Coyotes Tempe arena project rejected by public referendum - will remain at Mullett Arena for 2023-24

Scomerica

Registered User
Aug 14, 2020
1,679
1,078
Seattle, Wa
Is there an NFL, NBA, or MLB equivalent to the Coyotes? A franchise that has always been a financial struggle?
I don't think any NFL team is really financially but Jacksonville sometimes struggle to fill the stadium hence games in London.
NBA- New Orleans? They've been threatened with moves.
MLB- Oakland at this point. Obviously they were successful years ago but new owner is running them down and stadium is falling apart.
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,913
17,561
Victoria
Again, you are trying to cause shit with your "so you'll admit you're wrong when..." crap

They may very well play there next year but just bc they do does not mean they haven't had contingencies in place if this vote flopped like you originally suggested.

Also, if you don't know about the other sites in play then I suggest you actually look into it instead of throwing darts at me.
"Even if there is no move and no concrete contingency, I cannot be proven wrong" - you

Okay.
 

Laus723

Graceful brutality
Sponsor
Jan 27, 2006
32,260
7,253
Wellington, FL
lol historically arena's cost the city way more money that in brings in to the city or via jobs it creates. The jobs it creates are miniscule compared to the cost to the city/taxpayers (and it's not an "either or" where you get arena and more jobs, or no arena and no more jobs. Other things will be done with that space and presumably create some sort of job as well)), and the revenue ends up in the hands of the private owners. It's a good scam if you can get a city to build an arena for one of the teams in your league...not too mention even in the good times for the Yotes they've cost the league money.
Lol, yes historically…lol.

However I’ve heard that it’s privately funded which changes that. Doesn’t matter, they’ve spoken.
 

Rich Nixon

No Prior Knowledge of "Flyers"
Jul 11, 2006
15,282
20,077
Key Biscayne
Lol, yes historically…lol.

However I’ve heard that it’s privately funded which changes that. Doesn’t matter, they’ve spoken.

Yeah, you heard it was privately funded because they claimed it was privately funded. It was, in a sense, but it was also contingent on hundreds of millions in tax breaks and diversions. So it was akin to "we'll put $700m down if you forgive us $500m later," which is not exactly a free-and-clear arrangement. Plus, the consulting firm the Yotes themselves hired to put some sunny numbers out there actually determined it would not generate any revenue for Tempe and, in fact, would have negative returns.

Something mind-boggling to me about this whole saga was the number of people who accepted the sales pitch at face value. I've seen a million "WHY WOULD THEY VOTE NO IT WAS ALL PRIVATELY FUNDED?" comments here and on Twitter and everywhere else and that just...was not 100% true. Much more complicated and semantic than that, but it was not without cost to Tempe. When billionaires beg voters for support, people should be a bit incredulous about the promises.
 
Last edited:

OgeeOgelthorpe

Riccis per 60 record holder
Feb 29, 2020
18,355
20,132
Yeah, you heard it was privately funded because they claimed it was privately funded. It was, in a sense, but it was also contingent on hundreds of millions in tax breaks and diversions. So it was akin to "we'll put $700m down if you forgive us $500m later," which is not exactly a free-and-clear arrangement. Plus, the consulting firm the Yotes themselves hired to put some sunny numbers out there actually determined it would not generate any revenue for Tempe and, in fact, would have negative returns.

Something mind-boggling to me about this whole saga was the number of people who accepted the sales pitch at face value. I've seen a million "WHY WOULD THEY VOTE NO IT WAS ALL PRIVATELY FUNDED?" comments here and on Twitter and everywhere else and that just...was not 100% true. Much more complicated and semantic than that, but it was not without cost to Tempe. When billionaires beg voters for support, people should be a bit incredulous about the promises.

https://psmag.com/economics/the-shady-money-behind-americas-sports-stadiums#:~:text=Stadiums are built with money borrowed today, against,race to the chance to unload the cash.

Stadiums are built with money borrowed today, against public money spent tomorrow, at the expense of taxes that will never be collected. Economists almost universally agree that publicly financed stadiums are bad investments, yet cities and states still race to the chance to unload the cash.

Cities Should Not Pay For New Stadiums – Michigan Journal of Economics

Sports Stadiums Are a Bad Deal for Cities

Construction on the stadium might be performed by local workers, but it might not. And either way, it’s likely to be paid for off the books, without protections for workers. Even if the construction workers are local, their gigs last only a few years. Afterward, all that remains are the jobs inside the stadium—ticket sellers, vendors, janitorial staff—which are low-paid, seasonal, and few. “The number of jobs created is smaller than [the number of employees of] a midsize department store,” Leeds explains.

Unless Meruelo would have footed the cost entirely on his own, anything given by the city of Tempe other than permission to build would have been a bad deal for the city.
 

Rich Nixon

No Prior Knowledge of "Flyers"
Jul 11, 2006
15,282
20,077
Key Biscayne

Precisely. This arrangement was a little more complicated, but it was just a new approach to the same old shit.

The whole "entertainment district" additional sales pitches are a new addition to this process, too. You just make up a number ($2.1 billion project!) and put out some artists renderings of things that, in theory, could be built, too. So when someone asks "Wait, why would we give millions of dollars to a sports team?" you can respond "Well actually, we're gonna SAVE UR CITY with HYPOTHETICAL CONDOS and a TILTED KILT PUB & EATERY." Cool.
 
Last edited:

oldunclehue

Registered User
Jun 16, 2010
1,259
1,378
Precisely. This arrangement was a little more complicated, but it was just a new approach to the same old shit.

The whole "entertainment district" additional sales pitches are a new addition to this process, too. You just make up a number ($2.1 billion project!) and put out some artists renderings of things that, in theory, could be built, too. So when someone asks "Wait, why would we give millions of dollars to a sports team?" they can respond "Well actually, we're gonna SAVE UR CITY with HYPOTHETICAL CONDOS and a TILTED KILT PUB & EATERY." Cool.
Really this is it....they rename it, make it look fancy by being more than just an arena, when really the owner of the Hockey Team is just adding to their monthly income by building condos/apartments and leasing the land to other developers all with millions in tax breaks. But it will bring 500 jobs to the area.

Well 500 low paying part time jobs vs 500 million in tax breaks...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich Nixon

ichbinkanadier

Registered User
Apr 22, 2023
847
483
Really this is it....they rename it, make it look fancy by being more than just an arena, when really the owner of the Hockey Team is just adding to their monthly income by building condos/apartments and leasing the land to other developers all with millions in tax breaks. But it will bring 500 jobs to the area.

Well 500 low paying part time jobs vs 500 million in tax breaks...
And those jobs are never additional jobs- just a transfer from somewhere else in the city
 

ichbinkanadier

Registered User
Apr 22, 2023
847
483
Are Atlanta fans willing to spend more money on hockey than QC fans? Didn't think so.
What do you base this conclusion on?

And you forgot about corporate seats, sponsorships...

I'd be willing to bet that a playoff run wold generate more money in Atlanta than in Quebec. Think of it this way- for simplicity sake- let's say there are 50,000 people in QC who make $100,000. In Atlanta, a city with four times as many people, it could be 200,000 people (not a perfect analogy but hopefully you get my point). More people with more discretionary income.
 

Shwan

Registered User
Jan 30, 2019
391
794
Orange Country Adjacent
And those jobs are never additional jobs- just a transfer from somewhere else in the city
This was a good talking point for Tempe 1st to get the no vote.

Tempe is *already* building another $1.8B Luxury Retail/Condo/Office district, Tempe South Pier, just about 2.5 Miles east of the proposed arena site.

Then there's Mill Avenue, which is stuck in this homelessness death spiral, would have been sandwiched right between these two districts.
 

ichbinkanadier

Registered User
Apr 22, 2023
847
483
This was a good talking point for Tempe 1st to get the no vote.

Tempe is *already* building another $1.8B Luxury Retail/Condo/Office district, Tempe South Pier, just about 2.5 Miles east of the proposed arena site.

Then there's Mill Avenue, which is stuck in this homelessness death spiral, would have been sandwiched right between these two districts.
Is the Tempe South Pier entirely private?
 

Shwan

Registered User
Jan 30, 2019
391
794
Orange Country Adjacent
Is the Tempe South Pier entirely private?
They got the GPLET property tax exemption, but it wasn't nearly as big as what Tempe was going to give to the Coyotes.

But to add to the intrigue to this, a union tried to get this development put on the same ballot as the Coyotes propositions and Tempe fought them tooth and nail through the courts to stop it.

Just interesting that they would do that but for whatever reason the city and/or team were okay taking the arena bid to the ballots.
 

ichbinkanadier

Registered User
Apr 22, 2023
847
483
They got the GPLET property tax exemption, but it wasn't nearly as big as what Tempe was going to give to the Coyotes.

But to add to the intrigue to this, a union tried to get this development put on the same ballot as the Coyotes propositions and Tempe fought them tooth and nail through the courts to stop it.

Just interesting that they would do that but for whatever reason the city and/or team were okay taking the arena bid to the ballots.
I wonder why a union would want the two projects linked on the ballot
 

Ciao

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 15, 2010
10,362
6,203
Toronto
That would be a very bad precedent to set and bad business on the league's part.
Too late for that.

The Toronto Maple Leafs already established a precedent of paying for their own arenas with their own money twice: once in 1933 with Maple Leaf Gardens; and once again in 1999 with the Air Canada Centre, now the Scotiabank Arena.

Not a nickle of public money.

Both venues were hugely profitable. In fact, the 20-year $800-million naming rights contact with Scotiabank in 2018 alone dwarfs the $288-million construction costs in 1999 dollars.

Mind you, the Leafs and Raptors are viable, successful businesses with a solid financial foundation that can afford to make large long-term investments.

I don't know how the National Hockey League views itself, but maybe it could do that too, even if many of its individual franchises are not financially viable.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad