HFBoards

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

Phoenix XXI: When will then be now?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2011, 05:02 PM
  #251
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 10,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
This entire thread has boiled down once again to Canada good, Arizona bad. Even if the citizens of Arizona step up and do more to save a team from relocation than any Canadian city has done.
So exactly how have you (as a citizen) stepped up to do more to save a team from relocation?

- Have you bought more tickets?
- Payed more for your tickets?
- Gotten friends to buy tickets?

According to attendance numbers nobody is stepping up to help save the team. All you are hoping for is that a bunch of elected officials that dug a money pit so deep they have no other choice, do it for you. Again this isn't an issue about a hockey team, its about saving Westgate and that's all its ever been.

And just to add, even if you were against it, there is nothing you can do to stop it. The mayor alone is driving this boat, and all the taxpayers just get to go for the ride not knowing if there are enough lifeboats to save you when the time comes.


Last edited by cbcwpg: 02-14-2011 at 05:07 PM.
cbcwpg is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:10 PM
  #252
objectiveposter
Registered User
 
objectiveposter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 791
vCash: 50
the only other scenario is that Hulsizer is paying this years losses...maybe when he put the 25 mill deposit last year it was to cover this years losses (only if he ends up buying the team, if he doesnt he gets his money back)

if you think about it reinsdorf was willing to put 100 mill of his own money in the deal...Hulziser only has 70 mill coming from his pocket which seems extremely low. Glendale, knowing that it might be illegal to give the league 25 mill told Hulsizer from the beginning that he would be on the hook for this years losses to the league for 25 mill, and in return he would only have to pay 70 mill of his own money to buy the team instead of 100 mill.

objectiveposter is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:12 PM
  #253
AllByDesign
Who's this ABD guy??
 
AllByDesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Location, Location!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,317
vCash: 500
Goyotes is a season ticket holder and supports the team. It is not incumbent upon him to drag more people out to the games.

AllByDesign is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:13 PM
  #254
kingbrutis
Registered User
 
kingbrutis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,078
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=cbcwpg;30917781]So exactly how have you (as a citizen) stepped up to do more to save a team from relocation?

- Have you bought more tickets?----yes bought a full season
- Payed more for your tickets?---yes the price have gone up
- Gotten friends to buy tickets?---yes we have more friends that go on a regular basis now.


Bottom line is we will have this team for the next 25 yrs.

kingbrutis is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:18 PM
  #255
David_99
Registered User
 
David_99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OthmarAmmann View Post
Maybe GB is feeling charitable?
Daley: "So Gary, how's the Glendale situation going?"

Bettman: "Pfff, beats the hell out of me. I sent them a Valentines Day card. Hahaha! Oh before I forget, job well done this year. Here. This envelope contains your bonus. 25 Million."

Daley: "..."

Bettman: "What?"

Daley: "It's just a Valentines Day card addressed to Mayor Scruggs"



David_99 is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:23 PM
  #256
Einstein Theory
Registered User
 
Einstein Theory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
So exactly how have you (as a citizen) stepped up to do more to save a team from relocation?

- Have you bought more tickets?
- Payed more for your tickets?
- Gotten friends to buy tickets?

According to attendance numbers nobody is stepping up to help save the team. All you are hoping for is that a bunch of elected officials...


OK, before we start this debate all over again, here's something we all can mostly agree on:

1) The people of Winnipeg wish their elected officials did at least one-tenth of what the elected officials of Glendale have done to keep the team

AND

2) The fans of the Coyotes wish the residents of Phoenix did one-tenth what the residents of Winnipeg did to keep the Jets.

There are we all more or less agreeing again?

Einstein Theory is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:26 PM
  #257
goyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,811
vCash: 500
Mod: deleted.

The fact of the matter is no one on the board (myself included) is privy to all the information the city council has had to make its decision. The fact is the city council, vilified as they may be, is the elected body accountable to the people. The fact is that is it bad policy to have the courts look at evey deal a city does in a private/public partnership. The fact is that the CoG has no real good choices in this situation. And the fact is, no one knows what the outcome will be in 30 years, and whether they made a decision in the best interests of the citizens. However, the city council is accountable to the voters, and the GWI is not.

Finally, the fact is the facts don't matter anylonger in this debate. Relocationists want the team relocated, and Coyote fans want the team to stay. Sad to say, there is very little healthy debate as 9/10 posters here would never agree the Coyotes should stay so long as the market struggles or operates below their expectations.

