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 LXV: The word is... give me a minute.... "Omnishambles"... "Omnishambles"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2012, 12:49 PM
  #176
sipowicz
The Original
 
sipowicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,659
vCash: 1989
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
Anyone know if Bettman, Daly, or Jamison will be in attendance on Tues?

Generally, the outcome of votes is known in advance of the actual meeting. Also generally speaking, interested parties do not show up if they know the vote is going against them.

Just a thought for consideration.
The presence of little Bettman and silent Bill at a COG meeting has never amounted to more than a hill of beans.

sipowicz is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:02 PM
  #177
checkerdome
Registered User
 
checkerdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 848
vCash: 500
Any predictions for what will ensue from the meeting tomorrow?

checkerdome is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:20 PM
  #178
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by preissingg View Post
Any predictions for what will ensue from the meeting tomorrow?
Hilarity.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:11 PM
  #179
ajmidd12
Know-It-All
 
ajmidd12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hungover
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,553
vCash: 204
Hilarity will ensue for sure!

And Killion congrats (again) on becoming moderator. Go easy on us

ajmidd12 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:18 PM
  #180
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 21,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmidd12 View Post
And Killion congrats (again) on becoming moderator. Go easy on us
out of retirement, not for the well behaved here,
you/we/me dont need much, but elsewhere?

you cant do that on hf.

Killion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:36 PM
  #181
GordonGraham
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
Im sure this has been mentionned but if im right As of right now its 3-2 for the team staying

If it ends up 3-3 what will happen?

GordonGraham is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 02:53 PM
  #182
Wonko the Sane
It's you not me.
 
Wonko the Sane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Outside the Asylum
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,898
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonGraham View Post
Im sure this has been mentionned but if im right As of right now its 3-2 for the team staying

If it ends up 3-3 what will happen?
The deal withers. It needs a majority to pass, a tie means the status quo (no lease in this case) will continue.


Last edited by Wonko the Sane: 11-26-2012 at 02:56 PM. Reason: sp
Wonko the Sane is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:03 PM
  #183
checkerdome
Registered User
 
checkerdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
out of retirement, not for the well behaved here,
you/we/me dont need much, but elsewhere?

you cant do that on hf.
LOL(oops!!)

checkerdome is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:06 PM
  #184
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mungman View Post
The deal withers. It needs a majority to pass, a tie means the status quo (no lease in this case) will continue.
Is that accurate? I've heard others say that a tie would become a postiive vote because an absent council seat is an automatic yes.

What is the actual rule in case of a council tie?

cheswick is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:19 PM
  #185
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,844
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
What is the actual rule in case of a council tie?
That's been the question. There is nothing in the CoG Charter that mentions ties ( where other cities do mention ties ).

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:25 PM
  #186
Wonko the Sane
It's you not me.
 
Wonko the Sane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Outside the Asylum
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,898
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Is that accurate? I've heard others say that a tie would become a postiive vote because an absent council seat is an automatic yes.

What is the actual rule in case of a council tie?
Again (and again and again) that provision only comes into play in the case where a councillor is present at the meeting and chooses not to cast a vote on a matter before the council (the seat is occupied but does not cast a vote one way or the other (this is the mythical "automatic yea" everyone speaks of)). It has no effect in the case where a member is absent from council that day, in that case there is just one less vote cast (i.e. it is neither yea or nay).

This is my understanding of the machinations of the CoG system of so called "governance" (I use the term very loosely in the case of CoG).

Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
That's been the question. There is nothing in the CoG Charter that mentions ties ( where other cities do mention ties ).
General tradition in these cases without a definite written rule is for a tie to default to the "status quo". In this case the status quo is no lease in place so that should continue in that case. If (as way of an example) there were a lease with a large subsidy in place and a faction of the council wanted to direct the city manager to negotiate an early exit from the deal but the vote ended in a tie the status quo would prevail and the lease would remain intact.

In the Canadian Parliament the tradition is that a tie is broken by the vote of the speaker (who only votes in the case of a tie), the speaker (who can be from any of the parties in the house) should generally vote to maintain the status quo.

