The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Part X: Phoenix Coyotes - Between Scylla and Charybdis
That's one of greatest oversimplifications ever presented here.
You're not buying a team in Phoenix, with a clean slate, and the ability to put an arena where you think it'd be optimal (or have one built for you). You're buying a team in Glendale tied to the Jobing.com arena, from the NHL (with their own price), and in need of negotiating a lease with one party.
Is this equivalent to buying an expansion team in Phoenix? Or one that might have been placed in Scottsdale, per Elman's original plan?
I like "simple" Fugu. Unfortunately, the compliment of luggage trailing the Coyote Express surpasses the output of the Samsonite factory in Nashik, India in any given quarter. That being said, I think any incoming ownership group would pretty much have to be able to do so with a clean slate, reasonable accomadations from the COG & the NHL.
Remember, we do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. Think only of tomorrow. The market is more than viable with a fresh start/clean-slate in Glendale.
I like "simple" Fugu. Unfortunately, the compliment of luggage trailing the Coyote Express surpasses the output of the Samsonite factory in Nashik, India in any given quarter. That being said, I think any incoming ownership group would pretty much have to be able to do so with a clean slate, reasonable accomadations from the COG & the NHL.
Remember, we do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. Think only of tomorrow. The market is more than viable with a fresh start/clean-slate in Glendale.
Then why accept his MOU & reject IEH's in the first place?. Surely Beasley/Tindal were well aware of the onerous nature JR's Memorandum presented, yet they recommended it to Council, who voted 7-0 to proceed. No, it was JR that pulled the plug, though goodness knows' (?) for what reason. I agree with your hypothesis that he kept quiet about it, allowing Glendale to save face with the announcement that IE was back in the picture with an "exclusive" negotiating agreement, which they subsequently blew as a result of not being able to comply with in full disclosure of their TermSheet.
Killion, you might be right. But another possibility to consider is that maybe both Reinsdorf and Glendale liked the deal but they couldn't get the Westgate business owners signed up for the CFD provisions. Nobody really to blame, just the fiscal realities setting in? Also, if the Reinsdorf deal was suitable for Glendale and the CFD achievable, and Reinsdorf pulled out, why wouldn't IEH come back with the same deal? Presumably, Glendale was comfortable with the deal and it would have made the financial bar for IEH much lower and easier for them to close the deal with Glendale.
...we take it from those who fail to defend it sufficiently.
True. The meaning of "Winnipeg" in Cree circa 1800's was "place of muddy waters". Whats unclear to me is whether Winnipeg receives its franchise through relo or expansion. Its coming though, one way or t'other.
True. The meaning of "Winnipeg" in Cree circa 1800's was "place of muddy waters". Whats unclear to me is whether Winnipeg receives its franchise through relo or expansion. Its coming though, one way or t'other.
I'm not as sure that the NHL will consider expansion for Winnipeg, but personally I think that would be a better option for everyone. Clean slate, and all that...
But another possibility to consider is that maybe both Reinsdorf and Glendale liked the deal but they couldn't get the Westgate business owners signed up for the CFD provisions. Nobody really to blame, just the fiscal realities setting in? Also, if the Reinsdorf deal was suitable for Glendale and the CFD achievable, and Reinsdorf pulled out, why wouldn't IEH come back with the same deal?
Because it would seem to me you'd have crossed those t's & dotted those i's if you were Beasley/Tindal prior to recommending an MOU with so much at stake. As the City Manager & Council, they have a responsibility to make sure they can deliver on their "recommendation" to elected officials no?. It just makes everyone look like rank amateurs when things collapse like that.
Because it would seem to me you'd have crossed those t's & dotted those i's if you were Beasley/Tindal prior to recommending an MOU with so much at stake. As the City Manager & Council, they have a responsibility to make sure they can deliver on their "recommendation" to elected officials no?. It just makes everyone look like rank amateurs when things collapse like that.
And you would be surprised? I don't think that Glendale officials have covered themselves in glory for their astuteness thus far.
And you would be surprised? I don't think that Glendale officials have covered themselves in glory for their astuteness thus far.
I guess little surprises me, you or anyone else here anymore Whilee. But honestly, I cant imagine that kind of incompetence driving the lease negotiations/AMULA anywhere but over a cliff. What kind of City Mgr/GC "recommends" this, that or the other without absolutely making certain in advance, from Constitutional Lawyers to Ellman & the Westgate Merchants Association, Goldwater & the league in a general consensus that this, that or the other is doable & then make recommendations?. What kind of special brand of incompetency is that?. Something else had to have gone down that neither JR nor Glendale were able to control nor drive. Maybe the NHL?. 3yrs to come up with $68M?. Could be. Thing is, we'll likely never know, unless it goes nuclear & recriminations are voiced aloud.
When this is all said and done, I would love for someone to interview everyone and write a book about all the dealings that took place behind closed doors. It would make for facinating reading, don't ya think?
I guess little surprises me, you or anyone else here anymore Whilee. But honestly, I cant imagine that kind of incompetence driving the lease negotiations/AMULA anywhere but over a cliff. What kind of City Mgr/GC "recommends" this, that or the other without absolutely making certain in advance, from Constitutional Lawyers to Ellman & the Westgate Merchants Association, Goldwater & the league in a general consensus that this, that or the other is doable & then make recommendations?. What kind of special brand of incompetency is that?. Something else had to have gone down that neither JR nor Glendale were able to control nor drive. Maybe the NHL?. 3yrs to come up with $68M?. Could be. Thing is, we'll likely never know, unless it goes nuclear & recriminations are voiced aloud.
