CXLVI - Future of Coyotes up in air after Tempe rejects arena deal - will remain at Mullet Arena for 2023-24, looking at Fiesta Mall site in Mesa

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stumbledore

Registered User
Jan 1, 2018
2,525
4,911
Canada
No you don't. At least not in here or by any of the knowledgeable active posters in here. There was a range of "I think it'll pass" and "I think it'll fail," but no one was confident enough to guarantee either of those... and most of us around here were saying we had no idea what's going to happen with the referendum.
So, in point form, your rebuttal seems to be:

a) No, it was never said.

b) If it was said, it wasn't said in here.

c) If it was said in here, it wasn't by any active posters in here.

d) If it was said in here by active posters, then they weren't very knowledgeable.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,326
11,122
Charlotte, NC
So, in point form, your rebuttal seems to be:

a) No, it was never said.

b) If it was said, it wasn't said in here.

c) If it was said in here, it wasn't by any active posters in here.

d) If it was said in here by active posters, then they weren't very knowledgeable.

:laugh:

Fair enough. I'll take any of the equivocation out of it. The poster wasn't told that by anyone they should have believed and if they did believe it, that's reflects more on them than on anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stumbledore

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
13,101
2,767
What you're saying is kind of incoherent. You pointed to a worthless AM News Radio blog post that vaguely referenced one side of the ledger. The concept of revenue and expense is not obscure.

It's essentially impossible to make a message board post about the how the arena impacts the city of Glendale budget because there were like a dozen versions of the lease since Moyes through this thing into bankruptcy back in the day bringing us all together on this forum to begin with.

Throughout that wild ride, there have been prosperous and less prosperous times for both the franchise and the city. However, to pull all of that into a tidy little summary, Glendale decided they wanted to get off the Coyote rollercoaster so they RFP'd a management agreement that enabled them to get closer to a fixed number in the budget for the arena. It's still a bright red number, my friend.

So, if you have that bright red number, why don't you cough it up?

Also, at what point was it prosperous for the team or the city?

The "worthless AM new Radio blog post" just reports the same facts that have been reported elsewhere.

It's crazy to me that Coyotes fans are still making ridiculous arguments on the Internet instead of holding the people who have caused this situation to happen accountable. Bettman, Meruelo may have been the catalysts but uninformed, narrowly focused fans have been the core reason for this failure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fairview

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,556
31,691
Buzzing BoH
So the binary hatred in American politics strikes again?
Yup... in the case of one particular Republican. And odds are that was done to secure a yes vote for the sports betting bill.

HOWEVER..... if you do a thorough check of Meruelo's political contributions they include donations to Democrats in Nevada.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeeto

1CasualFan

Registered User
Feb 14, 2022
71
167
I'm surprised the NHL didn't fund a more aggressive campaign, either up front or under the table.

They blackmailed $50 million out of Glendale - couldn't they have coughed up at least a couple of million to the drive to keep Tempe alive?
The electioneering fascinates me. I think what typically happens is the entity with the deep pockets (NHL and/or Team) retains a consultant or canvasser for the actual leg work. I would be surprised if the Coyotes, et al, did not put a significant sum in the hands of such a consultant for this special election.

The effectiveness of the campaign is largely dependent on how well the consultant performs. In a ~30,000 vote election, typically the cash will carry the day. But for this particular matter, the opposition appears to have had more desire and better messaging.

The desire prong is something that money cannot buy. The consultant can hire as many door knockers as they want - but they're mostly going to be imports and they're only going to work as hard as they have to. Whereas, the opposition was largely ideological. They're local and they'll walk barefoot over broken glass to get their message out.

The message prong just fell into the oppositions lap. "No Taxpayer Money for Billionaires" is an easily understood slogan that resonates. A complex multi-use development plan with deferred payments and special taxing districts is not easy to convey to the voter who is typically going to have about a 10 second attention span for the matter. We could nitpick the accuracy of proponent and opponent talking points about the development plan, but it's irrelevant, so why bother? The message is what matters in these types of things. How accurate that messaging turns out to be is just fodder for op-eds and whatnot.

