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 Financial/Ownership Situation #6

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-10-2009, 02:45 PM
  #276
bobbop
Henrik's Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LT View Post
If all you have is potential owners that want huge concessions to take advantage of the situation, then whats the point.
That's the downsiode of bankruptcy. Nobody pays what is fair; they pay what they need to acquire the asset. All three groups are looking to take advantage of the situation. Reinsdorf+ and Ice Edge see the opportunity to get a major league team at a rock bottom price. Balsillie sees a side door to buy an asset and move it to a place where it would have much greater value for him. Nobody's a shining knight here. And if Moyes had such a good bankruptcy attorney he should have known up front up all this would happen.

bobbop is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 03:28 PM
  #277
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matzel View Post
I agree in principal with what you said except for the notion that plunking another team into Ontario (i.e. Hamilton) does not (help to) grow the fan base. This is not quite correct, in my opinion.

True, the population as a whole is already hockey crazy in that market, but the available product (Maple Leaf and Sabres tickets) does not keep up with demand, at this time.
You can't get ML tickets on most nights and if you get one from a scalper, you pay a premium.

Adding another franchise *does* grow the league in the respect that tickets can be sold at a premium to hockey fans wanting to attend live NHL games.

The Phoenix market offers *potential*. The youth hockey movement and increase in hockey rinks in the GPA over the last decade, can be pointed at for an increased interest in the sport. I would say that it is too early to call the NHL in AZ a success or a failure. It has not had enough time to truly be established and too many factors have affected the process negatively.

However, I think that any new owner would want a deal in place with the CoG, where he gets an out in 5, 6 or 7 years, if the market has still not caught on. I would be totally OK with that. At some point, the market has to be able to support the franchise and the potential needs to be realized.
I agree with the tickets sold point, but it is a small piece of the economic pie. While more "tickets" to live games will be available and that will be an overall net revenue gain, dollars spent by those same fans on everything else hockey related gets shifted. Overall it might equate to revenue neutral or a small revenue gain with the introduction of a new team, but it's far more likely those revenues move away from Toronto and Buffalo and to the new team.

The argument has been SO fans are rabid, already financially support hockey in many other ways but just don't have access to tickets. Now they would, but those other dollars they spend will be drawn away from other teams, which is why Toronto and Buffalo in this case are adamant that their revenues will be negatively impacted.

They'll also argue ticket revenues will be impacted by fans who stop going to Leafs or Sabres games and go to the games closer to where they live. Doesn't sound like Toronto will have a problem selling more tickets, but Buffalo certainly will. So Toronto ticket revs are neutral, Buffalo's fall, and non-ticket revenues now going to those teams have to drop.

RR is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 04:34 PM
  #278
RR
Moderator
 
RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cave Creek, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
No, the poster was talking about revenue not losses:

"The revenue is WAY out of whack when Moyes is using the Coyotes to line the pockets of Swift Transportation."

While I agree both revenue and expenditures need to be addressed when working toward profit, it remains seriously doubtful that the Coyotes can accrue enough revenue to ever make a profit in Phoenix which is exactly why Reinsdorf's bid is structured so that the City of Glendale is on the hook for any losses and the team can be moved if those losses continue.
Completely disagree. A team that is managed properly, is successful on the ice, gets some playoff games, is professionally marketed, and better utilizes its opportunity to generate revenue off other Arena events, is not seriously doubtful at all.

Someone like Reinsdorf who has been successful in other major sports is the best candidate at this point, and he also has established relationships he can draw upon -- broadcast contacts; cross-promotion opportunities with his White Sox and Bulls; other MLB and NBA franchises (local and national); a spring training complex in Glendale shared with the Dodgers; understanding that the NHL season occurs during the peak months of tourist season here, including spring training baseball; and that 8 of MLBs 30 teams spring train in the West Valley. That's a lot of untapped opportunity and you'd have to live here to understand that no Coyotes ownership group has ever aggressively gone after those dollars. Reinsdorf will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
Your assertion that " the NHL needs markets like Phoenix to be successful" is very curious to say the least. Why do you think that way? Would the league be any worse off if the Coyotes folded tomorrow? If you believe that, I'd like to see your logic.
If you don't accept the business model of growing the game financially by expanding its reach geographically, then it isn't logical. You don't need Phoenix or any of the other markets where hockey is relatively new. Instead, you'd contract up to half the league's teams, abandon attempts to build up those markets, and let the NHL return to minor sports league status with teams in Canada, Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, and New York/New Jersey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
As for why I have posted in this thread, I came here to try and get an understanding of what the fan base is thinking about this situation. Here's what I think I've learned so far.

