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 LXXIV: Be Seeing You

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-18-2013, 12:19 PM
  #701
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
for starters, might have something to do with their having been retained by Ed Beasley upon Michael Reinsdorfs recommendation at just under the $50,000 limit thereby not requiring council approval to conduct a study of the arena in the fall of 2008, receiving $48,000 for a piece of work that basically came to these 2 brilliant conclusions & suggestions
When Baum allowed Moyes counsel to question Reinsdorf, a bit of a different story came out:

- Beasley hired IFG (M.Reinsdorf) to conduct a review of Moyes operations at Jobing.com
- IFG recommended Beacon conduct the study
- Beacon spent a whopping three days in Glendale, mostly meeting with Beasley and Reinsdorf, then reported that Moyes mismanaged the facility, leased office space, etc.

Isn't the point of hiring a consultant getting a report that shows exactly what you want to see? Beacon is a conduit, not a player. Beasley needed something to discredit Moyes and grease the wheels for a revised arena lease with Reinsdorf. Still to this day, people who talk a lot but don't know much fault Moyes based on the content of the Beacon Feasibility Report. $48k well spent, wouldn't you say?

The circumstances and the city staff have changed considerably since 2009. Currently, Beacon is retained to find an arena solution that gives the city some revenue and doesn't exceed $6MM in fees. It's very likely that Beacon will deliver exactly that via SMG or another qualified facility management company. It's unlikely that the solution will include the Coyotes because ownership wasn't viable at $15MM + essentially all revenues from the building. It stands to reason that there wont be any interest at $6MM + revenue split.

The wildcard seems to be that the NHL might not have any place to put this team. Which means they'll either have to utilize their AMUL recourse, obsolete the RFP, collect the $6MM, and run it themselves in Glendale; or contract it.

Glendale 2.0 (Weiers et al) seem to understand the leverage the city has. They gave the league until mid-April to produce an owner. Not a vague Gary and Bill promise like the ones that were always good enough to win over imbeciles like Frate and Clark; a legitimate ownership offer. The league couldn't do it. So, the city went out to bid. If the NHL is pinched and contraction is a non-starter, Glendale could very well end up keeping the anchor tenant in the building for a few more seasons at a reasonable $6MM level of expense.

The league has until May 24 to make chicken salad out of this. We'll see what the big brains in NYC come up with. Or maybe I've got it all wrong and the league has a soft landing in Quebec City waiting for them and they'll be a press conference a week from tomorrow.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:27 PM
  #702
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
Given that the NHL spent a grand total of $14,000 on marketing and booking in 2012...
Fourteen grand after receiving $25M. Is that not just mind blowing? Honestly, it just doesnt get any more bent than that.

Killion is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:00 PM
  #703
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
The league has until May 24 to make chicken salad out of this. We'll see what the big brains in NYC come up with. Or maybe I've got it all wrong and the league has a soft landing in Quebec City waiting for them and they'll be a press conference a week from tomorrow.
I pretty much agree with your entire post.

Regarding the soft landing, however, it would seem to me that they're more likely waiting on Seattle, rather than QC. Reason? They can pull the trigger on a QC relocation at anytime, and since we're at the end of the season and the team has been out of the playoffs for some time, there really isn't any compelling reason to wait.

Anyway, it's nice to see the city finally standing up for itself. Hope it all works out for them.

 
Old
04-18-2013, 01:28 PM
  #704
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,102
vCash: 500
So, if what I'm reading here is jiving in my head properly-NHL have dug themselves a nice little hole here where they may have to make a decision about if contraction is feasable, selling to an outside buyer/relocation is feasable, or run the team themselves for at least another year.

Can someone remind me-why is May 24 such a big deal? Is that the latest they could "relocate" the team in time for that team starting next season?

Tinalera is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 02:04 PM
  #705
JMT21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinalera View Post
So, if what I'm reading here is jiving in my head properly-NHL have dug themselves a nice little hole here where they may have to make a decision about if contraction is feasable, selling to an outside buyer/relocation is feasable, or run the team themselves for at least another year.

Can someone remind me-why is May 24 such a big deal? Is that the latest they could "relocate" the team in time for that team starting next season?
I believe that date was thrown around because the announcement of the Thrashers being sold to the Jets officially came of May 31, 2011.

Delaying a relocation announcement past June 1st would make it very difficult for Quebec (or any other city for that matter) to be fully prepared for puck drop in October.