With an arena that holds just over 17,000, the Coyotes will always be a second-tiered franchise from a revenue standpoint. However, for better or for worse, and I don't claim to know which, the NHL wants to keep Phoenix as a market and the NHL failed to do the same for Hartford, Winnipeg or Quebec. Is that right? In my opinion it is not. But when the citizens step up, build and arena, then basically take the risk of the team operations for a period of at least 5 years, hockey fans around North America should sit back and say ... "you got to respect that". However, we get no respect. We get treated like the red-headed step child.

And as for the $25 million in escrow, does anyone actually claim to know what the operating losses were for last year and this year? I mean know it, not speculate? Because I have never seen any actual numbers and you can't go off of what Moyes reported because I don't believe it was accepted that his P & L's were entirely accurrate. For all anyone knows, the loses could be included in the roughly $30 million more MH is expected to pay for the team than the NHL paid out of bk.


Last edited by Fugu: 02-14-2011 at 09:52 PM. Reason: topic isn't the other posters, generalizations
goyotes is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:46 PM
  #258
Jesus Christ Horburn
Registered User
 
Jesus Christ Horburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,942
vCash: 500
I think the NHL knows that as soon as they withdraw funds from COG's 25 million, they become part of the circus and any litigation that follows.

My belief is still that while NHL publicly says they're committed to Glendale, they know this deal has a much larger chance of failing than it does succeeding.

There's a reason why they haven't approved Hulsizer as an owner yet (despite having at least two opportunities since December), why they haven't committed themselves to Glendale verbally and released statements like "The team will remain in Glendale next year...", why they gave Quebec City the greenlight to start building an arena (even though the Thrashers and Coyotes are the only two teams that may relocate in the next few years), and most importantly, why they haven't withdrawn any of the money in escrow.

IMO, the NHL fully believes this deal with either fail completely or be tied up in court for a long time. But they certainly won't be perceived as the ones who turned their back on Glendale less than 10 years after they built an arena.

Jesus Christ Horburn is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:50 PM
  #259
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 27,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post

The fact of the matter is no one on the board (myself included) is privy to all the information the city council has had to make its decision. The fact is the city council, vilified as they may be, is the elected body accountable to the people. The fact is that is it bad policy to have the courts look at evey deal a city does in a private/public partnership. The fact is that the CoG has no real good choices in this situation. And the fact is, no one knows what the outcome will be in 30 years, and whether they made a decision in the best interests of the citizens. However, the city council is accountable to the voters, and the GWI is not.

Finally, the fact is the facts don't matter anylonger in this debate. Relocationists want the team relocated, and Coyote fans want the team to stay. Sad to say, there is very little healthy debate as 9/10 posters here would never agree the Coyotes should stay so long as the market struggles or operates below their expectations.

With an arena that holds just over 17,000, the Coyotes will always be a second-tiered franchise from a revenue standpoint. However, for better or for worse, and I don't claim to know which, the NHL wants to keep Phoenix as a market and the NHL failed to do the same for Hartford, Winnipeg or Quebec. Is that right? In my opinion it is not. But when the citizens step up, build and arena, then basically take the risk of the team operations for a period of at least 5 years, hockey fans around North America should sit back and say ... "you got to respect that". However, we get no respect. We get treated like the red-headed step child.

And as for the $25 million in escrow, does anyone actually claim to know what the operating losses were for last year and this year? I mean know it, not speculate? Because I have never seen any actual numbers and you can't go off of what Moyes reported because I don't believe it was accepted that his P & L's were entirely accurrate. For all anyone knows, the loses could be included in the roughly $30 million more MH is expected to pay for the team than the NHL paid out of bk.
Goyotes, I think you are greatly simplifying the situation and mis-representing the views of many posters.

For my part, I entirely agree that a municipality should have the right to spend whatever they want to subsidize an NHL hockey team, as long as they have their citizens informed and in support. Philosophically, I oppose the "gift law", and politically I oppose many of the GWI's causes.

In my view, the problem with this deal has been that in the contortions to skirt the "gift law", the City of Glendale, and by extension Hulsizer and the NHL, have breached civic ethics. They have continually prevaricated about the financial and other aspects of the deal, thereby misleading the public. They have concealed information, thereby misleading the public and elected officials. They have utilized unqualified individuals to analyze the deal, who just happen to be on retainer to the city. Personally, I don't believe that the "end justifies the means". I expect this deal to go through, but I also think that it will bring the City of Glendale, Hulsizer and the NHL disrepute. I also think that there is a risk that it will taint the future honest efforts of municipalities and citizens to make reasonable decisions about bringing and maintaining professional sports in their cities.

By the way, I think that it is disingenuous to imply that the reason that the NHL might not have claimed any of the $25 million in escrow is because there might not be losses to pay. The losses might not reach $25 million, but even the most optimistic accounting must acknowledge that the NHL is giving Glendale a break (unless T.L. Hocking has dusted off his spreadsheet again). Somebody will pay for that, and ironically, it might even be through increased transaction costs for the TNSE, if they purchase a franchise. If that happens, I suppose that the citizens of Glendale will be grateful for the gift from the good hockey fans in The Great White North.

Whileee is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 05:54 PM
  #260
Tommy Hawk
Registered User
 
Tommy Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Mod deleted:

The fact of the matter is no one on the board (myself included) is privy to all the information the city council has had to make its decision. The fact is the city council, vilified as they may be, is the elected body accountable to the people. The fact is that is it bad policy to have the courts look at evey deal a city does in a private/public partnership. The fact is that the CoG has no real good choices in this situation. And the fact is, no one knows what the outcome will be in 30 years, and whether they made a decision in the best interests of the citizens. However, the city council is accountable to the voters, and the GWI is not.

Finally, the fact is the facts don't matter anylonger in this debate. Relocationists want the team relocated, and Coyote fans want the team to stay. Sad to say, there is very little healthy debate as 9/10 posters here would never agree the Coyotes should stay so long as the market struggles or operates below their expectations.

With an arena that holds just over 17,000, the Coyotes will always be a second-tiered franchise from a revenue standpoint. However, for better or for worse, and I don't claim to know which, the NHL wants to keep Phoenix as a market and the NHL failed to do the same for Hartford, Winnipeg or Quebec. Is that right? In my opinion it is not. But when the citizens step up, build and arena, then basically take the risk of the team operations for a period of at least 5 years, hockey fans around North America should sit back and say ... "you got to respect that". However, we get no respect. We get treated like the red-headed step child.

And as for the $25 million in escrow, does anyone actually claim to know what the operating losses were for last year and this year? I mean know it, not speculate? Because I have never seen any actual numbers and you can't go off of what Moyes reported because I don't believe it was accepted that his P & L's were entirely accurrate. For all anyone knows, the loses could be included in the roughly $30 million more MH is expected to pay for the team than the NHL paid out of bk.
Just curious, what has been mis-characterized about this deal?

Is CoG giving $100 million to MH for the revenues from the parking?

Does anyone even know if CoG already owns the rights to the parking, in other words, are they buying something they already own?

Does anyone know for certain if the parking will generate $100 million PLUS the amount to service the debt ($6-9 mil per year) in net income?

The parking is incremental based upon the yotes games so do the Yotes alone generate that much in parking net income (revenue less costs to run the parking). Other events will still be at the arena.

Is the CoG paying MH $97 mil over 5 years in arena management fees?

Has the arena ever made money? If not, what makes them think the arena will make money under MH? I do not mean revenue, I mean net profit. Do the yotes net income fall under the arena management calculation?

Is CoG paying a significant amount over what other arena managers are receiving for similar arrangements?

These are the points being discussed. What has been mis-characterized? Many of these points are up to interpretation and require a certain amount of real business experience to understand.

CoG has filed documents all over the place and none of them have numbers that tie to each other or support this deal from a financial standpoint. Also, the state supreme court ruling made clear that overpaying is against the law and you cannot use estimated sales tax and other indirect revenues to support the financial aspects of the deal.

No one is telling the courts to look at each and every deal, GI is doing that and they will take the ones they want to court. They do not care about PR, they care about doing what they think is right, just like the ACLU. If the ACLU cared about PR, they would have taken a lower number of cases to court.


Last edited by Fourier: 02-15-2011 at 09:22 AM.
Tommy Hawk is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:01 PM
  #261
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,233
vCash: 500
Did the city charge the team rent the past two seasons? Maybe they didn't since they thought they were paying for losses anyway. Playing rent free, counting on a couple playoff games, subtracting Gretzky's annual 8 million. I could see the team more or less breaking even after receiving revenue sharing.

Confucius is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:09 PM
  #262
Jesus Christ Horburn
Registered User
 
Jesus Christ Horburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,942
vCash: 500
I cannot fathom any circumstances under which the team made money this season.

I'd be surprised if their losses were only 25 million.

Jesus Christ Horburn is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:12 PM
  #263
goyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,811
vCash: 500
So Tommy Hawk, if the GWI is as you suggest, a band of legal zealots, then I have a question for you.