- Jim Balsille is the devil incarnate
- Moyes is a very bad man and has been stealing money (even though it is his own money)
- The team has been badly mismanaged (no dispute from me)
- If the Coyotes make a run deep into the playoffs in the next 5 years the fans will show up (not likely to happen with such a young team)
-There is general support for a surcharge on transactions at Westgate even though the Cardinals appear to be opposed.
- There is a belief that the NHL can't be successful without a team in Phoenix.

I'd also be curious what "false assumptions" you believe I'm laboring under.
The Moyes situation involving moving revenues and expenses around is very complicated. Understand his principal business is Swift Transportation. He paid $3.3B for it in 2007 financed through high-yield bonds that were issued at virtually the same time the economy started to tank. He had huge obligations that needed to be met and Swift operating capital dropped to frighteningly low levels.

It appears he created some revenue streams for his other companies -- Coyotes paying for unneeded office space; and inflating charges for travel to the team (his team, nothing wrong with that), to name two -- that were unnecessary expenses. It also appears he shifted Swift expenses to his other entities. Nothing wrong with that, everyone does it. The goal was to prop up Swift and keep it afloat and attractive to bond investors.

It also made sense for him to operate the hockey team close to the line to assure revenue sharing dollars coming in. By "expensing" much of the cost to run the Coyotes to his businesses, he kept the cash-flow in-house and could count on date-specific rev share dollars to come in.

If you look closely at the Swift story you'll see that the significant acceleration in the cost to operate the Coyotes directly coincides with his acquisition of Swift, which immediately was in trouble. I think it was Morgan-Stanley in late 2007 that said the Swift LBO was its worst deal of the decade. And Forbes reported earlier this year that the $3.3B Swift of 2007 is now worth about a fourth of that.

Bottom line is Moyes has been fighting like hell to keep his trucking empire alive, leaving less time to focus on things like the Coyotes. When he bought the team it represented 2-3% of his empire. Hardly worth expending a lot of time and money on when the principal business was so challenged.

I'm not in the Moyes is evil or Balsillie is devil incarnate camps, but I do believe both are disingenuous opportunists who will do anything, say anything, and step on anyone who gets in their way.

As to the surcharge, I don't know of anyone who is excited about it. But if it's a mechanism that works for the City and keeps the Coyotes here, so be it. And the Cardinals will drop their opposition to it when they get a cut of the proceeds.

RR is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 06:30 PM
  #279
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 7,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RousselRising View Post
understanding that the NHL season occurs during the peak months of tourist season here, including spring training baseball; and that 8 of MLBs 30 teams spring train in the West Valley.
Imagine the Coyotes actually being in the hunt for playoffs in March, right in the middle of spring training. Talk about opportunity!

Sinurgy is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 08:09 PM
  #280
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RousselRising View Post
I agree with the tickets sold point, but it is a small piece of the economic pie. While more "tickets" to live games will be available and that will be an overall net revenue gain, dollars spent by those same fans on everything else hockey related gets shifted. Overall it might equate to revenue neutral or a small revenue gain with the introduction of a new team, but it's far more likely those revenues move away from Toronto and Buffalo and to the new team.

The argument has been SO fans are rabid, already financially support hockey in many other ways but just don't have access to tickets. Now they would, but those other dollars they spend will be drawn away from other teams, which is why Toronto and Buffalo in this case are adamant that their revenues will be negatively impacted.

They'll also argue ticket revenues will be impacted by fans who stop going to Leafs or Sabres games and go to the games closer to where they live. Doesn't sound like Toronto will have a problem selling more tickets, but Buffalo certainly will. So Toronto ticket revs are neutral, Buffalo's fall, and non-ticket revenues now going to those teams have to drop.
One very big issue you're missing here is revenue sharing. Another team in Ontario wouldn't need or qualify for it and Im' guessing the Coyotes will always need it to survive unless their revenue stream from ticket sales and broadcast rights soars dramatically.

dashingsilverfox* is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 08:27 PM
  #281
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RousselRising View Post
Completely disagree. A team that is managed properly, is successful on the ice, gets some playoff games, is professionally marketed, and better utilizes its opportunity to generate revenue off other Arena events, is not seriously doubtful at all.

Someone like Reinsdorf who has been successful in other major sports is the best candidate at this point, and he also has established relationships he can draw upon -- broadcast contacts; cross-promotion opportunities with his White Sox and Bulls; other MLB and NBA franchises (local and national); a spring training complex in Glendale shared with the Dodgers; understanding that the NHL season occurs during the peak months of tourist season here, including spring training baseball; and that 8 of MLBs 30 teams spring train in the West Valley. That's a lot of untapped opportunity and you'd have to live here to understand that no Coyotes ownership group has ever aggressively gone after those dollars. Reinsdorf will.



If you don't accept the business model of growing the game financially by expanding its reach geographically, then it isn't logical. You don't need Phoenix or any of the other markets where hockey is relatively new. Instead, you'd contract up to half the league's teams, abandon attempts to build up those markets, and let the NHL return to minor sports league status with teams in Canada, Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, and New York/New Jersey.



The Moyes situation involving moving revenues and expenses around is very complicated. Understand his principal business is Swift Transportation. He paid $3.3B for it in 2007 financed through high-yield bonds that were issued at virtually the same time the economy started to tank. He had huge obligations that needed to be met and Swift operating capital dropped to frighteningly low levels.

It appears he created some revenue streams for his other companies -- Coyotes paying for unneeded office space; and inflating charges for travel to the team (his team, nothing wrong with that), to name two -- that were unnecessary expenses. It also appears he shifted Swift expenses to his other entities. Nothing wrong with that, everyone does it. The goal was to prop up Swift and keep it afloat and attractive to bond investors.

It also made sense for him to operate the hockey team close to the line to assure revenue sharing dollars coming in. By "expensing" much of the cost to run the Coyotes to his businesses, he kept the cash-flow in-house and could count on date-specific rev share dollars to come in.

If you look closely at the Swift story you'll see that the significant acceleration in the cost to operate the Coyotes directly coincides with his acquisition of Swift, which immediately was in trouble. I think it was Morgan-Stanley in late 2007 that said the Swift LBO was its worst deal of the decade. And Forbes reported earlier this year that the $3.3B Swift of 2007 is now worth about a fourth of that.

Bottom line is Moyes has been fighting like hell to keep his trucking empire alive, leaving less time to focus on things like the Coyotes. When he bought the team it represented 2-3% of his empire. Hardly worth expending a lot of time and money on when the principal business was so challenged.

I'm not in the Moyes is evil or Balsillie is devil incarnate camps, but I do believe both are disingenuous opportunists who will do anything, say anything, and step on anyone who gets in their way.

As to the surcharge, I don't know of anyone who is excited about it. But if it's a mechanism that works for the City and keeps the Coyotes here, so be it. And the Cardinals will drop their opposition to it when they get a cut of the proceeds.
Several issues here.

Nowhere did I say the NHL the NHL needs to contract to traditional markets or that growth in the game needs to avoid newer markets. The league has done quite well in some non-traditional markets, but not so well in others, Phoenix, Florida, Atlanta and TB among others. Both TB and Florida have been involved in the Stanley Cup finals but as soon as the team falls on harder times, as all eventually do, their fans abandon them.