JMT21 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 02:21 PM
  #706
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
The wildcard seems to be that the NHL might not have any place to put this team. Which means they'll either have to utilize their AMUL recourse, obsolete the RFP, collect the $6MM, and run it themselves in Glendale; or contract it.

Glendale 2.0 (Weiers et al) seem to understand the leverage the city has. They gave the league until mid-April to produce an owner. Not a vague Gary and Bill promise like the ones that were always good enough to win over imbeciles like Frate and Clark; a legitimate ownership offer. The league couldn't do it. So, the city went out to bid. If the NHL is pinched and contraction is a non-starter, Glendale could very well end up keeping the anchor tenant in the building for a few more seasons at a reasonable $6MM level of expense.
To me the question would be... if the NHL has no choice but to keep the team in Glendale for another year or two and run the arena, would they do it for $6MM? It is a reasonable amount for the CoG, but if memory serves, the NHL has been asking the CoG for $25MM per year. Now we all know the the NHL gave the city to say they are managing the arena, but we all also know the NHL wants the money to offset the costs of running the team. I just don't see the NHL being arena managers for just $6MM.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 02:27 PM
  #707
JimAnchower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinalera View Post
Can someone remind me-why is May 24 such a big deal? Is that the latest they could "relocate" the team in time for that team starting next season?
May 24 is the last date to submit an offer for the AMF according to the city. But in general, sometime in late May or early June would seem to be the deadline for a relocation to take place. The new owners will want to get a general manager and a coach in place so they can prepare for the draft and free agency. The team will have to fix up the arenas, whether it is Key Arena and Colisee, to NHL and NHLPA standards. The schedule makers will need time to figure out the schedule, both in terms of who plays where and when, but also getting the dates open to host the game at the arena and, perhaps, hotels. Ticket sales drives will also need to be done, in addition to getting local tv deals, corporate sponsorship, etc, even if it would be easy. There is a lot that needs to be done to relocate a team and the new owner will want as much time as possible to make it successful.

JimAnchower is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:24 PM
  #708
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,820
vCash: 500
If the city didn't want to give the NHL the management contract even for the price of 6 million, would it still be possible the team stays and the league receives nothing? The city may not want the league running the place, based on past performance.

Confucius is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:36 PM
  #709
mesamonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimAnchower View Post
May 24 is the last date to submit an offer for the AMF according to the city. But in general, sometime in late May or early June would seem to be the deadline for a relocation to take place. The new owners will want to get a general manager and a coach in place so they can prepare for the draft and free agency. The team will have to fix up the arenas, whether it is Key Arena and Colisee, to NHL and NHLPA standards. The schedule makers will need time to figure out the schedule, both in terms of who plays where and when, but also getting the dates open to host the game at the arena and, perhaps, hotels. Ticket sales drives will also need to be done, in addition to getting local tv deals, corporate sponsorship, etc, even if it would be easy. There is a lot that needs to be done to relocate a team and the new owner will want as much time as possible to make it successful.
Keeping the team in Glendale for another year or more presents a myriad of issues for them! Perhaps most pressing would be the replacement of Tipett and Maloney, not to mention the Fa`s that will likely leave and those who will never consider the team from elsewhere! Imagine, minor league coaching and a compromised roster would create, amongst other things, a horrendous PR nightmare for the midget and the BOG.

mesamonster is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:44 PM
  #710
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
FWIW... Global currently manages the UoP Stadium next door. The NFL Cardinals have their own entity Rojo Management which has some tie in as well (concessions... etc.). Rojo is also looking to manage a facility (playing fields) there that Glendale owns as part of their attempt to move the Cardinals pre-season camp to Glendale.
Supplemental:

It looks like the NFL pre-season deal is having some issues.

The Glendale well is looking awfully dry.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:04 PM
  #711
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimAnchower View Post
May 24 is the last date to submit an offer for the AMF according to the city. But in general, sometime in late May or early June would seem to be the deadline for a relocation to take place. The new owners will want to get a general manager and a coach in place so they can prepare for the draft and free agency. The team will have to fix up the arenas, whether it is Key Arena and Colisee, to NHL and NHLPA standards. The schedule makers will need time to figure out the schedule, both in terms of who plays where and when, but also getting the dates open to host the game at the arena and, perhaps, hotels. Ticket sales drives will also need to be done, in addition to getting local tv deals, corporate sponsorship, etc, even if it would be easy. There is a lot that needs to be done to relocate a team and the new owner will want as much time as possible to make it successful.
Thank to you and JMT for the responses Gives me some perspective on it.

We'll see where the next month or so takes us.