I'm not sure any amount of money could have swayed this particular election. What the proponents seemed to need but lacked was the "star" voice that could say "This is a good deal, you should vote Yes" and have it be credible to the locals. I think I've heard that Jerry Colangelo is that type of voice in the Valley. Coyotes did not have access to that, so they took at 14 point beating when the votes were tailed.
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,556
31,691
Buzzing BoH
Interesting..... some city council members in Phoenix suddenly are interested in bringing hockey downtown again.


"I woke up this morning thinking, 'Should we reconfigure the Suns stadium?'" said Councilman Jim Waring, whose district oversees northeast Phoenix. "We are now a potential lifeboat" for the team, he added.

Waring has been a notoriously vocal critic of taxpayer-funded sporting arenas and voted against renovating the Footprint Center for the Suns in 2019, which cost the city $230 million.

Since the arena already exists though, it may be worthwhile to welcome the Coyotes and "maximize the investment ... if it pencils out," Waring said. "We may get some tax revenue from this from extra games."

Councilman Kevin Robinson of north central Phoenix said, "Under the right set of circumstances, I'd love to see it happen." By Wednesday afternoon, Robinson said he had requested information from City Manager Jeff Barton to discuss the prospect.

Mayor Kate Gallego, through a spokesperson, said, "Should the Coyotes be interested in working together to find a solution for them to keep playing in the Valley, I'm happy to discuss potential options with them."
 

Stumbledore

Registered User
Jan 1, 2018
2,525
4,911
Canada
:laugh:

Fair enough. I'll take any of the equivocation out of it. The poster wasn't told that by anyone they should have believed and if they did believe it, that's reflects more on them than on anyone else.
Take out the equivocation? Good sir, you just did it again!

a) Weren't told that by anyone.

b) If they were told that, they shouldn't have believed it.

c) If they were told that and believed it, then it's their own fault for trusting someone.

If you keep this up, I'll be forced to go have my nap earlier than usual.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Boris Zubov

Shwan

Registered User
Jan 30, 2019
381
770
Orange Country Adjacent
Yup... in the case of one particular Republican. And odds are that was done to secure a yes vote for the sports betting bill.

HOWEVER..... if you do a thorough check of Meruelo's political contributions they include donations to Democrats in Nevada.
lol, sure dude *one* republican.

- David Gowan $5,000
- John Kavanaugh $5,000
- Joseph Chaplik $4,000
- Russel Bowers $2,500
- TJ Shope $2,5000
- JD Mesnard $2,000
- Warren Peterson $1,000

(This list is just for the AZGOP senior leadership, there's plenty more donations to other GOP candidates)

That's a lot of money going to abortion restriction, or at least that's how Tempe 1st marketed it.
 

1CasualFan

Registered User
Feb 14, 2022
71
167
So, if you have that bright red number, why don't you cough it up?

Also, at what point was it prosperous for the team or the city?

The "worthless AM new Radio blog post" just reports the same facts that have been reported elsewhere.

It's crazy to me that Coyotes fans are still making ridiculous arguments on the Internet instead of holding the people who have caused this situation to happen accountable. Bettman, Meruelo may have been the catalysts but uninformed, narrowly focused fans have been the core reason for this failure.

I think I'm coming from a more analytical place that you are implying here, but I'm fine with whatever your perception might be.

If you'd like to familiarize yourself with the data, its easily accessible via Glendale - Follow Your Money: https://apps.glendaleaz.com/appscl/fym/fymmun.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stumbledore

Stumbledore

Registered User
Jan 1, 2018
2,525
4,911
Canada
Yup... in the case of one particular Republican. And odds are that was done to secure a yes vote for the sports betting bill.

HOWEVER..... if you do a thorough check of Meruelo's political contributions they include donations to Democrats in Nevada.
A smart American businessman always donates to both parties. I'm surprised that only his Republican donations would be parroted by the proletariat.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,326
11,122
Charlotte, NC
Take out the equivocation? Good sir, you just did it again!

a) Weren't told that by anyone.

b) If they were told that, they shouldn't have believed it.

c) If they were told that and believed it, then it's their own fault for trusting someone.

