CXLVII - Is this the 'Final Countdown' in Arizona?

[Tawnos]

It does cut it if we're talking about an actual market that has a hope for future long term success. Most teams don't rely on entertainment districts, and most teams are in the downtown core.

I mentioned this in another thread the other day, but every arena built in the last 10 years is part of a mixed use district. That includes Edmonton and Detroit. The two confirmed new arenas in Ottawa and Calgary will be part of mixed use districts. Every new arena proposal on the table right now includes mixed use districts, including in DC. One team's major renovation project includes adding a mixed use district.

From the perspective of all of these teams, just an arena with ticket/concession/parking revenue doesn't cut it anymore.

 

[Llama19]

Local 12News did a report...

Could these renderings show a possible new Arizona Coyotes arena?

Source (Video): www.12news.com/video/sports/nhl/coyotes/could-these-renderings-show-a-possible-new-arizona-coyotes-arena/75-095840e9-15ea-4f7c-bc2e-3912710b2ddc

 

[oldunclehue]

Local 12News did a report...

Could these renderings show a possible new Arizona Coyotes arena?

Source (Video): www.12news.com/video/sports/nhl/coyotes/could-these-renderings-show-a-possible-new-arizona-coyotes-arena/75-095840e9-15ea-4f7c-bc2e-3912710b2ddc

I saw these, I love the look of it all. Such a unique rink. Curious about what looks like a connection to a smaller rink as well.

So many moving parts to make this work. But if they can make something like that, I am going to plan a vacation when my Jets play there.

Mind you....if the Jets leave and this fails, both teams might not be around lol. Dammit.

 

[sneakytitz]

Local 12News did a report...

Could these renderings show a possible new Arizona Coyotes arena?

Source (Video): www.12news.com/video/sports/nhl/coyotes/could-these-renderings-show-a-possible-new-arizona-coyotes-arena/75-095840e9-15ea-4f7c-bc2e-3912710b2ddc

Those look freaking awesome.

 

[Yukon Joe]

I mentioned this in another thread the other day, but every arena built in the last 10 years is part of a mixed use district. That includes Edmonton and Detroit. The two confirmed new arenas in Ottawa and Calgary will be part of mixed use districts. Every new arena proposal on the table right now includes mixed use districts, including in DC. One team's major renovation project includes adding a mixed use district.

From the perspective of all of these teams, just an arena with ticket/concession/parking revenue doesn't cut it anymore.

It's not a formal "entertainment district" but the Jets ownership bought up a fair bit of land/buildings around the arena before and after the Jets moved in 2011. The team's financial future is definitely not tied to tickets and concessions alone.

 

[LadyStanley]

From GM meetings

 

[LT]

x.com

vxtwitter.com

So likely at least another year of this.

 

[Yukon Joe]

x.com

vxtwitter.com

So likely at least another year of this.

That is slightly contradicted by Seravalli's reporting directly above.

So a few different thoughts:

1. League will always want to avoid a lame duck season. If the team loses the June land auction the league will want to avoid any hint that it is then definitely going to move after one more year.

2. All things being equal they'd like to stay in Arizona, but they want this whole arena situation to stop.

3. Daly is right - you can't pivot to relocation starting in June.

4. Seems like the league needs to make a call, and sooner rather than later, whether the land auction is a viable plan or not. This isn't the kind of thing discussed at the GM meeting however.

 

[TheLegend]

I mean can you really say that for sure? You just stated right above that we rarely see the finer details, so why are you claiming with certainty that we know the details of this particular agreement? Which makes more sense? That the team decided to make a 20 million dollar donation to ASU in the form of the annex, or that there are certain conditions that make it so that ASU ends up paying for all or part of it depending on the certain conditions? After all, 20 million dollar donation, on top of the other incentives given to ASU for use of the arena, for just the 3 to 5 years they'll be there is kind of a lot of money.

It was covered here, in depth, back when Mullett was being completed.

The contractor building Mullett for ASU specified the money for the annex and extra ice equipment had to be paid up front. Because they were going to have to undo some of the construction already in place and redraw the plans. The person from ASU in charge for overseeing the construction of Mullett said the same thing.

The lease of Mullett had the same stipulation, outlined by the arena's operator (OVG) and the Arizona Board of Regents (AZBOR).

So the odds of all these separate entities all getting together and making it up are pretty remote.

 

[TheLegend]

That is slightly contradicted by Seravalli's reporting directly above.

So a few different thoughts:

1. League will always want to avoid a lame duck season. If the team loses the June land auction the league will want to avoid any hint that it is then definitely going to move after one more year.

2. All things being equal they'd like to stay in Arizona, but they want this whole arena situation to stop.

3. Daly is right - you can't pivot to relocation starting in June.

4. Seems like the league needs to make a call, and sooner rather than later, whether the land auction is a viable plan or not. This isn't the kind of thing discussed at the GM meeting however.

Or it just contradicts Seravalli's injecting his own bit a narrative into it (his last paragraph). He's already been proven to be off on his "reporting" of this. He's made his personal opinion of the Coyotes quite clear to everyone in various blogs he's done.

Regarding your point #4. What would think would happen if the league made that call earlier? Richard Rodier addresses this scenario a while back.

 

[sneakytitz]

Regarding your point #4. What would think would happen if the league made that call earlier? Richard Rodier addresses this scenario a while back.

I think Rodier's assessment is right but what happens if the auction falls through and Ryan Smith shifts from being a buyer of an expansion team to a buyer of an existing team? Can they really keep that stuff secretive long enough to not cause that lame duck season? Or would they even care about a lame duck season with a 4,600 seat arena?

 

[Yukon Joe]

Or it just contradicts Seravalli's injecting his own bit a narrative into it (his last paragraph). He's already been proven to be off on his "reporting" of this. He's made his personal opinion of the Coyotes quite clear to everyone in various blogs he's done.

Regarding your point #4. What would think would happen if the league made that call earlier? Richard Rodier addresses this scenario a while back.

So "declined to clarify" to me suggests the question was asked and not answered. Otherwise it would be "did not clarify".

Did the league already make the call? Possible. But it feels like there's been a fair bit of media chatter about possible relocation this year - and not just from randos (like me!) on the internet.

As always - we shall see...

 

[mouser]

That's definitely an entertainment district. The arena renderings look gorgeous.

 

[TheGreenTBer]

Absolutely.no reason he should fail to win this bid IMO, and absolutely no reason to trust him with the keys to a NHL franchise if he doesn't.

 

[GKJ]

From GM meetings

This is perfect. The team stays there just because the timelines never match up.

“It’s too early to talk about that”

*A FEW MOMENTS LATER*

“It’s too late to do that.”

 

[Tawnos]

This is perfect. The team stays there just because the timelines never match up.

“It’s too early to talk about that”

*A FEW MOMENTS LATER*

“It’s too late to do that.”

yeah, the superficial double speak is strong today.

That being said, I would be surprised if there's a relocation for next season. The 3 year lease with 2 years of options at Mullett represented the longest timeline. If shovels get in the ground some time in the next 12 months, they'll be in line with that. And if they don't, then the team relocates after the 3 year term ends.

It's easy to see the league saying "let's give Meruelo this last 12 months because that's what the expectation was anyway."

 

[Yukon Joe]

Absolutely.no reason he should fail to win this bid IMO, and absolutely no reason to trust him with the keys to a NHL franchise if he doesn't.

My friend, the thing is the Coyotes ALWAYS seem to find a way for things to not work out.

Lots of things could still go wrong:

-they fail to win the auction. It's a public auction, someone could swoop in with a better plan / more money.
-even once he has the land, will Meruelo be able to finance and build a new arena?

Just off the top of my head.

@Tawnos you suggested shovels in the ground in 12 months. I think that wildly optimistic. They haven't even won the auction yet. A contractor hasn't been hired, plans haven't been finalized (the renderings do look nice, but a rendering isn't an architectural/engineering plan), supplies haven't been ordered, financing hasn't been finalized...

That being said if the Yotes do win the auction that is a good first step.

 

[GKJ]

yeah, the superficial double speak is strong today.

That being said, I would be surprised if there's a relocation for next season. The 3 year lease with 2 years of options at Mullett represented the longest timeline. If shovels get in the ground some time in the next 12 months, they'll be in line with that. And if they don't, then the team relocates after the 3 year term ends.

It's easy to see the league saying "let's give Meruelo this last 12 months because that's what the expectation was anyway."

they’re not getting shovels in the ground within 12 months.

Relocation will always be a surprise because no one ever thinks it’s going to happen.

12 months is gonna give 7 or 8 more expansion candidates to release statements though

 

[sneakytitz]

If the Coyotes don't win the auction or they fail to secure funding to build or any other reasons that doesn't have them moving towards an arena and the NHL has to step in, how do they? Is there something in the bylaws that allows the NHL to compel an owner to sell? Or remove the team from the league?