Tinalera is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:07 PM
  #712
OthmarAmmann
Money making machine
 
OthmarAmmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
Supplemental:

It looks like the NFL pre-season deal is having some issues.

The Glendale well is looking awfully dry.
So Bidwell is looking for the city to build a parking garage in order to move the training camp? Didn't he sue for that?

OthmarAmmann is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:38 PM
  #713
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 23,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas L View Post
So Bidwell is looking for the city to build a parking garage in order to move the training camp? Didn't he sue for that?
Sorta kinda. As I recall, a Parking Garage was promised by Ellman & he'd put $25M in escrow to cover the costs. However, when he fell way behind and was being fined 10's of thousands of millions of dollars by Glendale (which he never paid of course) an arrangement was made whereby the $25M was split, $12.5M to The Ellman, $12.5M to the COG. Again, memorys hazy, but I believe this was done in order to curry favour from Steve-O pursuant to the then proposed CFD, he then promising to facilitate such with his tenants at Westgate, COG wipes out his fines (sorta like having a friend on the police force making your parking tickets disappear I suppose), scrubbing the Parking Garage & returning the money in escrow (which pretty sure wasnt even his money to begin with, some poor sap of a long forgotten investor). So the Parking Garage plans were extinguished despite having promised them to the Bidwell's, then when Tanger moved in & developed their mall, some 6000 spots were wiped out, Bidwells then threatening to sue with a $50M claim against Glendale.... and so here we are TL.

Be seeing you...


Last edited by Killion: 04-18-2013 at 05:43 PM.
Killion is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 06:40 PM
  #714
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
Supplemental:

It looks like the NFL pre-season deal is having some issues.

The Glendale well is looking awfully dry.
Hadn't seen that article yet, CF... thanks for posting the link.

Heh..... yeah there's been more than a few monkey wrenches been thrown into the works.

I think the Cardinals overplayed themselves and now they're stuck. they jerked NAU around to the point its president has officially told them to get lost and he isn't going back on that decision.

They're wanting to get more perks out of Glendale, despite the fact Glendale gave them the go ahead to develop around the stadium on their own as they chose to. But as you said the well's dry there.

TheLegend is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 06:51 PM
  #715
TheLegend
Megathread Refugee
 
TheLegend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Anxiety Closet
Country: United States
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas L View Post
So Bidwell is looking for the city to build a parking garage in order to move the training camp? Didn't he sue for that?
Glendale is required to provide 6,000 parking spaces for the Cardinal's use (be it Westgate, or other nearby sites). Tanger Outlets took a chunk out of the spaces they originally had, so the Bidwills sued hoping they could force Glendale into building two parking garages for them. But instead Glendale was able to lease land close enough to the stadium to replace those spaces (at a LOT less money).

The Bidwill family owns a large amount of land south of the stadium and has the approval from the city to develop it as they please. They could build their own parking garages and charge for them if they wanted to, but why do that if they can prod someone else into doing (and paying for) it instead???


Last edited by TheLegend: 04-18-2013 at 06:57 PM.
TheLegend is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 07:36 PM
  #716
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Why would I or anyone have an "issue" with Beacon?... well, lets see here now; for starters, might have something to do with their having been retained by Ed Beasley upon Michael Reinsdorfs recommendation at just under the $50,000 limit thereby not requiring council approval to conduct a study of the arena in the fall of 2008, receiving $48,000 for a piece of work that basically came to these 2 brilliant conclusions & suggestions;

1) The Coyotes must sell more tickets, luxury suites & sponsorships.
2) The Coyotes Arena Management Team must book more non-hockey events.

Not exact quotes, but pretty close. Appeared to be written by a narcoleptic Grade 12 student hoping to take course's in sports management at a low level rural belt community college who's mainline curriculums feature things like Outboard Motor Mechanics & Marina Management, Veterinarian Secretarial Sciences & so on, all sensible & practical things to be pursuing in comparison. So there ya go, $48,000.00 for that. About 3 pages in length.... are you frikin kiddin me do I have problem with Beacon?

Sordid connections to Michael Reinsdorfs company IFG. Funny business & bad behaviour in Florida, Texas & California (elsewhere as well, including other jurisdictions in Az) including law suits loaded with accusations of some pretty sleazy actions by Beacon & or some of its principals & players. So ya, you'll just have to excuse me all ta Hell for having a "problem" with Beacon here Tommy. So far so good, lets just see how this thing plays out. 80% of the time they'll run it straight. Remains to be seen if there isnt some sort of a Dog Leg built into the course theyve designed here as the Authors & Gatekeeper's to the RFP. We'll see, but these Boys, they have "history". Ignore that at your own peril.

