CXLVIII - Coyotes owner Alex Meruelo had 'productive' meeting with Phoenix mayor

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,723
31,820
Buzzing BoH
@TheLegend you can laugh all you want, but 3-4 more years at mullet will do more damage and there is a bigger thing here that is being ignored.

It's all fine if AM wins the bid and builds the area, but there is a long history of much more historically relevant and stronger franchises having attendance issues with it's local fans if there is a disconnect between the fans and the team owner. Some people seem to just assume that if there is an NHL building in the "right" location that all the fans will just come flocking back. What if they don't? What if there is a disconnect w the owner and the fans and they don't want to come to a rink in the middle of nowhere with nothing else built around it (at the start)? What happens then? Serious question. This saga has had significant impact on the fan base, people seem to assume those fans will just start ponying up again and pack the area. What if they would rather continue watching at home at this point?

Every one of those fans knows that they and the franchise are just an angle to the entertainment district. That is where AM and JG are really trying to get. The coyotes are an angle to get there. Does that matter to the fans?

So…. I guess it’s clearly okay for you to laugh at one of my posts where I was answering someone’s basic question…… and I’m not allowed to express what I think is a concept that’s not based in modern reality.

Frankly speaking it never bothered me at all and I actually get a chuckle occasionally out of people thinking it gets under my skin in some way.

That said… here’s why you got a chuckle from me.

The days of just putting up an arena all by itself and thinking any pro sports team will survive on that alone are long gone. If Alex Meruelo wants to build an entertainment district to go along with the arena then so be it.

And that goes for any pro sports team in any market….. anywhere.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
38,798
5,011
Auburn, Maine
I hate saying this but even if they win this auction at this point it makes so much more sense to move the current franchise, let them get settled in a new long-term market IF one exists that can properly house the team now (Houston), let AM win this auction and develop his project with the approval of the NHL and open promise of an expansion team that start playing the first season that the new arena is open (money from sale of current team could be used to find the expansion team, and we all know the league will adjust for the Arizona market so that could cap the fee to match the sale price of the current franchise). Talking about 3 or 4 more seasons at mullet is borderline insanity.
where's the infrastructure to bring professional ie NHL Hockey.... to Hartford as a prime example, bleed..... instead of the Rangers adopting that territory by default after the transfer to Carolina by the Whalers, granted that there's new ownership of the Hurricanes
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,422
3,606
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
The phrase “never say never” sorta plays into this.

As an Islanders fan, I was absolutely terrified about the arena deal for UBS Arena falling apart... even after watching the construction cam every single day. And I finally relaxed when the puck dropped for the second period.

@TheLegend you can laugh all you want, but 3-4 more years at mullet will do more damage and there is a bigger thing here that is being ignored.

Like what? Islanders played at Barclays for how long? As much as I loved the commute it was not an NHL arena.

Yeah, there's no damage to be done playing 3-4 years in a temp venue with a permanent home that hasn't already been done going 15 years of being a total cluster with the future of the franchise always in doubt.

Knowing there's light at the end of the tunnel is infinitely better than wondering if that's an oncoming train.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coyotedroppings

Coyotedroppings

Registered User
Jul 16, 2017
7,178
6,041
So…. I guess it’s clearly okay for you to laugh at one of my posts where I was answering someone’s basic question…… and I’m not allowed to express what I think is a concept that’s not based in modern reality.

Frankly speaking it never bothered me at all and I actually get a chuckle occasionally out of people thinking it gets under my skin in some way.

That said… here’s why you got a chuckle from me.

The days of just putting up an arena all by itself and thinking any pro sports team will survive on that alone are long gone. If Alex Meruelo wants to build an entertainment district to go along with the arena then so be it.

And that goes for any pro sports team in any market….. anywhere.
I just laughed because his theory was so astronomically ignorant, with an odd bias toward the Mullet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheLegend

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,799
2,995
Last i checked no one can interfere with the teams attempt to buy the land. Not even the mayor of Scottsdale can prevent the team from buying the land. He can oppose it all he wants and in the city of phx city limits.

Maybe the mayor needs to realize why the arena attempt in tempe went to a public vote in the first place. The public has no say in on who can bid for that land and what said purchase of land can do with it.

no matter who acquires the land and builds on said land infrastructure will have to be build for it. sewers streets untilities etc
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: blues10

Tom ServoMST3K

In search of a Steinbach Hero
Nov 2, 2010
27,963
19,225
What's your excuse?
Any damage done by playing in Mullett is priced in already.

A few extra years there won't be any more damaging than the past...

I was gonna say years, but then I guess decades would be more appropriate, lol.