You would think, but sometimes desperation and poor judgement are close relatives in financial dealings. Doesn't it sound pretty optimistic to expect that a CFD will be able to provide Reinsdorf with up to $140 million over the first 3 years? If there was that much revenue to be extracted out of schemes based on extra charges to Coyotes fans and Westgate patrons, wouldn't someone have found a way to do that before now?
I'm not as sure that the NHL will consider expansion for Winnipeg, but personally I think that would be a better option for everyone. Clean slate, and all that...
clean slates can mean 30 straight games without a win and a total of 9 wins in the season circa 1981.
you guys in phoenix thought you had it bad.
it is interesting that of the last 6 franchise relocations in the NHL, only the winnipeg team didnt go on to win the stanley cup...calgary, new jersey, dallas, colorado and carolina all won the big prize after moving.
loser franchise...maybe a clean slate is better.
Last edited by peter sullivan: 08-11-2010 at 08:47 PM.
When this is all said and done, I would love for someone to interview everyone and write a book about all the dealings that took place behind closed doors. It would make for facinating reading, don't ya think?
Ya, I do. Doubt if anyone'll be talking though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee
If there was that much revenue to be extracted out of schemes based on extra charges to Coyotes fans and Westgate patrons, wouldn't someone have found a way to do that before now?
Actually, no. And I'm not being contrary just for the sake of being so. I'm quite confident in suggesting that with a hyper-aggressive, knowledgable & experienced in-house arena management division, fleet of foot hockey side (already their with Maloney & Tippet), media relations & promotional petrsonnel, revised game presentation & re-branding, sales & marketing team; $170M over 3yrs' is neither improbable nor impossible.
What kind of special brand of incompetency is that?.
I think that's his point - such incompetence is not very special at all, it's quite normal. "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity".
Actually, no. And I'm not being contrary just for the sake of being so. I'm quite confident in suggesting that with a hyper-aggressive, knowledgable & experienced in-house arena management division, fleet of foot hockey side (already their with Maloney & Tippet), media relations & promotional petrsonnel, revised game presentation & re-branding, sales & marketing team; $170M over 3yrs' is neither improbable nor impossible.
My point is that the Reinsdorf MOU wants to extract the $170 million over 3 years from revenue streams other than direct hockey revenue. The $170 million is the CFD-derived revenue, much of which comes from revenue sources other than hockey. So this is above and beyond increasing revenues from the Coyotes per se. Much of it will have to come from non-hockey fans that visit Westgate or other events at the arena. Doesn't that sound a bit more daunting?
When this is all said and done, I would love for someone to interview everyone and write a book about all the dealings that took place behind closed doors. It would make for facinating reading, don't ya think?
I'm thinking this whole scenario is gonna make a great read when is all is said and done-but the amount of detail? I was going to attempt to try and do an FAQ on this situation, but After slogging through the first 2 or 3 volumes of thread I just gave up...maybe if I have like a few months of free time!
I mean, where would one start? Do you start at the Bankruptcy? Do you try and find the first rumors of problems with the Yotes franchise? Do go so far back as to when the team left Winnipeg? Just trying to find the "starting point" is tough.
I agree a team in a different part of Phoenix may indeed be better off. Actually I said that about a year ago and the post got deleted. Mind you it was on the phoenix board. I think I said "Oh they'll be moving..to downtown Phoenix." Alot of posters got upset.
If you know anything about hockey, you'd realize that you don't cross the red line during the pre-game skate, and shoot pucks at their goalie.
Quote:
As the team sits now with it's baggage, there isn't any serious interest in owning it. I'm just restating the obvious if Glendale can sweeten the pot enough someone may buy the team. That's where we're at right now. The thing that I'm sure Glendale has thought of is, if the team moves. The NHL may come back to Phoenix in a few years but they won't come back to Glendale.
There is no point to Glendale sweetening the pot if the market is out of whack with having the team in that location. While they might be willing to try now that they're in for the pound, it's a continuation of artificial market supports that obfuscate the financial reality (potentially). The point is moot however, thanks to the Arizona laws on the subject. I just don't see any way around this particular conundrum.
My point is that the Reinsdorf MOU wants to extract the $170 million over 3 years from revenue streams other than direct hockey revenue. The $170 million is the CFD-derived revenue, much of which comes from revenue sources other than hockey. So this is above and beyond increasing revenues from the Coyotes per se. Much of it will have to come from non-hockey fans that visit Westgate or other events at the arena. Doesn't that sound a bit more daunting?
My understanding is that the hockey revenues were in fact a part of the whole. I agree that its a daunting task, however, as we discussed earlier jobbings' event schedule is almost empty & much much much more can be done to substantially increase bookings. Combine that with everything from parking to concessions, the CFD, a competitive on-ice product etc, glimmers of hope/optimism abound. The biggest problem IMHO is the NHL's inflexibility with regards price & terms. It'll be a really close shave if they dont provide wiggle room.
There is no point to Glendale sweetening the pot if the market is out of whack with having the team in that location. While they might be willing to try now that they're in for the pound, it's a continuation of artificial market supports that obfuscate the financial reality (potentially). The point is moot however, thanks to the Arizona laws on the subject. I just don't see any way around this particular conundrum.
And this is the truth, fortunate or unfortunate. It seems there may either be a white knight roam out of nowhere at the 12th hour to prevent the team from what currently seems like the inevitable (however, no shining armor on this knight...would just be doing it because Glendale cracks under pressure to do whatever to keep the team), or no way out for Glendale this season other than sitting in the lame duck bathtub...
Unfortunately, the compliment of luggage trailing the Coyote Express surpasses the output of the Samsonite factory in Nashik, India in any given quarter. That being said, I think any incoming ownership group would pretty much have to be able to do so with a clean slate, reasonable accomadations from the COG & the NHL.