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Lots of things could still go wrong:

-even once he has the land, will Meruelo be able to finance and build a new arena?

This is the one that has me most worried, mostly from a timeline POV. I do think he'll be successful in purchasing the land. At that price point, I'd be shocked if anyone would outbid Meruelo. I just see so many delays in construction of something this large. Delays aren't typically days or even weeks either... it's normally months. I just hope a plan is in place for the next several seasons while this gets done.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Those do look nice, albeit the overhead looks a bit off, but commissioning renderings is the easy part. Even an utter boob like Reinsdorf can manage that with only one typo.

 

[TheLegend]

My friend, the thing is the Coyotes ALWAYS seem to find a way for things to not work out.

Lots of things could still go wrong:

-they fail to win the auction. It's a public auction, someone could swoop in with a better plan / more money.
-even once he has the land, will Meruelo be able to finance and build a new arena?

Just off the top of my head.

Anything is possible....

However for someone else to jump into the auction, that it isn't something you can do on a whim.

Friedman suggested this morning on Jeff Marek's podcast to watch for the wording in the auction documents.

Remember that while this is state owned land.... it resides within the boundaries of the City of Phoenix. The land is already zoned in a way that can fit the Coyotes' needs (hence no exposure to public referendums). So if you are going to meet the requirements you'd better have had some contact with them.

Financing wise is a good question. I would point out that for TED to have been even approved by the Tempe city council Meruelo had to show he had the financing in place before he could put a shovel into the ground. Which he did.

 

[Yukon Joe]

If the Coyotes don't win the auction or they fail to secure funding to build or any other reasons that doesn't have them moving towards an arena and the NHL has to step in, how do they? Is there something in the bylaws that allows the NHL to compel an owner to sell? Or remove the team from the league?

Here's the NHL Constitution. I believe it was disclosed to the public during the Coyotes bankruptcy proceedings (you can tell by the teams named it's not current).

https://www.lakelawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/constitution-NHL-.pdf

There's no provision to force a team to sell, but there is a provision to suspend or terminate a team from the league. But here's the thing - do you think any of these teams are worth much more than two nickles except for being a part of the NHL? Lets say Meruelo is suspended from the league - is he going to take the team and go play in the ECHL? Of course not. So a threat to suspend or terminate really means forcing an owner to sell.

Besides, for those of you with a historical bent, being able to force a team out was the reason the NHL was formed in the first place! Originally the NHA was the league, but 7 of the 8 owners had a major beef with the 8th team, the Toronto Blueshirts. Realizing there was no way they could force the Blueshirts out, the other seven teams quit and formed the NHL in 1917.

And there have been more modern examples. Don Sterling was forced to sell, as was Frank McCourt.

 

[TheLegend]

This is the one that has me most worried, mostly from a timeline POV. I do think he'll be successful in purchasing the land. At that price point, I'd be shocked if anyone would outbid Meruelo. I just see so many delays in construction of something this large. Delays aren't typically days or even weeks either... it's normally months. I just hope a plan is in place for the next several seasons while this gets done.

Biggest "if" as I see it is how quickly they could get the infrastructure in place.

 

[TheLegend]

Here's the NHL Constitution. I believe it was disclosed to the public during the Coyotes bankruptcy proceedings (you can tell by the teams named it's not current).

https://www.lakelawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/constitution-NHL-.pdf

There's no provision to force a team to sell, but there is a provision to suspend or terminate a team from the league. But here's the thing - do you think any of these teams are worth much more than two nickles except for being a part of the NHL? Lets say Meruelo is suspended from the league - is he going to take the team and go play in the ECHL? Of course not. So a threat to suspend or terminate really means forcing an owner to sell.

Besides, for those of you with a historical bent, being able to force a team out was the reason the NHL was formed in the first place! Originally the NHA was the league, but 7 of the 8 owners had a major beef with the 8th team, the Toronto Blueshirts. Realizing there was no way they could force the Blueshirts out, the other seven teams quit and formed the NHL in 1917.

And there have been more modern examples. Don Sterling was forced to sell, as was Frank McCourt.

The NBA got around the Sterling affair by having his wife in a separate legal action declare him unfit to run the trust that owned/controlled the Clippers. The NBA actually did little other than to bar Sterling from attending games, practices, etc.