bettman said the the Atlanta --> Winnipeg move was a one off never to happen again, why would he even mention it? Maybe a move is being setup behind the green door.

Bettman DID NOT say that Winnipeg to Atlanta was a one-off
the REPORTER did. Those are the reporter's words.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...slam!%20hockey

The league commissioner says the relocation of the Atlanta Thrashers to Canada is a one-off, not a sign of things to come.

“We don’t believe anyone else should be a franchise relocation candidate,” Bettman said. “This was an Atlanta problem that couldn’t be solved for Atlanta and has nothing to do with anywhere else. And to suggest to the contrary then begins to raise expectations in other markets. And we all know how much fun that wasn’t here in Winnipeg.”

Bettman tells QC not to start counting their chickens.

“First of all, they don’t have a building,” Bettman said. “Secondly, we don’t have a team that we’re planning on relocating. And we’re not planning on expansion. We do not want to raise expectations in Quebec City. That would be very unfair to the people of Quebec City.”

Bettman did, indirectly, offer one word of advice to anyone wanting to land an NHL franchise: the Jim Balsillie approach is probably not a good idea.

He Lied to Mario is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 05:33 PM
  #93
AndyCapp
Registered User
 
AndyCapp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by He Lied to Mario View Post
Bettman DID NOT say that Winnipeg to Atlanta was a one-off
the REPORTER did. Those are the reporter's words.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...slam!%20hockey
From the June 1 article;

“We don’t believe anyone else should be a franchise relocation candidate,” Bettman said. “This was an Atlanta problem that couldn’t be solved for Atlanta and has nothing to do with anywhere else. And to suggest to the contrary then begins to raise expectations in other markets. And we all know how much fun that wasn’t here in Winnipeg.”

And this is a Glendale problem, that can't be solved for Glendale...and has nothing to do with anywhere else....until it bursts into flames, or the BOG rises up with cutlasses upon the tiny perfect Commissioner. (Or did that happen this week, already?)

The fact that Atlanta's problems were kept very quiet (over roughly 2 years), as opposed to the "full clown car effect" of the Glendale situation (during the same time frame), means very little. If anything, it shows that ASG were good at one thing...keeping their darker impulses off the front pages while they quietly got out of the hockey business.

In fact, the Atlanta-to-Winnipeg transfer illustrates nicely that NHL politics are best done behind the scrim, instead of the main drag in broad daylight.

Facts of the Coyotes situation are wide open to the public by now. Given that, Jamison's group will need to pay a huge risk premium to lenders or investors, now that the books are open on the team's operations. No amount of wishful thinking or magic powder will convince a venture capital fund, or an aggressive banker (if any exist in the US any more) that there's huge profits to be had in a "turn-around" of the "NHL Hockey in the Desert" project. At best, this is a marginally profitable situation, and the interest rates for borrowed money will reflect this.

My money rides on another "sub rosa" midnight surprise from the NHL, (a la Thrashers to WPG). If it's QC, and the transfer of the franchise results in a sub-optimal situation for the new ownership...so be it.

Chipman/Thompson pretty well knew that they had to make the case that Winnipeg could take a Refugee Franchise on "short notice". That was part of their business plan, and their case to the League, to be honest. PKP and company are probably doing the quiet background work Chipman/Thompson had nailed down two years ago. They're getting ready to be ready.

Mind you, even if they're not ready, they won't say no.

AndyCapp is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 05:50 PM
  #94
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by He Lied to Mario View Post
Bettman DID NOT say that Winnipeg to Atlanta was a one-off, the REPORTER did. Those are the reporter's words; The league commissioner says the relocation of the Atlanta Thrashers to Canada is a one-off, not a sign of things to come.
Not all direct quotes from an interview subject are directly quoted verbatim with punctuation marks at the beginning and end of them in a free-flowing question and answer session. Did the reporter "make-up" the "one-off" and "not a sign of things to come" comment or were they off the cuff comments made by Bettman that he simply didnt bother punctuating?. We dont know for sure, but does it really matter?. Gary Bettman says a lot of "stuff"...

Heres' a beauty from SportsBusinessDaily in an interview with Gary Bettman shortly after the Thrashers were sold which taken in context and the issue of relocation fee's raises all kinds of questions pursuant to the process and why TNSE was even charged one, with some strange implications as to just how the NHL might be handling the Phoenix sale locally or as a portable;

"The purpose of the $60M relocation fee was an attempt to encourage a local sale at a lower price. Obviously it benefits the league (Atlanta paid $80M in Expansion Fee's). However, the practical effect would be to encourage a sale at a lower place (sic). By requiring such a relocation fee, we were creating a lower than market value price for an NHL franchise for someone to buy it and keep it in Atlanta".


Now, if we look at both the Atlanta transaction and the pending Phoenix sale, is there not an inherent conflict of interest & motives to such a stated goal?. If you believe in & facilitate discounts then Im guessing youve tabled a whopper for Greg Jamison and or Kaites/Reinsdorf then?. Why arent these questions being asked?.

Killion is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 07:50 PM
  #95
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyCapp View Post
Facts of the Coyotes situation are wide open to the public by now. Given that, Jamison's group will need to pay a huge risk premium to lenders or investors, now that the books are open on the team's operations. No amount of wishful thinking or magic powder will convince a venture capital fund, or an aggressive banker (if any exist in the US any more) that there's huge profits to be had in a "turn-around" of the "NHL Hockey in the Desert" project. At best, this is a marginally profitable situation, and the interest rates for borrowed money will reflect this.
I'm not following this. Are you suggesting that any potential lenders, investors or venture capital funds would not demand and receive all of the financial information about the Coyotes that is now available to the public (even if it had not been made public)? If you are suggesting that, I believe you are wrong. That's not the way financial institutions and most investors operate.