Note; of course AEG, GS & SMG manage all kinds of facilities without anchor tenants, some strictly entertainment venues from Vegas to Branson. I have no idea why you would feel it neccessary to point that out to me or anyone else here, like, Duh. Theyve got full-on entertainment booking & production services but tell ya what? Youve got your head up your ass if you think for one second that any one of them "doesnt care" whether or not theres an NHL/NBA tenant in an arena (note that, ARENA, indoor A.R.E.N.A. With an ice plant. 17,500+ seater, all the bells & whistles in an 'A' market. NHL or NBA tenant installed or city wanting one; then you get into different classifications of market sizing, specific types of venues, seating capacities etc etc etc; show theatres, show lounges, dinner theatres, casino's, cultural centres, on & on). I dont know where you'd get such an idea.
You made a statement that these arena managers are beholding to the NHL and NBA. I am pointing out they are not and could really care less about the NHL and the NBA unless it will make them money. They are not in arena management to lose money. The NHL and NBA TOGETHER would barely be a fortune 500 company. Not what you would call big business.

I will adress the 50k statement below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
When Baum allowed Moyes counsel to question Reinsdorf, a bit of a different story came out:

- Beasley hired IFG (M.Reinsdorf) to conduct a review of Moyes operations at Jobing.com
- IFG recommended Beacon conduct the study
- Beacon spent a whopping three days in Glendale, mostly meeting with Beasley and Reinsdorf, then reported that Moyes mismanaged the facility, leased office space, etc.

Isn't the point of hiring a consultant getting a report that shows exactly what you want to see? Beacon is a conduit, not a player. Beasley needed something to discredit Moyes and grease the wheels for a revised arena lease with Reinsdorf. Still to this day, people who talk a lot but don't know much fault Moyes based on the content of the Beacon Feasibility Report. $48k well spent, wouldn't you say?

The circumstances and the city staff have changed considerably since 2009. Currently, Beacon is retained to find an arena solution that gives the city some revenue and doesn't exceed $6MM in fees. It's very likely that Beacon will deliver exactly that via SMG or another qualified facility management company. It's unlikely that the solution will include the Coyotes because ownership wasn't viable at $15MM + essentially all revenues from the building. It stands to reason that there wont be any interest at $6MM + revenue split.

The wildcard seems to be that the NHL might not have any place to put this team. Which means they'll either have to utilize their AMUL recourse, obsolete the RFP, collect the $6MM, and run it themselves in Glendale; or contract it.

Glendale 2.0 (Weiers et al) seem to understand the leverage the city has. They gave the league until mid-April to produce an owner. Not a vague Gary and Bill promise like the ones that were always good enough to win over imbeciles like Frate and Clark; a legitimate ownership offer. The league couldn't do it. So, the city went out to bid. If the NHL is pinched and contraction is a non-starter, Glendale could very well end up keeping the anchor tenant in the building for a few more seasons at a reasonable $6MM level of expense.

The league has until May 24 to make chicken salad out of this. We'll see what the big brains in NYC come up with. Or maybe I've got it all wrong and the league has a soft landing in Quebec City waiting for them and they'll be a press conference a week from tomorrow.
A 50k contract gets about 2 weeks of ONE senior level consultant's time and about a week of a junior level person.

A lot can be done in a 50k contract however it does not allow for a deep dive. A contract of that size is typically used to confirm or deny a supposition. In this case, Beasely felt like the arena was being mismanaged and Moyes was BSing about the losses. Beacon came in and confirmed that it was not being properly managed. It did NOT confirm if there were better managers out there or if Reinsdorf or the NHL would be better managers.

As for the RFP, again, all of the responses are public records and even though Beacon is the one who drafted the RFP and published it, it does not mean they will be evaluating the results or negotiating any type of final contract.

Tommy Hawk is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:25 PM
  #717
Llama19
Registered User
 
Llama19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Outside GZ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,554
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post

The Bidwill family owns a large amount of land south of the stadium and has the approval from the city to develop it as they please. They could build their own parking garages and charge for them if they wanted to, but why do that if they can prod someone else into doing (and paying for) it instead???
"When it comes to parking, the Bidwills are contractually bound to build parking garages to replace any of the 14,000 parking spaces displaced by the[ir] development."