I have an inkling about Moyes financial situation, since I've been following this very closely since Gary Bettman lied about the financial health of the Coyotes on HNIC but, as I said, and you've also indicated, what Moyes does with his own money, especially when he's lost it, is not the major concern here. He's taking his lumps.

What is a concern, going ahead, is the lack of fan, corporate and media support for the team. It appears you're more convinced that Reinsdorf is a white knight here than Reinsdorf himself is.

He's not only not putting any of his own money into the venture but he's also asking Glendale to assume all the risk and let him escape if the team is still losing money after five years.

If you're so sure Reinsdorf will be able to successfully take advantage of all the marketing opportunities just waiting for the plucking, why on earth would he also need a surcharge on every transaction at Westgate.

It appears to me, as an admitted outsider, that the taxpayers of Glendale about about to get taken for a very expensive ride here and five years from now, The Coyotes could well be playing somewhere else.

Remember, given the disarray of the team right now and how long it'll take for this to wind through the appeals process, that the clock will start ticking September 10th so that 5 year window will actually be considerably shorter.

Or are you of the opinion the Coyotes can be turned around on a dime and become a playoff contender and financially successful in what is likely about a 4 year window?

dashingsilverfox* is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 09:05 PM
  #282
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post

Or are you of the opinion the Coyotes can be turned around on a dime and become a playoff contender and financially successful in what is likely about a 4 year window?
We have two bidders that want to keep the team here that seem to think so. Say what you will of their means, but none the less they have found a way to keep the Coyotes stable, here. I tend to think that the sales tax would initially prop up the team and then become a major cash cow for all players (city, cards, yotes) so that goes directly to Reinsdorf's pocket. He'd essentially get a cut of all revenue generated at jobing.com, Westgate, spring training and Cardinal stadium. No strings attached, either. The man is a shark but a smart one at that. He sees a city desperate to keep their team and an opportunity to create another cash cow. He is buying when the market is at an all time low, as well.

If the team had made the playoffs the last 2 or 3 years we aren't having this conversation, that much is sure. The team on the ice is the least of their problems. We're quite literally a decent head coach away from the playoffs. It is not absurd to think that with the young talent we have the Coyotes could potentially be making regular trips deep into the post season.

****, even just one playoff series would invigorate the fan base.

XX is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 09:31 PM
  #283
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post
We have two bidders that want to keep the team here that seem to think so. Say what you will of their means, but none the less they have found a way to keep the Coyotes stable, here. I tend to think that the sales tax would initially prop up the team and then become a major cash cow for all players (city, cards, yotes) so that goes directly to Reinsdorf's pocket. He'd essentially get a cut of all revenue generated at jobing.com, Westgate, spring training and Cardinal stadium. No strings attached, either. The man is a shark but a smart one at that. He sees a city desperate to keep their team and an opportunity to create another cash cow. He is buying when the market is at an all time low, as well.

If the team had made the playoffs the last 2 or 3 years we aren't having this conversation, that much is sure. The team on the ice is the least of their problems. We're quite literally a decent head coach away from the playoffs. It is not absurd to think that with the young talent we have the Coyotes could potentially be making regular trips deep into the post season.

****, even just one playoff series would invigorate the fan base.
If the Coyotes has made the playoffs in the last 2 or 3 years, I doubt, at the ticket prices being charged, the team would be anywhere near the break even point. Here in Canada, where playoff tickets go for upwards of $200 a seat, a home playoff game generates about $1.5 in additional revenue.

It's going to take time to get close to break even IMO, it won't happen overnight or just through a coaching change. Building a solid fan base takes a lot longer than that.

Under the circumstances, Reinsdorf may be your best hope but it seems to me that there could be a backlash from taxpayers, the Goldwater Institute and others who have no interest in propping up a hockey team.

The last I heard, the Cardinals were adamantly opposed to the "surcharge" which, as I understand it, goes directly to Reinsdorf.

Is there updated information?

dashingsilverfox* is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 09:37 PM
  #284
Sinurgy
Embrace Passion
 
Sinurgy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 7,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post
****, even just one playoff series would invigorate the fan base.
What's a "playoff series"?

