HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

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

Forbes: Phoenix Coyotes $170 Million Sale To Be Partially Funded By NHL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-30-2013, 08:35 PM
  #76
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,746
vCash: 500
I could be wrong on this but a quick calculation shows that if the RSE paid $6M (Glendale AMF) annually on the $120M loan at 9% it'd go like this:



Last edited by Fugu: 05-30-2013 at 09:14 PM. Reason: resurrected
Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 09:08 PM
  #77
mikelvl
Registered User
 
mikelvl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
The NHL screwing Québec City is something we are getting used to. Maybe we can start a NA conference of the KHL here... **** you NHL...
The NHL wants expansion fees from Quebec City. They don't get that if they relocate a team there. They want to keep Phoenix on life support until Seattle is ready.

mikelvl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 09:24 PM
  #78
Pilky01
Registered User
 
Pilky01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
The NHL wants expansion fees from Quebec City. They don't get that if they relocate a team there. They want to keep Phoenix on life support until Seattle is ready.
And Quebec fans should feel okay about that because....?

Pilky01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 09:25 PM
  #79
LeafShark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
The NHL wants expansion fees from Quebec City. They don't get that if they relocate a team there. They want to keep Phoenix on life support until Seattle is ready.
The NHL can sell the team for $170M, and then double dip and add a $60M relocation fee like Winnipeg. You can't charge one market more than another during a two team expansion, optics don't look the greatest. There's also the added privilege of removing a money loser. Quebec City is ready now, and net, there wouldn't be a substantial difference between relocation and expansion. The only legitimate reason for the NHL to wait is if they think for some reason, the temporary arena is not adequate.

LeafShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 10:23 PM
  #80
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
* NHL to loan an additional $85 MM (to be used as working capital)
What. The. ****?

There must be some kind of background reason for working this hard to keep the team there. NBC...?

  Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 10:56 PM
  #81
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 36,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
What. The. ****?

There must be some kind of background reason for working this hard to keep the team there. NBC...?

That perhaps, or just not having a ready landing spot at the moment. I know our posters thing there are spots that are ready, but that may not be accurate. Also, it could be the BOG. I remember hearing some whispers about them not being convinced QC was somewhere they wished to return the NHL. They also were lukewarm about Kansas City back when AEG was trying to find a team for that arena. Obviously, they preferred moving a team that was to be relocated to Winnipeg over KC. The only other ready landing spot is Hamilton.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 11:01 PM
  #82
Slashers98
Registered User
 
Slashers98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
That perhaps, or just not having a ready landing spot at the moment. I know our posters thing there are spots that are ready, but that may not be accurate. Also, it could be the BOG. I remember hearing some whispers about them not being convinced QC was somewhere they wished to return the NHL. They also were lukewarm about Kansas City back when AEG was trying to find a team for that arena. Obviously, they preferred moving a team that was to be relocated to Winnipeg over KC. The only other ready landing spot is Hamilton.
That's only speculation on your part at this point. I never heard any governor against a relocation to Quebec City.

We all know QC is not Bettman's plan A, but after seeing the mess he's getting into with that scam deal, I am not certain we are more like plan Z

Slashers98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 11:06 PM
  #83
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I remember hearing some whispers about them not being convinced QC was somewhere they wished to return the NHL.
If they're willing to sell a team for $45M and take back a huge mortgage on top of it, I'd say that's pretty compelling evidence they're just not interested in relocating to QC.

Holding pattern for Seattle, I guess...?

  Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 11:10 PM
  #84
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 36,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slashers98 View Post
That's only speculation on your part at this point. I never heard any governor against a relocation to Quebec City.

We all know QC is not Bettman's plan A, but after seeing the mess he's getting into with that scam deal, I am not certain we are more like plan Z
No, it's not complete speculation. I do remember reading an article somewhere about some BOG members not being enamored of a move to QC. I couldn't hope to remember when/where I read it. Probably last year sometime. I also recall the year following the Lemieux visit to KC, there was the mention about several BOG members being lukewarm about that city as well.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 11:15 PM
  #85
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 36,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
If they're willing to sell a team for $45M and take back a huge mortgage on top of it, I'd say that's pretty compelling evidence they're just not interested in relocating to QC.