I really don't get why the Scottsdale Mayor has come out so strong against this project - I assume there's a bit of local politics at play here, otherwise why bother burning the bridge, even if you're skeptical at the team's ability to actually build this thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,799
2,995
Any damage done by playing in Mullett is priced in already.

A few extra years there won't be any more damaging than the past...

I was gonna say years, but then I guess decades would be more appropriate, lol.

I really don't get why the Scottsdale Mayor has come out so strong against this project - I assume there's a bit of local politics at play here, otherwise why bother burning the bridge, even if you're skeptical at the team's ability to actually build this thing.

There are requirements that anyone bidding for state land has to meet in order to be allowed to bid if AM didn't have the means to get it done then why was his application to bid for the land approved in the first place.
 

Roadrage

Registered User
Mar 25, 2010
730
190
Next door
- There must be proof of sufficient funds in place to close the deal at the end of 30 days. No form of financing is acceptable. Balance will be due in total at close, in cash.

- There must be an acceptable plan in place to initiate the infrastructure plan within the first 6 months of close and be completed within 36 months. Estimate cost for this is $80-100 million and is the responsibility of the winning bidder to finance it all.
So, the arena needs to be completed within 36 months of winning the auction or just the "infrastructure plan", whatever that is?
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,799
2,995
I don't think it really means anything. The land isn't in Scottsdale, it just borders it.

Maybe Scottsdale is a bad actor and tried to slow down construction or something, but there really isn't much he can do.

he's probably trying to stop it from using scottsdales utility infrastructure. Hes basically beating the drum of don't use our utilities and make us pay for it make city of phx pay for it.
 

Tom ServoMST3K

In search of a Steinbach Hero
Nov 2, 2010
27,963
19,225
What's your excuse?
he's probably trying to stop it from using scottsdales utility infrastructure. Hes basically beating the drum of don't use our utilities and make us pay for it make city of phx pay for it.
You don't come out this hard against a project unless you're looking for something - Or maybe they had plans on building something too actually inside Scottsdale but without the hockey element?

Just spitballing ideas, because this is pretty weird to me.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,799
2,995
You don't come out this hard against a project unless you're looking for something - Or maybe they had plans on building something too actually inside Scottsdale but without the hockey element?

Just spitballing ideas, because this is pretty weird to me.

He can't interfere to prevent it from happening. Its not city land nor its not in city of scottsdale city limits. Its state land that AM was allowed to bid on and has a right to own if he wins it. The only thing AM is required to do is what the requirements are that he has to follow in order to be allowed to bid and acquire said land if he is the higher bidder.
 
Last edited:

eojsmada

Registered User
Oct 23, 2022
944
1,130
I don't think it really means anything. The land isn't in Scottsdale, it just borders it.

Maybe Scottsdale is a bad actor and tried to slow down construction or something, but there really isn't much he can do.
Well...there has to be a tie-in for all of the infrastructure, I would think, that would require Scottsdale's approval for said tie-in. The planning, bidding for construction, and actual construction will run pretty tight to the 36-month deadline and if Scottsdale is uncooperative in allowing a tie-in to its infrastructure, that will make things quite difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Llama19

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,799
2,995
Well...there has to be a tie-in for all of the infrastructure, I would think, that would require Scottsdale's approval for said tie-in. The planning, bidding for construction, and actual construction will run pretty tight to the 36-month deadline and if Scottsdale is uncooperative in allowing a tie-in to its infrastructure, that will make things quite difficult.

Unless scottsdale wants to end up in the courts by getting sued by city of phx and the team itself scottsdale may not have a choice.
 

Tom ServoMST3K

In search of a Steinbach Hero
Nov 2, 2010
27,963
19,225
What's your excuse?
He can't interfere to prevent it from happening. Its not city land nor its not in city of scottsdale city limits. Its state land that AM was allowed to bid on and has a right to own if he wins it. The only thing AM is required to do is what the requirements are that he has to follow in order to be allowed to bid and acquire said land if he is the higher bidder.

I guess my point is he's clearly trying to prevent it from happening - I'm not particularly interested at this point as to the likelihood of his success (very, very low IMO) - I want to know why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,723
31,820
Buzzing BoH
Right...but if it hampers Meruelo's ability to reach the 36-month deadline...does Scottsdale care about getting sued?

Nyah…. Scottsdale’s mayor is just posturing over the fact a major development will be built just outside his city limits that could draw tax dollars away from his own city.

Typical economic turf war that has been going on for decades here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Buffalo @ Eastern Michigan
    Buffalo @ Eastern Michigan
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $766.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Ohio @ Toledo
    Ohio @ Toledo
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $550.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad