HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Arizona Coyotes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Coyotes Ownership Thread: "DOAN'T ASK DOAN'T TELL""

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2012, 03:36 PM
  #26
awfulwaffle
Registered User
 
awfulwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 7,885
vCash: 500
Ha I love the video!

awfulwaffle is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 07:24 PM
  #27
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 8,280
vCash: 500
Movement on Phoenix Coyotes ownership is coming, one way or another: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyo...y-bickley.html

Sinurgy is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 07:46 PM
  #28
Naych_PHX
Are you, kidding me?
 
Naych_PHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: phoenix
Posts: 5,729
vCash: 500
Caught a few seconds on channel 10 about how they should/could lower the price from 170 to bout 140 so, I guess this is what they were talking about.

Naych_PHX is online now  
Old
02-16-2012, 07:49 PM
  #29
awfulwaffle
Registered User
 
awfulwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 7,885
vCash: 500
I don't know why the league wouldn't lower the price of the team in order to find a buyer that is interested in keeping the team there, within reason of course, and possible stipulations to pay more down the road if they turn a profit at some point? Would that even be viable?

awfulwaffle is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 08:23 PM
  #30
inkymarx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AP View Post
Are you saying that because that is the truth or because you would rather see the Coyotes in QC(if relocation happens of course)?
Colisée Pepsi holds 15,176 as it currently stands and I am not sure weather or not it can be renovated again to add seats. Looking at pictures of Colisée, it atleast appears like it would be a viable option as a short term solution, however, based on the pictures I have seen there is a lack of suites in the building.... I don't think they could go more then 1 or 2 seasons without that suite money, in a 15,176 seat arena and I know the NHL wouldn't move there unless there was confirmed plans for a new arena.

With that being said, I personally think the plan was to move the Coyotes to Winnipeg and the Thrashers to Québec at the same time. This is just my opinion and I can't really prove anything, so if you don't like that idea, don't go getting all bent out of shape.

I know for a fact (this has been confirmed in interviews with Mark Chipman) that True North and the previous owners of the Thrashers had been trying to make a deal with each other and the NHL for years before the Thrashers relocated. It has also been confirmed in interviews with Mark Chipman that the most recent "Coyotes to Winnipeg" rumours did in fact have some weight to them, and they were prepared to move the Coyotes to Winnipeg in May of 2011 until the City of Glendale agreed to cover losses. I believe that was the NHL's way of getting out of Phoenix without being the bad guy and it didn't work.

So what does this have to do with Québec? I believe the previous owners of the Thrashers were growing impatient at the fact that True North wanted purchase the Thrashers and move them to Winnipeg, but the NHL wasn't allowing it. The NHL then said "Ok, we will allow the Coyotes to be moved to Winnipeg and we will allow the Thrashers to move to Québec and everyone is happy.

THEN the City of Glendale agreed to cover losses for the 2011-2012 season, and that left True North waiting in Winnipeg with no franchise, but with a promise (the promise is a confirmed fact) that they will get the next available team. I believe that promise was made with the intent that the Coyotes would only last one more season and then they would become the next available team.

Shortly after that I believe there was some sort of contract dispute behind closed doors that prevented the Thrashers from moving to Québec.... this is not confirmed, but I believe it's true.

At this point I believe the Thrashers ownership said "You wouldn't let us sell to Winnipeg, now we can't sell to Québec for atleast another season, and it top it all off, True North is sitting in Winnipeg with a bunch of cash and no team because the Coyotes are staying in Glendale with no owner for another season. Either let us sell to True North now or we will declare bankruptcy, and you will then have 2 teams in limbo."

So if my theory is correct it seems that the NHL already has it's sights set on Québec, which means they must have a plan in place.

However, if my theory is correct, the reason why the Thrashers didn't move to Québec is important. I heard it was because of a contract dispute that was only effective for one more season....which means it would no longer prevent a team from moving to Québec next season.

If my theory is accurate, except the dispute was over the building of a new arena, that could be bad news for Québec, but that's not what I believe the dispute was over.

So my point is Québec was / is already on the radar....Again, that is just my opinion... I am not just making it up as I go but I can't really confirm anything because it's just my opinion based on everything that was happening around the time the Thrashers sale was made.... so don't get all friggity-****ed if my opinion doesn't gel with you.

And just for the record.... I am Canadian and I would like to see a team back in Québec.... I would have rather the Coyotes went to Winnipeg but Québec deserves a team. That being said, without knowing anything about the arena / ownership situation in Seattle, if this team stays in the USA I think I would prefer to see them go to Seattle vs anywhere else.