If you keep this up, I'll be forced to go have my nap earlier than usual.

A isn't right. I didn't say they weren't told it by anyone this time around.
B is not ambiguous. They were not told by someone they should believe.
C does leave open the possibility that the poster didn't believe it and is just trolling, but really there's no ambiguity there at all.

There is no equivocation in that post. Maybe you should take that nap :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stumbledore

Llama19

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
7,298
1,139
Outside GZ
I think I'm coming from a more analytical place that you are implying here, but I'm fine with whatever your perception might be.

If you'd like to familiarize yourself with the data, its easily accessible via Glendale - Follow Your Money: https://apps.glendaleaz.com/appscl/fym/fymmun.html
Glendale's new web site design is horrible...and borderline unnavigable...
and only dates back to 2019...
 

JimAnchower

Registered User
Dec 8, 2012
1,465
265
Interesting..... some city council members in Phoenix suddenly are interested in bringing hockey downtown again.

I would expect this. Could the new lease take power away from the Suns about bringing in another tenant? Is Ishbia more willing to partner than Sarver? Now if the recent renovation made moving the Coyotes downtown more difficult, it still doesn't hurt politicians to float the idea. There's no harm in "hey, we're willing to work here". If they are truly interested, it will cost a lot of money to do another renovation.
 

Stumbledore

Registered User
Jan 1, 2018
2,525
4,911
Canada
A isn't right. I didn't say they weren't told it by anyone this time around.
B is not ambiguous. They were not told by someone they should believe.
C does leave open the possibility that the poster didn't believe it and is just trolling, but really there's no ambiguity there at all.

There is no equivocation in that post. Maybe you should take that nap :)
I'm still scratching my head about that one and the wizard's wife says lunch is on the deck and if I don't get out there soon the damn birds will take it.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,409
3,597
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Please quit with the Glendale talk. The real problem there was simple: There wasn't enough money available in the arena and the hockey market for both the team and the city to be happy. That's it. Easy to describe. There is no going back, because the same situation holds true.

100%. That's basically why most the 1990s expansion teams had struggles that got better once they renegotiated their lease.

Everyone wants their slice of the pie, and wants to be the one making money. Cities "wised up" after the first wave of new stadiums/arenas that swept through in the early 90s, and made BETTER DEALS for the municipalities... but then the Jackets and Preds and some other teams just sucked because their lease terms were so bad. The City was like "Oh, we could lose this team unless we MAKE THEM MORE POPULAR" which requires them to have bigger budgets to compete, which means lease concessions.

Which should really be the blueprint for future leases and arena deals. Some kind of format where the percentages of revenues are a pendulum that swings the teams ways when results aren't, and the cities way when the it's winning happy times.

Which come to think of it was actually how the Islanders Barclays Center lease worked.


Consider, if you will, the Tempe deal. Where was the money for Meruelo? Probably in the development, not in the arena. Consider, if you will, UBS where the Islanders play. Why could it work? Not the arena. Everything else is the money driver.

Yeah, but I think it's important to remember the difference between team revenue, vs the cost of building the arena.

A new arena was making the ISLANDERS plenty of additional money from what they had before, making them profitable and a "up against the cap" team after years of putting Conn Smythe bonuses into 2/3 of the rosters contracts because bonuses count against the cap....

It's the recovery of the cost of actually building the arena that's the disputed money in all these cases. The Cities needs to get the money back from paying for an arena. At least a $0 ROI instead of a negative. But the team wants all the revenues they'd get in a fully paid-for for arena that they own... The "mixed use development" plan that everyone is going to is a way for both parties to win: The additional money comes in from charging other business rent for storefronts at a place where lots of people congregate (and drink/eat).


The city should have known that back in '13, when SMG, who was at that time a large arena manager, gave them 2 estimates to run the arena. One, with hockey, the other, without. Since the team siphons off a lot, SMG offered the city a better deal with NO hockey team.

The lesson here from both Coyotes and Islanders is that SMG is the devil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad