Part XV: Phoenix - the battle of evermore (UPD #443ff 14-Dec agenda/lease links)

[peter sullivan]

Awesome. Can't wait for the 14th now. Speculation means nothing now because it's all about to become answers.

anyone want to put a wager on an announcement happening on the 14th that says they are hoping to make an announcement within the next 2 weeks?

i cant see it all being done in 8 days...they might vote on an agreement but there is no way all the mechanisms can be finalized by then.

 

[ps241]

lots to ponder......if a deal is so close then why so quite at the CoG......me thinks there is still heavy lifting going on......not like polititions to be quite if good news is about to happen....they would be in front of this for sure if they were down to "only" papering this deal (that you can take to the bank)

that being said i was pretty sure JR would waltz into the endzone on this deal and that one still has me scratching my head about what went wrong and is a good sign to all of us that its fun to guess on this but we really don't know what is happening right now at the CoG where this seems to lie in the balance.

i thought IEH would fail and i guess that got me up to .500 on my batting average....with MH its hard for me to get a read.....i am less sure of Matt than JR but more sure of him than IEH.....that puts him in the middle on my gut-o-meter.....his edge is that the CoG should feel the "imminent time pressure squeeze" now if they didn't before.....i have know idea what their real wiggle room is (the parking garage gambit was oh so clever)?

I also believe if the deal was "right there" and was wrapping up the meeting with the BOG would have been more than an interview "that went great".....i might be wrong on this but me thinks there are still some serious moving parts

now if you are a Yotes fan this is all very good news since i am most likely wrong again and this thing will now surely be gift wrapped and under the tree ready to open for Christmas.....the last bizzare and fitting twist would be a silent, quick, sale with Polititions not trying to take any credit for saving the team in the last stages of an all but done deal

 

[LadyStanley]

241, it could also be that Hulsizer wants to be less controversial (think Balsillie) and is trying to not rock the boat, make promises/guarantees (that he cannot fulfill), etc.

Thus the simple statement.

(He also just faced the "movers and shakers" of the NHL for the first time, wanting their favor/approval on his venture. That can be intimidating for any uninitiated person.)

 

[Jesus Christ Horburn]

anyone want to put a wager on an announcement happening on the 14th that says they are hoping to make an announcement within the next 2 weeks?

i cant see it all being done in 8 days...they might vote on an agreement but there is no way all the mechanisms can be finalized by then.

Well based on the timing of the "positive news" releases regarding the Coyotes in the past few months (exactly on the 15th of each month), I could see the COG approving the MOU on the 14th, thus allowing a flood of pro-Coyotes/Hulsizer news and statements to be released on the 15th - right on schedule.

That said, I don't see any way this deal is completely done before January. The sale of the franchise to both Reinsdorf and Ice Edge fell apart in the weeks following the MOU approval, which is where I believe this deal will fall apart as well - if it even gets that far.

 

[peter sullivan]

^ they have consistently said that they are going to skip the MOU stage and go directly to the signed sealed and delivered lease agreement....

that again is where i get stumped too...the MOU was essentially an agreement to then work out the details of handing over gobs of money by some outside mechanism.

with no evidence that they have been working on those mechanisms it seems likely that this agreement will be MOUish.

maybe i'm wrong and they have been dilligently aligning the CFD and ellman and westgate etc....or maybe matty doesnt need all of that since he says he's happy to lose money.

we'll see...

 

[RR]

^ they have consistently said that they are going to skip the MOU stage and go directly to the signed sealed and delivered lease agreement....

AFAIK the COG has never said that. Maybe you're referring to a different "they."

that again is where i get stumped too...the MOU was essentially an agreement to then work out the details of handing over gobs of money by some outside mechanism.

with no evidence that they have been working on those mechanisms it seems likely that this agreement will be MOUish.

maybe i'm wrong and they have been dilligently aligning the CFD and ellman and westgate etc....or maybe matty doesnt need all of that since he says he's happy to lose money.

we'll see...

The way the AZ Open Meeting Law works is the council and staff can work behind closed doors on legal matters. Council cannot vote on an issue, but they can give staff direction on what they want to see in an agreement, direct staff to draw up documents, and then review in a future executive session. Once the document(s) is to the liking of a councilman it can be placed on a public agenda to be presented, discussed, commented on by the public, and then voted on.

Time is running out. That's why some are speculating the lease itself is being worked on behind the scenes and will be voted on Dec. 14.

 

[peter sullivan]

perhaps i should have said, as it has been reported several times, they will proceed directly to the lease agreement without first voting on an MOU....are you suggesting otherwise?...didnt matty himself say that?

not sure what your second point is responding to.

 

[RR]

perhaps i should have said, as it has been reported several times, they will proceed directly to the lease agreement without first voting on an MOU....are you suggesting otherwise?...didnt matty himself say that?

Not suggesting that at all. I just read your OP and thought you were referring to COG and wanted to clarify it has never made that statement.

not sure what your second point is responding to.

I simply wanted to point out what the AZ open meeting law allows. Could be an MOU that comes out Dec. 14; could be the final lease agreement. Either would be permissible under AZ law. That was all.

EDIT: or, God forbid, nothing comes out on Dec. 14 and all of our heads explode.

Finally, cannot resist:

Matthew Hulsizer: New deal imminent

An interesting tidbit from the above Burnside article:

He also talked about how he has managed to overcome hurdles that prevented other potential suitors from buying the team.

"I don't know that I've resolved the issues," he said. "They may have been unwilling to lose money and maybe I am."

 

[obsenssive*]

this is a hypothetical but; what if there was a major catastrophe and for whatever reason (security/function...) the arena in Glendale couldn't be used by an NHL team any longer. What would happen to the yotes? would they fold/find a temporary new home/something else?

I know the preds home arena was flooded last season, but it was during the offseason so it was repaired by october.

 

[RR]

this is a hypothetical but; what if there was a major catastrophe and for whatever reason (security/function...) the arena in Glendale couldn't be used by an NHL team any longer. What would happen to the yotes? would they fold/find a temporary new home/something else?

I know the preds home arena was flooded last season, but it was during the offseason so it was repaired by october.

The Coyotes would return to their former home, US Airways Center (formerly America West Arena, and current and long-time home of the Suns), in downtown Phoenix.

 

[HockeyAndTheSox]

this is a hypothetical but; what if there was a major catastrophe and for whatever reason (security/function...) the arena in Glendale couldn't be used by an NHL team any longer. What would happen to the yotes? would they fold/find a temporary new home/something else?

I know the preds home arena was flooded last season, but it was during the offseason so it was repaired by october.

Yeah, pretty much what RR said - They would go back to US Airways Center. The USAC while not exactly a great hockey stadium, can still accomodate a rink. Most recently 2 years ago the ECHL Phoenix Roadrunners (affiliate of SJ at the time) was using the ice there.

I would imagine however that the section that has an obstructed ice view would not be sold unless there was a sell out.

 

[lockstock]

this is a hypothetical but; what if there was a major catastrophe and for whatever reason (security/function...) the arena in Glendale couldn't be used by an NHL team any longer. What would happen to the yotes? would they fold/find a temporary new home/something else?

I know the preds home arena was flooded last season, but it was during the offseason so it was repaired by october.

Don't even think about it! Arizonans have a lot of guns. I know you Peggers are getting desperate now that hope is fading, but terrorism is not the answer.

 

[RR]

Yeah, pretty much what RR said - They would go back to US Airways Center. The USAC while not exactly a great hockey stadium, can still accomodate a rink. Most recently 2 years ago the ECHL Phoenix Roadrunners (affiliate of SJ at the time) was using the ice there.

I would imagine however that the section that has an obstructed ice view would not be sold unless there was a sell out.