Holding pattern for Seattle, I guess...?

Devellano let it slip several years ago that Vegas was definitely on the docket when the league chose to expand. That plan may have changed due to economic considerations, and that some of the initial arena plans and Bruckheimer's involvement seemed to dissipate (or-- I haven't heard anything more since 2008). This also predates the Phoenix debacle.

From a purely financial perspective, and other than the Leafs objection, the no brainer market is greater Toronto. The expansion fee alone would set an NHL record. However, I know I put a lot into the alignment and no one is going to change my mind, but I think they need two additional teams there and they know that, plus they have to have someone they can swap (Tampa perhaps).

I'd say Seattle, Portland, and Vegas are the most likely to get consideration, assuming owners can be found.


Edit: from the Hansen thread, a report that NBA would return to Seattle in 24 months. This deal seems to be structured for 5 yrs.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-30-2013, 11:33 PM
  #86
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
The NHL wants expansion fees from Quebec City. They don't get that if they relocate a team there. They want to keep Phoenix on life support until Seattle is ready.
What's the difference between the two though? The NHL owns the Coyotes so they are receiving the money anyway right, whether by sale or expansion.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 01:05 AM
  #87
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
 
TheTakedown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 10,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
What's the difference between the two though? The NHL owns the Coyotes so they are receiving the money anyway right, whether by sale or expansion.
Receving THEIR money back is not the same as receiving a check for $XXX million for an expansion team...

TheTakedown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 06:08 AM
  #88
NORiculous
Registered User
 
NORiculous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,942
vCash: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by azaloum90 View Post
Receving THEIR money back is not the same as receiving a check for $XXX million for an expansion team...
There is no financial dif if the expasion comes from Qc and sale to Seatle or if the expasion comes from Seatle and the sale is to Qc.

NORiculous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 08:37 AM
  #89
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NORiculous View Post
There is no financial dif if the expasion comes from Qc and sale to Seatle or if the expasion comes from Seatle and the sale is to Qc.
That's what I'm getting at. Your getting the Quebec money either now or later. Unless one is open to the players getting a cut vs the NHL keeping the whole amount, what's the difference?

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 09:22 AM
  #90
tony d
Irish Spring Soap
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 57,480
vCash: 500
As I said before I figured Phoenix was going to stay put. It's a darn shame that Bettman will do all he can to save what is not a hockey market when there's some good hockey markets out there that would support a team far better than Phoenix ever would.

__________________


Celebrating 10 yrs. at hfboards today. Thanks everyone for making the past decade so memorable. Here's to 10 more years.
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 09:43 AM
  #91
Slashers98
Registered User
 
Slashers98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony d View Post
As I said before I figured Phoenix was going to stay put. It's a darn shame that Bettman will do all he can to save what is not a hockey market when there's some good hockey markets out there that would support a team far better than Phoenix ever would.
What makes you think Phoenix will stay put?

Slashers98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 09:49 AM
  #92
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 12,286
vCash: 500
This seems like another Hail Mary pass to me. I don't see how this really affects a potential move to QC. If QC is the only landing spot for this distressed asset, that's where they'll land. Whether or not Bettman really wants that. Kind of like how Winnipeg positioned itself to be the only alternative.

Ugmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 10:04 AM
  #93
Pilky01
Registered User
 
Pilky01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
The roundtable on Prime Time Sports this evening should be great entertainment.

Pilky01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 11:00 AM
  #94
NORiculous
Registered User
 
NORiculous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,942
vCash: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony d View Post
As I said before I figured Phoenix was going to stay put. It's a darn shame that Bettman will do all he can to save what is not a hockey market when there's some good hockey markets out there that would support a team far better than Phoenix ever would.
That is what some people would call leadership. I remember an old Star Trek voyager episode where captain janeway said you have 3 rules to always follow as a captain.

1. Go down with the ship
2. Keep your shirt tucked in
3. Never leave a crew member behind

Anyway, I'm not trying to say this is why GB is doing what he is, but its food for thought.

