HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Phoenix XXXIII: Sound of Silence

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2011, 02:26 PM
  #51
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
I guess it should have been, however Quebec is still out of the running by a couple of years IMO -

QC - No ownership group, Le Colisee is not an ideal venue (compared to MTS,keyarena,KC arena...might work short term), new arena is a few years away - better suited location for the Isles, Panthers or Thrashers relocations down the road.
Quebec does have an ownership group.

Fish on The Sand is online now  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:26 PM
  #52
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
It's all but guaranteed. While I agree that Winnipeg was not the only location being considered a few months ago, It is the only workable relocation solution left at present vs. KC, Seattle, LV, Hamilton etc...

Winnipeg - Has the ownership group standing by (quick closure needed for scheduling 11/12), operational 15,000+ NHL ready arena, no objections/injunctions marring a pending relocation to area.

KC - No ownership group at present, has arena available (unsure of hockey readiness), may draw objections from the Blues over territory which could cause issues selling THAT team.

Seattle - No ownership group, 15,000+ cap arena, may draw objections fron VAN over territory (unlikely though)

Las Vegas - No ownership group, no NHL arena, also in the desert (fool me once...)

Hamilton - No ownership group (other than Balsille ), Copps coliseum is not NHL ready ($200M in renos needed), will most definately draw objections form TOR & BUF regarding territory rights.
The sprint Center in KC is hockey ready. Its about 250 miles from STL to KC so there is not any territory issues, and I think a team in KC increases the Blues ability to be sold it would instantly add another rival for the Blues and it also will become KCs fans a team to hate right away so guaranteed sellout games for both teams. The city used to have an agreement with a businessman to bring a team to the city if one became available to relocate but I think that has expired, so I dont know about the potential ownership situation in KC.

sh724 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:26 PM
  #53
rj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
With Kansas City, another thing to realize is that the city basically owns the arena and it is ready to go. They wouldn't need an ownership group for the Islanders, as Wang already has interests in the area.

A lot of people were sold a bill of goods for the Power and Light district in Kansas City and no one has come through on any of the "promises". One of the "promises" were the Islanders.
I thought AEG owned the K.C. arena?

rj is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:26 PM
  #54
Evil Doctor
Damn you Taylor Reed
 
Evil Doctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cambridge, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
oh good. This again.

winnipeg has an owner and an arena.
quebec has a public potential owner and a confirmed arena plan.
hamilton may or may not have a mystery owner and no confirmed plans for a new arena or renovations of copps (both of which cost the same amount).
A fair summation, though I should add that considering most new arena proposals I've seen have been in the neighbourhood of $400m a Copps reno would about 50% cheaper.

Evil Doctor is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:27 PM
  #55
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,297
vCash: 500
I could swear AEG runs the Sprint Center. AEG, as in the same people that own the LA Kings.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:28 PM
  #56
pirate94
Registered User
 
pirate94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
oh good. This again.

winnipeg has an owner and an arena.
quebec has a public potential owner and a confirmed arena plan.
hamilton may or may not have a mystery owner and no confirmed plans for a new arena or renovations of copps (both of which cost the same amount).
Bailsillie is so far off the NHL map now Hitler would have an easier time getting an NHL team

pirate94 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:31 PM
  #57
Blitz
WANTED: Top-4 LHD...
 
Blitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Fergus, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorton724 View Post
The sprint Center in KC is hockey ready. Its about 250 miles from STL to KC so there is not any territory issues, and I think a team in KC increases the Blues ability to be sold it would instantly add another rival for the Blues and it also will become KCs fans a team to hate right away so guaranteed sellout games for both teams. The city used to have an agreement with a businessman to bring a team to the city if one became available to relocate but I think that has expired, so I dont know about the potential ownership situation in KC.
The thing to think about is... "Who do people in KC support now?" - If the answer is the Blues, then a new team in KC would be taking support from STL.

I do agree though with the rivalry thing (MTL/QC <- that's hatred...) - it's just too bad it would come at the expense of the Blues current fanbase.

Blitz is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:33 PM
  #58
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
I could swear AEG runs the Sprint Center. AEG, as in the same people that own the LA Kings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rj View Post
I thought AEG owned the K.C. arena?
AEG Kansas City runs the Sprint Center but they do not own it. If a team was put in KC with AEG running the building I dont think there would be much of an issue unless they tried to charge a ridiculous amount for using the building, im sure they could put in a clause where the city handles everything that involves the team so AEG wont be able to 'hurt' a KC team

sh724 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:35 PM
  #59
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,694
vCash: 232
I think people too often forget that the NHL's first foray into KC was an unmitigated disaster. Averaging 8,000 fans in a 17,000 rink. (league average for the period about 13,000). A team in Kansas city would be very risky at this point in time. The NHL doesn't want to move Phoenix only to have the possibility of a larger problem on it's hands. Las Vegas is the same thing. Until the problem children of the NHL are stabilized any relocations will be to stable markets, not markets that they hope will grow into the league.

cheswick is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:37 PM
  #60
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
The thing to think about is... "Who do people in KC support now?" - If the answer is the Blues, then a new team in KC would be taking support from STL.

I do agree though with the rivalry thing (MTL/QC <- that's hatred...) - it's just too bad it would come at the expense of the Blues current fanbase.
Im sure a good portion of KC NHL fans follow the Blues, but I dont think the roots are that deep, my college is made of mostly people from the STL area with the KC area being the second largest demographic and the people I know from KC are all over the map for which team(s) they follow. The biggest sports followings in KC are the Cheifs (NFL) and Kansas University Basketball. With both of those overlapping hockey season it could hurt attendance in KC but the actually city are is more populated than STL with STLs metro area being bigger

sh724 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:38 PM
  #61
aj8000
Registered User
 
aj8000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 735
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Doctor View Post
Note, the tone..."on the radar" "alternativeS" "MAY"

Not: "100% certain this team is going to Winnipeg and anyone who doubts that is a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nut (from southern Ontario)"

In fact it seems it's backing away from the concept that Winnipeg is even the front runner.

Clearly it backs up what I'm saying, Winnipeg is not the only location being considered. Doesn't mean the Coyotes won't go to Winnipeg, but it does mean they might go somewhere else.

However, the comment is also consistent with the NHL's stance that they do not want to get Winnipeg's hopes up. Agreed, there are always other alternatives; however, I suspect they are very unlikely alternatives. Anyways, the team is still in Glendale and no relocation announcement has been made so it is speculation on both sides anyways.

aj8000 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:45 PM
  #62
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
I think people too often forget that the NHL's first foray into KC was an unmitigated disaster. Averaging 8,000 fans in a 17,000 rink. (league average for the period about 13,000). A team in Kansas city would be very risky at this point in time. The NHL doesn't want to move Phoenix only to have the possibility of a larger problem on it's hands. Las Vegas is the same thing. Until the problem children of the NHL are stabilized any relocations will be to stable markets, not markets that they hope will grow into the league.
the attendance was not good but look at the team. Not only where they competing against a NBA team it was also in the WHA era where talent was extremely diluted. In 2 years the team was 27-110-23 including a 27 game winless streak and 1 win in the last 44 games to end the second and last season. The ownership group never should have been given a team in the first place because they could not afford to run a team. Which is why they sold it after the second team who moved the team to Colorado. They did not do any better in Denver either finishing last in the league all but one season and the owners tried to move the team to NJ after the second year but the league said no. Now look at the Avalanche the have been succesful in Denver so you cannot compare a market in 2 different eras.

The hockey market in the state has risen significantly since then with the success of the Blues and several exhibition games played in KC. Every D1 school in the state has atleast a club hockey team, and a lot of the high schools have teams but the high school athletic governing body does not recognize hockey as a sport so its only club teams for all the high schools that offer hockey.

sh724 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:47 PM
  #63
Go Yotes 97
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 54
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goyotes View Post
It is now being actively discussed on a regular basis, and the GWI is being blamed in most circles. The Gov. is getting involved very late in the game, as a result of McCain making this very public. I would say at this point it is a slow boil.
It isn't being discussed in Arizona period.

Go Yotes 97 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:48 PM
  #64
rj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorton724 View Post
AEG Kansas City runs the Sprint Center but they do not own it. If a team was put in KC with AEG running the building I dont think there would be much of an issue unless they tried to charge a ridiculous amount for using the building, im sure they could put in a clause where the city handles everything that involves the team so AEG wont be able to 'hurt' a KC team
So I guess AEG talked the city into building and paying for what at this point is a white elephant arena that AEG would make money on managing as soon as they could find a tenant. Well, typical of the people that run AEG.

Quote:
Every D1 school in the state has atleast a club hockey team.
What D1 schools that are larger than 5000 people don't have a club hockey team? I play rugby, every D1 school has a club rugby team but that doesn't mean they can support a professional team.

rj is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:50 PM
  #65
RAgIn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sudbury, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Doctor View Post
Note, the tone..."on the radar" "alternativeS" "MAY"

Not: "100% certain this team is going to Winnipeg and anyone who doubts that is a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nut (from southern Ontario)"

In fact it seems it's backing away from the concept that Winnipeg is even the front runner.

Clearly it backs up what I'm saying, Winnipeg is not the only location being considered. Doesn't mean the Coyotes won't go to Winnipeg, but it does mean they might go somewhere else.
You can disect it all you want, but the City of Winnipeg is the front runner for the relocation of the Phoenix Coyotes. Until, another city steps forward with an arena, an ownership group and a plan, I'll stick to the facts. Destination, Manitoba.