Last edited by inkymarx: 02-16-2012 at 08:43 PM.
inkymarx is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 08:31 PM
  #31
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,342
vCash: 500
The Economist has picked up our saga

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gamet...omecomingqueen

Just odd story for that publication

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 09:31 PM
  #32
BuffaloAZ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chandler, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinurgy View Post
Movement on Phoenix Coyotes ownership is coming, one way or another: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyo...y-bickley.html
I lost interest when I got to this point of the article...by Dan Bickley.

BuffaloAZ is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 09:50 PM
  #33
gra
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 27,295
vCash: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffaloAZ View Post
I lost interest when I got to this point of the article...by Dan Bickley.
I didn't bother reading article since it is by Dan Bickley.

gra is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:55 PM
  #34
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 47,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinurgy View Post
********. You called "samesies" on Pho's comment where he admitted to having a thing for QC and their francophone culture. You definitely have a preference good sir!
Actually I could go either way. QC has a lot of appeal. They've got hockey culture and history. I called samesies on being a bit of a Francophile. So there is that. I also like that it will make a lot of money immediately, and there will be tremendous pressure to win and spend.

What do I like about Seattle? Doan might go. They might hang on to Maloney and Tippett. I love the idea of the NFL/MLS and MLB and NBA/NHL buildings being in a straight line on the same street in a mega sportsplex in downtown Seattle. I like that Seattle has some seemingly recession proof elements to their economy. I like that the arena is supposedly privately funded. I thibk seattle could potentially duplicate what we've seen from the nhl in the bay area. I think it could be a tremendous growth market fir the game and we could see first round picks left and right from the puget sound some day fairly soon.

I'd follow the team regardless of which route they go. Seattle would be fine if glendale is truly doomed as a home for this club.

__________________
This poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is online now  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:20 PM
  #35
ssmatik
Registered User
 
ssmatik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Side
Country: United States
Posts: 446
vCash: 500
Glendale's beleaguered Westgate City Center should get a shot of consumer energy later this year, when Tanger Factory Outlet Centers Inc. opens a new outlet mall on the site.

http://www.azcentral.com/business/ar...-glendale.html

ssmatik is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:43 PM
  #36
ower
Registered User
 
ower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SEA by way of Tempe
Country: United States
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJinAZ View Post
They are doing ice skating events there next week. Not sure the team would lose 30m playing at Key but they will definitely lose 30m playing at Jobing with no owner. I think there would be a honeymoon period where they would get the "new kid in town" excitement plus a ton of fans from Vancouver trying desperately to create a rivalry that would offset a lot of the loss.

Stuck in Glendale is right.... I do get the feeling that after 3 years in limbo this off season will be the breaking point. Either the NHL lowers the price or relocates. I think Glendale's subsidies are done.

As someone who lives in Seattle and would be within walking distance.. I don't want the team to come here. The NHL is an after thought regarding the deal. It all hinges on bringing an NBA team here. If by March first there's no NBA team coming here then there will be no NHL. If they were interested in bringing NHL here they would of tried years ago instead of taking a long shot with soccer. If they were interested in NHL they would of gave in when the Key Arena needed to be upgraded. Seeing games there would be like seeing old Coyotes games at America West back in the day. It's awful, not enough seating and some of them don't have complete view of the ice. As much as people wanna try to portray Seattle as a rich hockey market, it's not. Sure, people will come out when they're home team plays and it will be no different then when the same teams come to phoenix and all the transplants suddenly show up to support a team.

If they team doesn't stay in phoenix I'd rather them not come here and move on and treat it like a bad break up.

ower is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:16 AM
  #37
Scottrocks58*
Six
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkymarx View Post
Colisée Pepsi holds 15,176 as it currently stands and I am not sure weather or not it can be renovated again to add seats. Looking at pictures of Colisée, it atleast appears like it would be a viable option as a short term solution, however, based on the pictures I have seen there is a lack of suites in the building.... I don't think they could go more then 1 or 2 seasons without that suite money, in a 15,176 seat arena and I know the NHL wouldn't move there unless there was confirmed plans for a new arena.

With that being said, I personally think the plan was to move the Coyotes to Winnipeg and the Thrashers to Québec at the same time. This is just my opinion and I can't really prove anything, so if you don't like that idea, don't go getting all bent out of shape.

I know for a fact (this has been confirmed in interviews with Mark Chipman) that True North and the previous owners of the Thrashers had been trying to make a deal with each other and the NHL for years before the Thrashers relocated. It has also been confirmed in interviews with Mark Chipman that the most recent "Coyotes to Winnipeg" rumours did in fact have some weight to them, and they were prepared to move the Coyotes to Winnipeg in May of 2011 until the City of Glendale agreed to cover losses. I believe that was the NHL's way of getting out of Phoenix without being the bad guy and it didn't work.

So what does this have to do with Québec? I believe the previous owners of the Thrashers were growing impatient at the fact that True North wanted purchase the Thrashers and move them to Winnipeg, but the NHL wasn't allowing it. The NHL then said "Ok, we will allow the Coyotes to be moved to Winnipeg and we will allow the Thrashers to move to Québec and everyone is happy.

THEN the City of Glendale agreed to cover losses for the 2011-2012 season, and that left True North waiting in Winnipeg with no franchise, but with a promise (the promise is a confirmed fact) that they will get the next available team. I believe that promise was made with the intent that the Coyotes would only last one more season and then they would become the next available team.

Shortly after that I believe there was some sort of contract dispute behind closed doors that prevented the Thrashers from moving to Québec.... this is not confirmed, but I believe it's true.

At this point I believe the Thrashers ownership said "You wouldn't let us sell to Winnipeg, now we can't sell to Québec for atleast another season, and it top it all off, True North is sitting in Winnipeg with a bunch of cash and no team because the Coyotes are staying in Glendale with no owner for another season. Either let us sell to True North now or we will declare bankruptcy, and you will then have 2 teams in limbo."

So if my theory is correct it seems that the NHL already has it's sights set on Québec, which means they must have a plan in place.

However, if my theory is correct, the reason why the Thrashers didn't move to Québec is important. I heard it was because of a contract dispute that was only effective for one more season....which means it would no longer prevent a team from moving to Québec next season.

If my theory is accurate, except the dispute was over the building of a new arena, that could be bad news for Québec, but that's not what I believe the dispute was over.

So my point is Québec was / is already on the radar....Again, that is just my opinion... I am not just making it up as I go but I can't really confirm anything because it's just my opinion based on everything that was happening around the time the Thrashers sale was made.... so don't get all friggity-****ed if my opinion doesn't gel with you.

And just for the record.... I am Canadian and I would like to see a team back in Québec.... I would have rather the Coyotes went to Winnipeg but Québec deserves a team. That being said, without knowing anything about the arena / ownership situation in Seattle, if this team stays in the USA I think I would prefer to see them go to Seattle vs anywhere else.
So, what Canadian wouldn't want a team. Yawn.

Scottrocks58* is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:44 AM
  #38
AZcoyotes33
Registered User
 
AZcoyotes33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssmatik View Post
Glendale's beleaguered Westgate City Center should get a shot of consumer energy later this year, when Tanger Factory Outlet Centers Inc. opens a new outlet mall on the site.

http://www.azcentral.com/business/ar...-glendale.html
This could really impact the ownership issue. Getting people out to Glendale will go along way with bringing in fans. It definitely doesnt hurt the situation.

AZcoyotes33 is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 10:26 AM
  #39
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
The NHL has said repeatedly that they WILL NOT lose money on any sale of the team in PHX. Following the certain additional losses this year the NHL will need to discount the purchase price by at least 80MM, something they will not do. Based on the present and anticipated future revenue streams of this franchise no buyer in their right mind is going to pay anything over 100MM for a franchise known for low ticket prices, a poor lease agreement, poor arena location and high operating expenses. Don`t forget the Coyotes in their present form are operating with a bare bones staff and doing everything possible to save money. Yet still they lose a large amount of money. Anew owner will need to boost staff, raise ticket prices and find away to combat the issue of an arena in the middle of nowhere. These are all real obstacles that a buyer will be confronted with, none of them have an easy answer.

As for Bickley, this guy is a real tool! To say that the NHL has not begun to vet other potential cities and sites is a joke and speaks to his naivete. Bettman is a terrible ambassador for this sport and has contributed mightily to the fact that as many as 16 teams are currently losing money. But, you can be sure he has a long and deep file on potential sites, to say he does not is poor journalism.

mesamonster is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 10:34 AM
  #40
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
With Seattle also in the mix, why would GB accept an offer that loses the NHL money in PHX when he could relocate and make money?

mesamonster is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 10:52 AM
  #41
gra
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 27,295
vCash: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesamonster View Post
With Seattle also in the mix, why would GB accept an offer that loses the NHL money in PHX when he could relocate and make money?
Excatly!!! Sadly the NHL is getting away with the BS they have been pulling not only because of the garbage in the media but also because of how stupid Judge Balm is to not upholding the origional lease in the 1st place. If only that judge bothered to read up on the rulings on the Penguins and Islanders leases for there would be no way the team can fold and more. Last I checked when it comes time to have the debts paid the goverment is supposed to get paid in full 1st over anyone in the private sector. People can't get their Public Student loans discharged in bankruptcy but can usually get a discharge on private debt even with the harder restrictions in place signed into law by George Bush. So why is it that rich business men seem to be entitled to an exception(such as the BK filing by Moyes and both him and NHL never seeking COG getting all of the money owed to them in court) here and Judge Balm ruling saw to it that the private sector got paid in full while his ruling left a huge risk to the Glendale Taxpayer in the process?

Our legal system in the United States can be a real joke at times.

gra is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 11:47 AM
  #42
Naurutger
Registered User
 
Naurutger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maricopa County
Country: United States
Posts: 5,722
vCash: 1454
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesamonster View Post
With Seattle also in the mix, why would GB accept an offer that loses the NHL money in PHX when he could relocate and make money?
How is the Wild doing? You should focus your support on your team.

Naurutger is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:16 PM
  #43
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,342
vCash: 500
QC might not be that great of a relo after all http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ontent=2341657

I knew something stunk...ha ha they don't even have a reasonable piece of dirt to put their new sparkling arena.

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:39 PM
  #44
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 47,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTippett View Post
QC might not be that great of a relo after all http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ontent=2341657

I knew something stunk...ha ha they don't even have a reasonable piece of dirt to put their new sparkling arena.
Actually it seems like it might be a pretty easy fix...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrix78 View Post
Do you remember when Brunt said :




Now, according to a radio station in Quebec City (FM93)

The city is now planning to build the new arena on the ring of the former hippodrome.

Why ? Because they are evaluating the field decontamination process would cost way too much and they must include it in the 400M $ budget.

The ring of the hippodrome would be free of any environmental issue.
If it is confirmed, we could expect a ground-breaking very soon in the next months.

Mayor Labeaume was questioned about this and he didn't want to say anything. He just said that we will know everything around March 31 (this is when the contract between Quebecor and the city will be sealed for the next 25 years and we should learn what the building will look like, etc.)


rt is online now  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:42 PM
  #45
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by naurutger View Post
How is the Wild doing? You should focus your support on your team.
The Wild are a horrible team with no chance of making the playoffs! Despite the losing streak and the hopelessness of the season they continue to sell 90% of their seats. The Wild has an average ticket price over $50, yet will lose close to 10MM this year. Ask yourself if that is the economic reality in Minny, what is the economic reality of the PHX situation? Thanks for asking it proves my point once again, the Coyotes no matter who owns them and as long as they remain in Glendale they will always lose money-nobody wants that burden.

mesamonster is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:43 PM
  #46
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,342
vCash: 500
what the **** is a hippodrome? a place where hippos ****?

edit:

Quote:
Wikipedia: A hippodrome (Greek: ἱππόδρομος) was a Greek stadium for horse racing and chariot racing. The name is derived from the Greek words "hippos (ἵππος; "horse") and "dromos" (δρόμος; "race" or "course"). Some present-day horse racing tracks are also called hippodromes, for example the Central Moscow Hippodrome.
sooooooooo QC once was part of the Roman Empire?

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:48 PM
  #47
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 47,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTippett View Post
what the **** is a hippodrome? a place where hippos ****?

edit:



sooooooooo QC once was part of the Roman Empire?
There are a lot of horse tracks called hippodromes.

rt is online now  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:51 PM
  #48
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
There are a lot of horse tracks called hippodromes.
ok but is it Canadians just trying to be "European" by calling it a Hippodrom and not a HORSE TRACK like everyone else?

this saga has us so exhausted we are arguing etymology now.

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 12:52 PM
  #49
Scottrocks58*
Six
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTippett View Post
QC might not be that great of a relo after all http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ontent=2341657

I knew something stunk...ha ha they don't even have a reasonable piece of dirt to put their new sparkling arena.
Leave it to them to further advance the state of Hockey. Glow in the dark NHL arenas. It will cut down the cost of lighting and give the ice that beautiful radioactive blue hue.

Scottrocks58* is offline  
Old
02-17-2012, 01:04 PM
  #50
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 47,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTippett View Post
ok but is it Canadians just trying to be "European" by calling it a Hippodrom and not a HORSE TRACK like everyone else?

this saga has us so exhausted we are arguing etymology now.
Perhaps the substitution of terms is more common in French. We are talking about Quebec City Quebec like a hundred years ago. Things there probably aren't much like things here.

I don't know. I have no idea. In any event, its across the street from le colisee, and apparently a good site to build on. That's all.

rt is online now  
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 02:06 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.