Quote:
On May 19, 2005, the Speaker was required to cast the tie-breaking vote during a confidence measure for the first time in Canadian history. Faced with the defeat of Paul Martin's minority government, Milliken voted in favour of the NDP budget amendment. Despite popular belief that the Speaker, as a Liberal MP, would automatically support the government, his vote was pre-determined by other factors. As Speaker, Milliken's vote must be cast to allow the continuation of debate, or to maintain the status quo. Thus, the Speaker voted in favour of second reading, "to allow the House time for further debate so that it can make its own decision at some future time." The bill would later pass third reading without the need for Milliken's vote.

Speakers have only needed to vote in order to break a tie 11 times in Canadian parliamentary history. Milliken did so so on six occasions, more than all previous Speakers combined.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker...ommons_(Canada)


Last edited by Wonko the Sane: 11-26-2012 at 03:38 PM.
Wonko the Sane is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 03:40 PM
  #187
calmdown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major4Boarding View Post
Monday:
Yes nice week beginning...
http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agen...das/112612.pdf

Tuesday:
http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agen...das/112712.pdf

Wednesday:
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/86...gree-mediation

What a timing

calmdown is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:29 PM
  #188
ajmidd12
Know-It-All
 
ajmidd12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hungover
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,553
vCash: 204
Interesting....

Quote:
1. The NHL team stays in Glendale for 20 years, the same amount of time remaining on the
original bonds for the arena.
2. The city receives 15% of the naming rights revenue of the arena and 15% from
advertising revenue for city-owned parking spaces
3. The city pays an average arena management fee of $15 million per year which was net
present valued at $188.3 million using a 6.5% discount rate.
4. The total payment for the first five years is $71 million compared to $95 million in
previous agreement.
5. Performance standard specifies a minimum of 40 hockey games and 30 non-hockey
events each fiscal year with an average attendance of not less than 7,000 patrons to the
non-hockey events.
6. Penalty – In the event that the Arena Manager does not through its efforts cause 30
Arena Manager Events to occur at the Arena, the Management Fee next due from the
city to Arena Manager will be reduced by an amount equal to $25,000 multiplied by the
difference between the actual and the minimum standard.
7. The Arena Manager will pay the city $60,000 for every game not played during the
season caused by a lock out or player’s strike.
8. If the Arena Manager produces an additional 20 events above the 30 events outlined in
the performance standards, the Arena Manager will be paid an additional $500,000.
#1 - this makes sense, though Jamison isn't stupid enough to guarantee 20 years.

#2 - Anyone know what the naming rights are worth? Would be curious to see what this "15%" they are getting actually is in dollars and cents.

#3 - Where did these numbers come from? There math is way off, $15M per year at 20 years isn't $188.3M, there is no way JIG agrees to this much of a discount.

#4 - the deal appears to be back loaded now in lieu of the previous front loaded one.

#5 - how can anyone guarantee that an event will draw more than 7000 patrons? That's a ******** clause.

#6 - does that mean if JIG fails to provide 30 events he will be charged $750,000 as a penalty?

#7 - we already know the penalty for no hockey is approximately $2.4M (40 games x $60,000).

#8 - Where do they expect to get an additional $500,000 per year if JIG exceeds the expectations?!?!

To recap, this means JIG can pay a "penalty" rate of $3.15M per year and receive $11-$15M for the years with a lockout. Seems like a great return on income if you ask me and he has to do absolutely NOTHING.

What gets me is they reference that without the team 750 jobs are lost, but without Jamison performing to the contract standards the people are still jobless that doesn't change, he can sit back and collect his cheques!


Last edited by ajmidd12: 11-26-2012 at 04:34 PM.
ajmidd12 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:42 PM
  #189
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,844
vCash: 350
^^^^^^

As much as I find it unlikely that Jamison would go out of his way to run the arena with the same incompetence that the NHL has..... There is something missing in this. I just have a feeling that after the CoG signs off and gives Jamison his lease and pile O' money, that in a couple of years the CoG is going to have one of those eureka moments and realize the true level that they are being played.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:49 PM
  #190
madhi19
Registered User
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
^^^^^^

As much as I find it unlikely that Jamison would go out of his way to run the arena with the same incompetence that the NHL has..... There is something missing in this. I just have a feeling that after the CoG signs off and gives Jamison his lease and pile O' money, that in a couple of years the CoG is going to have one of those eureka moments and realize the true level that they are being played.
GWI will jump one the second point. A true management deal would likely give 15% of the sale of the naming right to the manager not the other way around.

madhi19 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:03 PM
  #191
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sipowicz View Post
The presence of little Bettman and silent Bill at a COG meeting has never amounted to more than a hill of beans.
Daly was at the meeting when they approved the second $25 million though. My boy Arthur Thurston called him out.

aqib is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:21 PM
  #192
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
GWI will jump one the second point. A true management deal would likely give 15% of the sale of the naming right to the manager not the other way around.
not really. the naming rights deals typically go to the teams. Besides they only get $2.5 million a year from jobing.com.

aqib is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:49 PM
  #193
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmidd12 View Post
#1 - this makes sense, though Jamison isn't stupid enough to guarantee 20 years.
No chance that Glendale makes this kind of commitment without that kind of guarantee from Jamison. Basically, if things don't work out, the only way out of the lease is through bankruptcy, in which the investors lose everything they've invested.

Quote:
#3 - Where did these numbers come from? There math is way off, $15M per year at 20 years isn't $188.3M, there is no way JIG agrees to this much of a discount.
You need to google "net present value." $15m in 2032 is not the same amount of money as $15m in 2012.

Quote:
#4 - the deal appears to be back loaded now in lieu of the previous front loaded one.
Sort of, but not really. The overall dollar payments will increase, but you'll understand more if you can figure out what inflation is.

Quote:
#5 - how can anyone guarantee that an event will draw more than 7000 patrons? That's a ******** clause.
There is no guarantee. If an event draws less than 7000 patrons, it doesn't count as one of the total.

Quote:
#6 - does that mean if JIG fails to provide 30 events he will be charged $750,000 as a penalty?
uhh no. If he only gets 29 events, he pays $25K. If he only gets 28 events, he pays $50k. The only way he'd pay $750,00 is if he fails to book any events that meet the standard.

Quote:
#8 - Where do they expect to get an additional $500,000 per year if JIG exceeds the expectations?!?!
Likely out of their cut of event revenues.


Quote:
To recap, this means JIG can pay a "penalty" rate of $3.15M per year and receive $11-$15M for the years with a lockout. Seems like a great return on income if you ask me and he has to do absolutely NOTHING.

What gets me is they reference that without the team 750 jobs are lost, but without Jamison performing to the contract standards the people are still jobless that doesn't change, he can sit back and collect his cheques!
Yes, the city takes a haircut if there is a lockout. But if they increased penalties, they'd probably have a hard time explaining how it's how it's not a direct subsidy instead of a management agreement.

You seem to believe that Jamison can just sit back and collect paycheques without any costs. If he runs the team into the ground, that subsidy will look small in comparison to his losses.

Ernie is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:53 PM
  #194
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
According to Clark's Twitter if there is a tie the motion fails:

Joyce Clark ‏@clarkjv

@KJ_Radke Doesn't matter. Vote will be either 3-3 and fail for lack of majority or 4-2 and pass. I have no idea which way vote will go.
Hide conversation

Reply
Retweet
Favorite
More

12:17 PM - 26 Nov 12 Details

aqib is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:06 PM
  #195
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,462
vCash: 500
I've stayed out of this thread since the lockout started, but it's safe to assume that absolutely nothing of substance either way has happened and we're exactly where we stood in May when Jamison was announced as saviour?