Should the GWI not sue, would you then agree that the deal as you outline has withstood the legal scrutinty of a principaled organization equal to the esteemed ACLU?

It seems to me that without question, in your opinion, if the deal is offensive to the law, the GWI must sue to abide by their mission. So, is the converse true? If they do not sue, will you agree there was no good faith basis to challenge this deal, and many of the assumptions you have made about its legality have been nothing more than blowing smoke? Or will you just spew sour grapes and call the GWI out?

And as to the escrow account, MH is paying $30 million more for the team than the NHL did less than two years ago. That should cover the losses, but like the rest of you, I have no real first hand knowledge.

goyotes is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:18 PM
  #264
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 27,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
So Tommy Hawk, if the GWI is as you suggest, a band of legal zealots, then I have a question for you.

Should the GWI not sue, would you then agree that the deal as you outline has withstood the legal scrutinty of a principaled organization equal to the esteemed ACLU?

It seems to me that without question, in your opinion, if the deal is offensive to the law, the GWI must sue to abide by their mission. So, is the converse true? If they do not sue, will you agree there was no good faith basis to challenge this deal, and many of the assumptions you have made about its legality have been nothing more than blowing smoke? Or will you just spew sour grapes and call the GWI out?

And as to the escrow account, MH is paying $30 million more for the team than the NHL did less than two years ago. That should cover the losses, but like the rest of you, I have no real first hand knowledge.
Goyotes, do you believe that this deal has been developed, presented and approved by the City of Glendale without public mis-representations and ethical breaches? (Your answer will help me to interpret your posts in the future).

Whileee is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:18 PM
  #265
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
As such, I take this moment to point out that your post is completely incorrect and appears to be nothing more than an infantile outburst.
And here I thought you were saving that for me one day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
killion.....your giving us the Wallstreet type ending....I envision more of the cops show ending....squad cars pull up to a house where Beasley is sitting on his couch in the the front yard visibly intoxicated..
Nope. At his desk. Made from the rear half of a 57 Apache' 1/2 ton. Intoxicated & shirtless. Just like me in the here & now and another day at the office. Ya'll got a light Copper?...

Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
We need the GWI and our kind cousins from Canada to tell us what is best.
On it. Ive got newly minted Lawyer Vincent LaGuardia Gambini outta Jersey on a private charter up to Winnipeg to apply for and then slap a Decree Nisi on the Winnipeg Free Press & every single mother of a web server in the province to put a stop to it first thing in the morning goyotes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
I just want to see the final outcome of a city going where no city has gone before.
"aye, but Captain, I cannay' force anymore power from the Warp coils without blowing us all to Kingdom Come"....

Killion is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:26 PM
  #266
Coach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
I would simply say as someone who has lived in Arizona for over twenty years, observed the GWI from a local perspective, know lawyers who have litigated against the GWI, and practice law in Arizona since 1993, and comfortable in my abilities to read and understand the City North case and see the distinctions, that my opinion is less based upon emotions and more based upon a true reading of the realities. I suppose we will know whether I was right and nearly every other poster on this board was wrong if the GWI doesn't rush to court to save the hopes of all good Winnipeggers.
Yes you have said GWI is useless and won't do anything on practically every post you have made. You will probably be right and will be able to gloat. Of course if your wrong you'll look like an idiot and can expect 90% of this board to not let you forget it.
My prediction is GWI will sue before the 30 year lease is over and you can hold me to that prediction.

Coach is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:37 PM
  #267
wpgallday1960
Registered User
 
wpgallday1960's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sunny St. James
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
It seems like the people of Glendale and their elected officials have decided what is best for their community. The most vocal objectors to this deal have been relocationists from Canada. Too bad none of you are taxpayers in Arizona. You might have standing to try and block this deal. Of course, no taxpayer has actually filed a suit either, but we are sheep who can't determine what is best for ourselves. We need the GWI and our kind cousins from Canada to tell us what is best.