RAgIn is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:52 PM
  #66
Potrzebie
Registered User
 
Potrzebie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 965
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by YeOldeRyaneClowe View Post
I like the simon/garfunkel titles. Next up: "the only living boy in glendale"
No way. "Homeward Bound"

Potrzebie is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:52 PM
  #67
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rj View Post
So I guess AEG talked the city into building and paying for an at this point white elephant arena they'd run. Typical of the people that run AEG.
the city wanted the arena bc they did not have a modern venue to represent the city, it was part of a several billion dollar project to improve the downtown area. the building is one of the nicest i have been in although i was only in it once a few days after it opened. It has been more successful than what the city thought it would be. The tennant now is an arena football team. In 2010 it was the 5th busiest arena in the US and 13th in the world, with over 4 million guest in the 3 years it has been open.

sh724 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 02:55 PM
  #68
pirate94
Registered User
 
pirate94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
There's more out of the ballpark speculation here than an OPEC conference

pirate94 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:17 PM
  #69
goyotes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Yotes 97 View Post
It isn't being discussed in Arizona period.
You obviously don't watch tv or listen to sports talk radio.

goyotes is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:21 PM
  #70
crazed323
Registered User
 
crazed323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 238
vCash: 500
This talk about other possible relocation destinations is udderly ridiculous. Everyone everywhere wants a team in their market. So much so they completely lose sight of the exactly what has happend in the last year and a bit. The NHL will only negotiate a relocation of the Phoenix Coyotes with Winnipeg. Why? Because TNSE has been their leverage to try and get a deal done in Glendale. The sale price will be what was agreed to last may. When TNSE put an offer on the table. Only if TNSE passes on the coyotes will any other place be considered. TNSE won't pass this up. So you can believe all you want that there are other possible destinations for the Coyotes. All you are doing is wasting your time. I'll pay every member of these boards $1 if the Coyotes end up moving anywhere other then Winnipeg.

crazed323 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:26 PM
  #71
AtlantaWhaler
Moderator
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
 
AtlantaWhaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 12,951
vCash: 500
So, an article comes out that claims Bettman may be making a deadline and Hulsizer has pulled all concessions, and you're hashing debates from 5 threads ago? Weird. I figured this thread would be going crazy right now.

AtlantaWhaler is online now  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:26 PM
  #72
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
It's all but guaranteed. While I agree that Winnipeg was not the only location being considered a few months ago, It is the only workable relocation solution left at present vs. KC, Seattle, LV, Hamilton etc...
Gary Bettman in a private email dated 04/04/09 (over two years ago) to Bill Daly disclosed during bankruptcy proceedings:

Quote:
"...frankly, if this team had to move, it should first be offered to Winnipeg."


GHOST


Last edited by MAROONSRoad: 04-14-2011 at 03:38 PM.
MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:32 PM
  #73
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 7,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazed323 View Post
This talk about other possible relocation destinations is udderly ridiculous. Everyone everywhere wants a team in their market. So much so they completely lose sight of the exactly what has happend in the last year and a bit. The NHL will only negotiate a relocation of the Phoenix Coyotes with Winnipeg. Why? Because TNSE has been their leverage to try and get a deal done in Glendale. The sale price will be what was agreed to last may. When TNSE put an offer on the table. Only if TNSE passes on the coyotes will any other place be considered. TNSE won't pass this up. So you can believe all you want that there are other possible destinations for the Coyotes. All you are doing is wasting your time. I'll pay every member of these boards $1 if the Coyotes end up moving anywhere other then Winnipeg.
Agreed. All this talk about other markets is just wrong, at this time. Given time, sure the NHL would look at all markets, but their hands are tied, so here is the question....

Name the only city in North America that could be told as late as July 2011 that they are getting an NHL team that MUST be up and running for the next season. I don't care who you cheer for or where you live, there is only one place that can accomplish this on such short notice.

Basically, all Winnipeg has to do is swap out AHL players for NHL players and away they go.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:41 PM
  #74
pirate94
Registered User
 
pirate94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad View Post
Gary Bettman in a private email dated 04/04/09 (over two years ago) to Bill Daly disclosed during bankruptcy proceedings:





GHOST
check and mate

pirate94 is offline  
Old
04-14-2011, 03:43 PM
  #75
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 7,582
vCash: 500
Goldwater exec: Glendale not cooperative on Coyotes

http://ktar.com/category/local-news-...ve-on-Coyotes/

"What we were hoping for was working with Glendale -- in pointing out the unconstitutionality of this deal -- is that they would be willing to go back to the drawing board and try to come up with something that would be legal and, unfortunately, Glendale hasn't shown any interest in that," Olsen said.

"I spoke with the governor and we talked over what's happening in Glendale and I think that she understands, as we understand and as the buyer understands -- in this case, Matt Hulsizer -- that the negotiating here needs to be done between the city of Glendale and the NHL," Olsen said.


Sounds like the GWI is staying on the same path.

cbcwpg 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 06:53 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.