McRib is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:17 PM
  #196
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 21,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
I've stayed out of this thread since the lockout started, but it's safe to assume that absolutely nothing of substance either way has happened and we're exactly where we stood in May when Jamison was announced as saviour?
Not quite. There has been some movement, events. Further negotiations, a revised Lease & Arena Management Agreement. Ed Beasleys retired. There was a Tax Petition, an Election, the Lockout of course....

Killion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:25 PM
  #197
checkerdome
Registered User
 
checkerdome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 848
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=ajmidd12;56051021]Interesting....

...#1 - this makes sense, though Jamison isn't stupid enough to guarantee 20 years."

...or young enough.

checkerdome is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:26 PM
  #198
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
So I see Killion's on-again-off-again moderator career is back on again. Interesting.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:31 PM
  #199
ajmidd12
Know-It-All
 
ajmidd12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hungover
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,553
vCash: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
No chance that Glendale makes this kind of commitment without that kind of guarantee from Jamison. Basically, if things don't work out, the only way out of the lease is through bankruptcy, in which the investors lose everything they've invested.
They have done it once, who is to say they won't again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
You need to google "net present value." $15m in 2032 is not the same amount of money as $15m in 2012.
I know what "net present value" is, the thing is that $300M is still $300M no matter what way you look at it. Hell $1 could be worth $500 in the year 2032, that doesn't change that its only worth $1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Sort of, but not really. The overall dollar payments will increase, but you'll understand more if you can figure out what inflation is.
I'm not sure you understand clearly. The deal used to be $95M in the first 5 years, now it's $71M it doesn't take a genius to conclude that the additional $24M will be paid out over the remaining 15 years of the 20 year lease.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
There is no guarantee. If an event draws less than 7000 patrons, it doesn't count as one of the total.
That's my point. They can have all the school graduations they want, it still doesn't count. But that is entirely besides the argument as Jamison is laughing either way, he books an event, makes money off it. He doesn't book events he pays a very small fine. He's still collecting annually regardless how you look at it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
uhh no. If he only gets 29 events, he pays $25K. If he only gets 28 events, he pays $50k. The only way he'd pay $750,00 is if he fails to book any events that meet the standard.
Umm yes. 30 x $25,000 = $750,000 my point was Jamison doesn't need to book anything, just deduct $750,000 from his annual subsid.... err AMF. That's it, he's laughing otherwise!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Likely out of their cut of event revenues.
Revenues?!?! The team hasn't turned a profit in 15 years, how are they magically going to start earning money. Plus the City is still on the hook for the bond repayment regardless what happens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Yes, the city takes a haircut if there is a lockout. But if they increased penalties, they'd probably have a hard time explaining how it's how it's not a direct subsidy instead of a management agreement.

You seem to believe that Jamison can just sit back and collect paycheques without any costs. If he runs the team into the ground, that subsidy will look small in comparison to his losses.
It's pretty clear to anyone (besides Clark) that this is a direct subsidy regardless how you or anyone else sugar coats it. The fact remains the CoG shot themselves in the foot when the $6M Management Fee was released, anything over and above is nothing more than a subsidy.

Jamison can easily book the 40 hockey nights and call it a day, he's still pocketing over $14M / season while collecting ticket revenue, merchandise sales revenue, parking revenue, etc. Jamison would break even annually without lifting a finger.

*EDIT* Mesa can I pay you to attend tomorrow's meeting to speak about the absurdity of this deal? Just make sure you shout out to HF Boards


Last edited by ajmidd12: 11-26-2012 at 06:55 PM.
ajmidd12 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:08 PM
  #200
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 21,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
So I see Killion's on-again-off-again moderator career is back on again. Interesting.
... Multiple Personality Disorder. Last few weeks I was Jesse James. On the run. This week I think Im Wyatt Earp, but for next, Im thinking of doing that whole Elliot Ness thing. Flying down to Chicago, looking up Greg Jamisons' "Bankers". 141 West Jackson Boulevard. Suite 500. Operating as Peak6 L.P. Search Warrants being signed as we speak.

Killion 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 06:57 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.