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/business/ab...dwill1028.html

The Bidwills want to build over 4.6 million square feet of offices, two hotels, and two apartment complexes on what are now parking lots around the stadium, that's a bigger footprint then the 1.7 million square foot UoP stadium!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Sorta kinda. As I recall, a Parking Garage was promised by Ellman & he'd put $25M in escrow to cover the costs. However, when he fell way behind and was being fined 10's of thousands of millions of dollars by Glendale (which he never paid of course) an arrangement was made whereby the $25M was split, $12.5M to The Ellman, $12.5M to the COG.
You are correct, and Clark stated, "it was a "coup" for Glendale to negotiate to keep half of it. "That wasn't our money. It was someone else's money," she said.""

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...otes-deal.html

Be seeing you!


Last edited by Llama19: 04-18-2013 at 08:28 PM. Reason: Adding square footage
Llama19 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:25 PM
  #718
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yukon Joe View Post
TNSE (now owners of the Jets) were asked about buying Nashville when they went through their ownership issues 5-6 years ago. The proposal was that TNSE would buy the team, operate them in Nashville for a year, then relocate the team to Winnipeg.

TNSE turned the NHL down. They did not want to operate a team in a different market.
So I asked one of my friends who happens to hail from the Peg, and he sent me this:

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/spo...dators-coyotes

take it for what its worth.

aqib is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:33 PM
  #719
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
Glendale is required to provide 6,000 parking spaces for the Cardinal's use (be it Westgate, or other nearby sites). Tanger Outlets took a chunk out of the spaces they originally had, so the Bidwills sued hoping they could force Glendale into building two parking garages for them. But instead Glendale was able to lease land close enough to the stadium to replace those spaces (at a LOT less money).

The Bidwill family owns a large amount of land south of the stadium and has the approval from the city to develop it as they please. They could build their own parking garages and charge for them if they wanted to, but why do that if they can prod someone else into doing (and paying for) it instead???
Well why would they build parking garages used 10 times a year, when you can put something on the land that generates revenue more regularly (at some point it will be worth something) also garages are expensive to build.

aqib is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:37 PM
  #720
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqib View Post
So I asked one of my friends who happens to hail from the Peg, and he sent me this:

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/spo...dators-coyotes

take it for what its worth.

Oh, so the team could have been moved, maybe more quickly than the 7 yr requirement Balsillie got. I see a trace of blue bootprints walking away from the scene...


Quote:
“It was just purely exploratory,” Chipman said. “Their ownership was looking to sell that team and they were in a position where the team could not only have been sold but moved. In the end, very quickly, a local ownership group emerged and as you have seen, that’s the NHL’s M.O. — they don’t like teams moving.
“When the ownership group emerged there, that was the end of the discussion.”

Fugu is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:52 PM
  #721
Acesolid
The Illusive Bettman
 
Acesolid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,820
vCash: 500
Maybe it's important, maybe it isn't;

But the if the coyotes lose tonight to the Blues their playoffs odds (according to sportsclubstats) fall to somwhere around nil: 0.6 percent.

They're close to mathematical elimination, and if Dreger is right and a decision is taken before the playoffs... This might move things along.

Acesolid is online now  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:07 PM
  #722
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Hawk View Post
Beacon came in and confirmed that it was not being properly managed. It did NOT confirm if there were better managers out there...
You can't make a determination that someone is mismanaging without first/simultaneously either determining or assuming that there are better managers out there.

 
Old
04-18-2013, 10:04 PM
  #723
AllByDesign
Thomas who?
 
AllByDesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Location, Location!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
The league has until May 24 to make chicken salad out of this. We'll see what the big brains in NYC come up with. Or maybe I've got it all wrong and the league has a soft landing in Quebec City waiting for them and they'll be a press conference a week from tomorrow.
I don't know how soft their landing is, but my money says that have an exit strategy primed and ready to execute.

I suppose we will see in the days following the final Coyotes game of the season.

AllByDesign is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:39 PM
  #724
Hull and Oates
Registered User
 
Hull and Oates's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 80
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLegend View Post
I think the Cardinals overplayed themselves and now they're stuck. they jerked NAU around to the point its president has officially told them to get lost and he isn't going back on that decision.
That's a shame, because this looked awesome.


Hull and Oates is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:41 PM
  #725
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
You can't make a determination that someone is mismanaging without first/simultaneously either determining or assuming that there are better managers out there.
That is not a true statement. I can make a determination using leading business practices. I do not have to know if someone can do better in Glendale or not, I can tell if they are using leading practices or if something looks off compared to normal business practices.

Tommy Hawk 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 02:02 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.