This entire thread has boiled down once again to Canada good, Arizona bad. Even if the citizens of Arizona step up and do more to save a team from relocation than any Canadian city has done.
Good Lord - hyperbole much!??!
Quite frankly the citizens have not stepped up to save the Yotes. Attendance has not picked up despite a competitive team and cheap ticket prices. Make no mistake - this is about saving an anchor tenant for the arena and to maintain the viability of Westgate Mall, the Coyotes are secondary. I don't doubt for a minute if the Suns wanted to relocate to Jobing.com without subsidies this deal to save the Coyotes would be dead.

wpgallday1960 is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:37 PM
  #268
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
However, we get no respect. We get treated like the red-headed step child.
Well. Im a redhead (truth) and I was adopted (truth) and Im rootin for ya. Its your government. Your dime. And I believe the NHL can work in Phoenix, Im just not so sure Hulsizer's the guy to do it, but so what?. He sells up in a few yrs, maybe the next guy or the one after that. Whatever & for however long it takes IMO.... As for the bolded part?. I guess that explains why it was that my StepSisters would give me radios & toasters for Christmas's, Birthdays & such as a kid, telling me they were bath toys...

Killion is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 06:39 PM
  #269
CasualFan
Tortious Beadicus
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
Are you actually saying this with a straight face? You demonstrate very little understanding of what the GWI is really about, its leadership, the policy is seeks to drive, how it is funded, where it gets its primary support, what dynamics are playing out here on a local level, what power-brokers are warning the GWI not to do, and the that aside from some true ideologes, the GWI is deeply, deeply concerned with not looking bad - even more so than looking good. This is not a good case for the GWI to litigate, other than maybe to take issue with the process.
I have little use for your conspiracy theories about the diabolical underpinnings of the Goldwater Institute. When we operate on the fringe or appeal to the dramatic we lose site of the reality of the situation.

I do not live in Arizona, so I am not in tune with the local dynamics. However, I have spoken to GWI attorneys on numerous occasions, so I'm comfortable with my understanding of the institution and it's members - not that it was hard to understand a basic 501(c)3 public policy entity to begin with.

None of your assertions are aligned with anything GWI has done, said, or is likely to ever do. It makes for a fine Hollywood script or message board fodder but it's not rooted in reality. If GWI does not file a suit, it will not be because the whole episode was a PR stunt; it will not be the result of power-brokers warning them; it will not be out of fear of funding repercussions; it will simply be because Tindall et al. out flanked them by manipulating the parking rights agreement and controlling the dissemination of records. No more, no less.

You have positioned yourself in the middle of some great war between Canada v Arizona. I'm not biased to either side of that skirmish. I'm just advising you that the perception of GWI that you have concocted is completely unfounded, regardless of where you live or how long you have resided there.

CasualFan is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:18 PM
  #270
dkehler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
And as to the escrow account, MH is paying $30 million more for the team than the NHL did less than two years ago. That should cover the losses, but like the rest of you, I have no real first hand knowledge.
That extra $30 million is to cover last season's losses and the $25 million escrow was to cover this year's losses. So the question remains, who is picking up the tab for this season's losses?

dkehler is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:26 PM
  #271
danishh
Registered User
 
danishh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: YOW
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,974
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkehler View Post
That extra $30 million is to cover last season's losses and the $25 million escrow was to cover this year's losses. So the question remains, who is picking up the tab for this season's losses?
COG/Ellman from the parking fund --> escrow account.

danishh is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:40 PM
  #272
Coach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkehler View Post
That extra $30 million is to cover last season's losses and the $25 million escrow was to cover this year's losses. So the question remains, who is picking up the tab for this season's losses?
MH does get 10 million from the CoG this year as part of the 5.5 year agreement. It is possible he will just get charged all of the losses for the season. Hard to believe the NHL would just wave all the loses for the year and then for CoG to give him 10 million this year with MH covering no loses for the year.

Coach is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:40 PM
  #273
dkehler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
COG/Ellman from the parking fund --> escrow account.
Nope, the latest is that Glendale is taking 10 million of that to put into the new escrow for Hulsizer and pocketing the other 15 million.

dkehler is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:54 PM
  #274
Coach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkehler View Post
Nope, the latest is that Glendale is taking 10 million of that to put into the new escrow for Hulsizer and pocketing the other 15 million.
No the 25 million escrow from the Elman parking was dealt with last month. The CoG got 12.5 million and Elman got 12.5 million. This is the 25 million escrow that CoG put up to keep the team an additional year.

Coach is offline  
Old
02-14-2011, 07:59 PM
  #275
dkehler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
No the 25 million escrow from the Elman parking was dealt with last month. The CoG got 12.5 million and Elman got 12.5 million. This is the 25 million escrow that CoG put up to keep the team an additional year.
This is all getting very confusing, probably just like Glendale wants. There is also the $25 million Hulsizer put up as a show of good faith. But the question remains, who is covering this season's losses?

dkehler 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 07:42 AM.

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.