NORiculous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 11:08 AM
  #95
HamiltonFan
bettman's a Weasel
 
HamiltonFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
No, it's not complete speculation. I do remember reading an article somewhere about some BOG members not being enamored of a move to QC. I couldn't hope to remember when/where I read it. Probably last year sometime. I also recall the year following the Lemieux visit to KC, there was the mention about several BOG members being lukewarm about that city as well.
I highly doubt that the nhl is lukewarm on KC, USA, per se.

The problem with KC presently is that the nhl business model in non traditional American markets is predicated upon the nhl team receiving free use of an arena built with public money. The nhl team then collects profits from that arena on non nhl events in order to subsidize the millions of dollars in operating losses that the nhl team incurs. KC has indeed built that arena but the mayor has come out aggressively and said that there will be no subsidy for an nhl team, that they would have to pay fair value for rent. This makes nhl hockey a non starter in KC for any reasonable potential owner. Make no mistake, if the nhl could find some sucker owner who would be willing to pay what KC wants in rent, and incur the inevitable 10's of million dollars in losses, then the nhl would be in KC faster than you can say 'NBC'.

HamiltonFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 11:30 AM
  #96
madhi19
Just the tip!
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NORiculous View Post
That is what some people would call leadership. I remember an old Star Trek voyager episode where captain jainway (how ever that is spelled) said you have 3 rules to always follow as a captain.

1. Go down with the ship
2. Keep your shirt tucked in
3. Never leave a crew member behind

Anyway, I'm not trying to say this is why GB is doing what he is, but its food for thought.
4. Always know where your towel is!

madhi19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 01:09 PM
  #97
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 36,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamiltonFan View Post
I highly doubt that the nhl is lukewarm on KC, USA, per se.

The problem with KC presently is that the nhl business model in non traditional American markets is predicated upon the nhl team receiving free use of an arena built with public money. The nhl team then collects profits from that arena on non nhl events in order to subsidize the millions of dollars in operating losses that the nhl team incurs. KC has indeed built that arena but the mayor has come out aggressively and said that there will be no subsidy for an nhl team, that they would have to pay fair value for rent. This makes nhl hockey a non starter in KC for any reasonable potential owner. Make no mistake, if the nhl could find some sucker owner who would be willing to pay what KC wants in rent, and incur the inevitable 10's of million dollars in losses, then the nhl would be in KC faster than you can say 'NBC'.

I'm just relaying what I read. I believe the source was Lieweke, and that he was urging some of them to tour the arena, etc. AEG, at that time, had a deal with the city of KC to find an anchor tenant (since lapsed, iirc).

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 01:19 PM
  #98
Shawa666
Registered User
 
Shawa666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Québec, Qc, Ca
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NORiculous View Post
That is what some people would call leadership. I remember an old Star Trek voyager episode where captain janeway said you have 3 rules to always follow as a captain.

1. Go down with the ship
2. Keep your shirt tucked in
3. Never leave a crew member behind

Anyway, I'm not trying to say this is why GB is doing what he is, but its food for thought.
MMmm, what about Winnipeg 1, Hartford, Québec 1?


Oh right, they didn't fit in "The Plan"

Shawa666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 01:28 PM
  #99
GF
Registered User
 
GF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NORiculous View Post
That is what some people would call leadership. I remember an old Star Trek voyager episode where captain janeway said you have 3 rules to always follow as a captain.

1. Go down with the ship
2. Keep your shirt tucked in
3. Never leave a crew member behind

Anyway, I'm not trying to say this is why GB is doing what he is, but its food for thought.
Well Bettman certainly has that one covered in Glendale.
His stubborness to keep this dying franchise alive already cost him (what was left of) his reputation, and probably his job when the BOG finally get tired of him (I can't believe he lasted that long honestly).

GF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2013, 01:44 PM
  #100
Jonjmc
Registered User
 
Jonjmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 1,495
vCash: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawa666 View Post
MMmm, what about Winnipeg 1, Hartford, Québec 1?


Oh right, they didn't fit in "The Plan"
Those were WHA franchises in locations that were not chosen by the NHL, I'm not really sure why people seem to forget that.

Jonjmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:26 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.