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 07:50 PM
  #96
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Heres' a beauty from SportsBusinessDaily in an interview with Gary Bettman shortly after the Thrashers were sold which taken in context and the issue of relocation fee's raises all kinds of questions pursuant to the process and why TNSE was even charged one, with some strange implications as to just how the NHL might be handling the Phoenix sale locally or as a portable;

"The purpose of the $60M relocation fee was an attempt to encourage a local sale at a lower price. Obviously it benefits the league (Atlanta paid $80M in Expansion Fee's). However, the practical effect would be to encourage a sale at a lower place (sic). By requiring such a relocation fee, we were creating a lower than market value price for an NHL franchise for someone to buy it and keep it in Atlanta".
Sort of obvious isn't it, a team's worth is tied to the area it plays in. Just because a team can sell elsewhere for more, I guess Bettman is saying the local sale got a hometown discount. I'd suggest any team selling for less than 300 million got a hometown discount because that is probably the cost of a team in S. Ontario.

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 08:17 PM
  #97
wpgJetsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
"Our anticipation is this shouldn't go on and probably won't go on another year with us owning the club and the City of Glendale doing what it's doing to support the building with the Coyotes in there," NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman told a reporter for the league-owned website. "But, you never know what is going to happen. Our hope continues to be it gets sold in the not too distant future to a buyer for Glendale."
Quote:
"We're not planning any moves: we don't want any moves," Bettman told NHL.com. "But if we find ourselves confronted with one, the way (the four-conference system is) set up gives us a little bit more flexibility."

Wasn't this similar to what was said about the Atlanta Situation?
Reading what the NHL is now reporting compared to before and how similar it was to the Atlanta situation, this team is done by season end. No owner and the team will relocate for sure! Most people say Quebec but who knows.

wpgJetsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 08:37 PM
  #98
AndyCapp
Registered User
 
AndyCapp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
I'm not following this. Are you suggesting that any potential lenders, investors or venture capital funds would not demand and receive all of the financial information about the Coyotes that is now available to the public (even if it had not been made public)? If you are suggesting that, I believe you are wrong. That's not the way financial institutions and most investors operate.
The opposite argument. We all know too much about the prospects of "hockey in Glendale".

Enough of "the books" have been open to folks like "The Business of Hockey Boards" for some time. The fine folks here have dissected the profitability of this enterprise very well. I'm thinking no sane banker would loan money to this enterprise, given it's short-term realities AND long-term prospects, without a punitive "risk premium".

Similarly, my "Business Rabbi" brought "angel investors" to the table on a media project about eight years ago. He smiled and stated the interest rate we should expect, should the investors like the project. "Every interest point over my "target rate" is a doubling of their doubt in the enterprise," he said.

This business model is wiiiiiiiiiiiide open, and its prospects for profitability have been parsed a long time ago around here. I doubt Jamison is finding an investor willing to put money into a franchise purchase, without either a guaranteed annual return, or a rate that doesn't read to all involved as "substantial doubt" in its long-term success.


Last edited by AndyCapp: 12-08-2011 at 08:51 PM.
AndyCapp is offline  
Old
12-08-2011, 09:01 PM
  #99
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyhopeful View Post
Sort of obvious isn't it...
The only thing obvious about it is that the premise of his reply is disingenuous, revisionist and so full of holes you could drive a Mack through it. Im again disappointed in a member of the 5th Estate who didnt have the perspicacity to challenge his subjects Porkies, follow-up & move in for the kill shot.

Killion is online now  
Old
12-08-2011, 09:13 PM
  #100
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyCapp View Post
The opposite argument. We all know too much about the prospects of "hockey in Glendale".

Enough of "the books" have been open to folks like "The Business of Hockey Boards" for some time. The fine folks here have dissected the profitability of this enterprise very well. I'm thinking no sane banker would loan money to this enterprise, given it's short-term realities AND long-term prospects, without a punitive "risk premium".

Similarly, my "Business Rabbi" brought "angel investors" to the table on a media project about eight years ago. He smiled and stated the interest rate we should expect, should the investors like the project. "Every interest point over my "target rate" is a doubling of their doubt in the enterprise," he said.

This business model is wiiiiiiiiiiiide open, and its prospects for profitability have been parsed a long time ago around here. I doubt Jamison is finding an investor willing to put money into a franchise purchase, without either a guaranteed annual return, or a rate that doesn't read to all involved as "substantial doubt" in its long-term success.
Well, I agree with you there.

No investment in the Coyotes makes sense without the following or a combination of the following: 1) massive additional tax payer subsidies of one kind or another by the COG guaranteed without political/legal risk that those subsidies could end prematurely or get bogged down in a legal process, 2) easy out of Glendale/AZ/Jobing.com provided by both the NHL and COG if the bottom line doesn't turn around in a few years (NHL to allow relocation by X date) and/or 3) massive reduction of the purchase price from the rumoured at least $170MM the NHL is asking.

Basically - the COG has to subsidize NHL hockey for Arizonans by picking up the tab caused by the lack of demand for the product. Massive subsidies guaranteed without risk is the key to financing the transaction. NHL lowering the price helps also. An out clause again helps with the financing of the purchase.

The only other possibility which does not appear on the horizon is a billionaire that purchases the team for non-economic reasons -- community charity, civic pride, vanity, etc -- and doesn't mind losing 10s of millions per year.


Last edited by MAROONSRoad: 12-08-2011 at 10:49 PM.
MAROONSRoad 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 01:01 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.