Sinurgy is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 09:41 PM
  #285
k1llua
 
k1llua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to k1llua
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinurgy View Post
What's a "playoff series"?
They tell me it's one of those things that has to do with playing hockey in April. I didn't believe it myself, considering that it involved saying "hockey" and "April" in the same sentence, but they insisted that what they were saying was true.

It still seems crazy to me.

k1llua is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 10:11 PM
  #286
Kaizen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Prince George B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinurgy View Post
What's a "playoff series"?
too funny.

Kaizen is offline  
Old
08-10-2009, 11:56 PM
  #287
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,325
vCash: 500
I need to go to confession:

I just put a limit order in for shares of RIMM (Blackberry) While I despise the Co-CEO, I really like the product they make and I feel on a pull back I could use the stock to diversify my portfolio. Am I bad Coyotes Fan? I really feel guilty about this...

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:11 AM
  #288
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTurris View Post
I need to go to confession:

I just put a limit order in for shares of RIMM (Blackberry) While I despise the Co-CEO, I really like the product they make and I feel on a pull back I could use the stock to diversify my portfolio. Am I bad Coyotes Fan? I really feel guilty about this...
I wouldn't. RIM is going to get destroyed the second the Verizon iPhone comes out. Talk about lost market share. I'm not sure how well Balsille's continuing little side venture of failing to get an NHL team and making just about everyone mad in the process reflects on the company, either. Then again, it could be a wash with the people who will buy his product now just to support the 'cause'.

XX is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:15 AM
  #289
SniperHF
Global Moderator
 
SniperHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 15,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post
I wouldn't. RIM is going to get destroyed the second the Verizon iPhone comes out. Talk about lost market share. I'm not sure how well Balsille's continuing little side venture of failing to get an NHL team and making just about everyone mad in the process reflects on the company, either. Then again, it could be a wash with the people who will buy his product now just to support the 'cause'.
As long as RIMM has the dominant market share of business phones using exchange e-mail, RIMM will be pretty strong.

Other companies have made progress in this area but are still not nearly at the level of RIMM. Until the playing field is level I would not worry.

SniperHF is online now  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:22 AM
  #290
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperHF View Post
As long as RIMM has the dominant market share of business phones using exchange e-mail, RIMM will be pretty strong.

Other companies have made progress in this area but are still not nearly at the level of RIMM. Until the playing field is level I would not worry.
Apple was late to the mp3 game and we all saw how that turned out.

XX is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:24 AM
  #291
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperHF View Post
As long as RIMM has the dominant market share of business phones using exchange e-mail, RIMM will be pretty strong.

Other companies have made progress in this area but are still not nearly at the level of RIMM. Until the playing field is level I would not worry.
Thats my point, I can't get my corporate email working on the iPhone like I can my Storm. Honestly the iPhone (& I have a touch) has pluses and minuses as does most BlackBerrys, the Storm is a pretty good phone. Besides, the Verizon iPhone is at least 2 years away, their working on a tablet thing this winter. I just envision a RIMM Pullback here in the coming weeks and I want to pounce.

IMO the Storm is a better product than the iPhone (minus the music feature)

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:31 AM
  #292
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTurris View Post
IMO the Storm is a better product than the iPhone (minus the music feature)


You're alone on that one. You could have cited something actually good like the Tour(9630) but the Storm? Good god man!

So yes, you should feel guilty.

XX is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:37 AM
  #293
DekeTretiak
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: State of Expectation
Country: Canada
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoCoyotes View Post
Communist
I'm assuming that your answer was serious, as there wasn't any smiley, so I'll answer seriously.

What is communistic is forcing a business to stay in a market regardless of profit or loss.

DekeTretiak is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:41 AM
  #294
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post


You're alone on that one. You could have cited something actually good like the Tour(9630) but the Storm? Good god man!

So yes, you should feel guilty.
Seriously, here IMO is why (again outside the music player). I have a iPod Touch and navigating the internet, specifically a web page is mind numbing sometimes how you accidental touch and open up a link you didn't want to. With the Storm I love the click-ie feature, no inadvertent hyper links opened. The Storm does Picture MMS, Like mentioned before corporate email. I find typing on it, with the click-ie feature, better - not accidentally typing the wrong letter. There are a couple softwear glitches so not to pain a perfect picture, but for me I love the phone. Plus the Blackberry exchanger server is so helpful to sync my offices computer and the phone. Plus the P/E ratio is much better on RIMM at the moment, or will be when my limit order goes threw.

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:43 AM
  #295
k1llua
 
k1llua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to k1llua
As long we're this phone tangent. I love my G1, I've only had it for two days, but I can pretty confidently say that Google got everything right with Android. If you want to talk dominant that's something that can be once more companies jump on the Android bandwagon.

k1llua is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:44 AM
  #296
SniperHF
Global Moderator
 
SniperHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 15,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post
Apple was late to the mp3 game and we all saw how that turned out.
Right and that is why I said AS LONG AS. Watch the stock, pull out when something better comes along. I'm not saying buy and hold RIMM For 20 years, that would be insane. But for a year or 3 could be a good buy.

Plus Apple had no one single target, they captured a sparse totally divided market on the PMP game. Right now if a purchasing department is looking to acquire phones for their company and e-mail is required, there is only one choice and everybody knows it. A much different environment than the one Apple took over on the PMP side.

No more OT posts from me.

SniperHF is online now  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:45 AM
  #297
TeamTippett
Formally TeamTurris
 
TeamTippett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Phx
Country: United States
Posts: 5,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1llua View Post
As long we're this phone tangent. I love my G1, I've only had it for two days, but I can pretty confidently say that Google got everything right with Android. If you want to talk dominant that's something that can be once more companies jump on the Android bandwagon.
Corporate email? IS it 3G B/c my perception of the TMobile was that their way behind the times on data transmission, no? I hear Motorola is supposedly coming out with a really nice Android Phone before too long. I have never picked up a G Phone, what does it do spectacularly?

TeamTippett is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 12:56 AM
  #298
k1llua
 
k1llua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to k1llua
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamTurris View Post
Corporate email? IS it 3G B/c my perception of the TMobile was that their way behind the times on data transmission, no? I hear Motorola is supposedly coming out with a really nice Android Phone before too long. I have never picked up a G Phone, what does it do spectacularly?
I'm not sure about corporate email, I've been pretty much a gmail only person and obviously it does that great. Which I'm pretty sure is Google's angle behind it. The 3G is a little spotty when I'm at home, but that probably has more with being on the ass end of Surprise, but everywhere else I've been it's worked pretty well. It pretty much just does everything well, everything is just fluid and works well together.

I haven't heard anything about Motorola, but I know Samsung and I think Sony are working on them. Android is pretty much set up so anyone can use it for their phone. I think they're taking the Microsoft angle where it doesn't matter who's hardware it is when your software is on every single one.

k1llua is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 01:05 AM
  #299
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 28,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1llua View Post
As long we're this phone tangent. I love my G1, I've only had it for two days, but I can pretty confidently say that Google got everything right with Android. If you want to talk dominant that's something that can be once more companies jump on the Android bandwagon.
Android is going to suffer a bit from the Linux paradox until they get enough market share. That is to say; all the features you could ever want, at a great price, but just no adaptation/apps/etc...


I think we need to petition for an OT sticky like every other forum has. It can be Pho's dumpster for all irrelevant posts!

XX is offline  
Old
08-11-2009, 01:22 AM
  #300
k1llua
 
k1llua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to k1llua
Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierX View Post
Android is going to suffer a bit from the Linux paradox until they get enough market share. That is to say; all the features you could ever want, at a great price, but just no adaptation/apps/etc...


I think we need to petition for an OT sticky like every other forum has. It can be Pho's dumpster for all irrelevant posts!
I think the openness that being built upon Linux will eventually solve the apps issues seeing as pretty much anyone can program their own app. Plus, I don't think Google/T-Mobile takes the cut from the sale of apps that Apple does.

k1llua 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 09:47 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.