As was always the case up until the Yotes left there in 2003. Still cracks me up they claimed they could seat 16,000+ for hockey, which included about 1,000 of the 3,000 obstructed seats. I remember one of my first games there in 1998 (moved here in 2000) I got seats downstairs right behind the net in the opponents two-attack zone. Thought they made a mistake selling them to me for $30. Then got there and realized why: had to peek around the pillar in front of us to watch the game, and the seats were too low to completely see over the end boards. Never made that mistake again.

Don't even think about it! Arizonans have a lot of guns. I know you Peggers are getting desperate now that hope is fading, but terrorism is not the answer.

But if we get a blizzard, tornado, hurricane, flood, or earthquake big enough to take out the arena, then I'll tip my hat and admit that God must be a Canadian who hails fom Winnipeg.

 

[selkie]

I suspect that most cities big enough to have multiple venues have those kind of reciprocal 'act of God' agreements. Way back when, the Detroit Pistons played 15 games at Joe Louis Arena because a freak blizzard damaged the Pontiac Silverdome roof and it took a while to repair.

 

[Whileee]

this is a hypothetical but; what if there was a major catastrophe and for whatever reason (security/function...) the arena in Glendale couldn't be used by an NHL team any longer. What would happen to the yotes? would they fold/find a temporary new home/something else?

I know the preds home arena was flooded last season, but it was during the offseason so it was repaired by october.

Saskatoon...

 

[OthmarAmmann]

But if we get a blizzard, tornado, hurricane, flood, or earthquake big enough to take out the arena, then I'll tip my hat and admit that God must be a Canadian who hails fom Winnipeg.

The insurance proceeds would actually be the get-out-of-jail free card for the arena debt.

 

[obsenssive*]

The Coyotes would return to their former home, US Airways Center (formerly America West Arena, and current and long-time home of the Suns), in downtown Phoenix.

ok. I just didn't think there was much hockey-ready infrastructure in Phoenix.

Don't even think about it! Arizonans have a lot of guns. I know you Peggers are getting desperate now that hope is fading, but terrorism is not the answer.

I was thinking more natural disaster.....

I think it would be more likely that Phoenixites with "lots of guns" and a massive socio-economic crisis would stir up some **** before winnipeggers even raise their voice.

 

[saskganesh]

what if Cthulhu attacks?

this is getting silly. I imagine most teams would have problems if they needed to find an NHL sized and ready arena overnight in the same city.

 

[cheswick]

I think it's safe to assume that if a lease agreement shows up for voting on the 14th it will be ratified. If nothing shows up it suggests a deal couldn't be worked out that would pass council so there's no need to vote on it.

 

[Fidel Astro]

I can't see Hulsizer making any kind of deal without the potential to move the team in a few years, so even if he is successful, I think he'll just be delaying the inevitable.

If a winning streak can't attract fans, I doubt the announcement of a new owner will make much of a difference -- especially if it's made public that the new owner can relocate after a certain amount of time.

Think about it: the Coyotes fans right now have had an amazing opportunity to show the potential owner how strongly they support their team and how good Phoenix is as a hockey market. They haven't taken that opportunity. In fact, they've done the exact opposite. Why should we expect them to do anything differently if they're given another opportunity to do so?

 

[ps241]

Not suggesting that at all. I just read your OP and thought you were referring to COG and wanted to clarify it has never made that statement.



I simply wanted to point out what the AZ open meeting law allows. Could be an MOU that comes out Dec. 14; could be the final lease agreement. Either would be permissible under AZ law. That was all.

EDIT: or, God forbid, nothing comes out on Dec. 14 and all of our heads explode.

Finally, cannot resist:

Matthew Hulsizer: New deal imminent

An interesting tidbit from the above Burnside article:

that is a solid interview with Matt and for my money he doesn't come across as a wing nut.....he is putting firm dates on elements of the deal and the way he is talking he seems very confident that "A" a deal will get done and "B" he is going to be losing money for a while.....for my money if an owner accepts and can afford "B" then "A" can and most likely will get done.......when this gets done it might look like Matt has lost his marbles and he might be eating allot more of the losses than has been speculated on the board....in other words a modest or non existent CFD and some serious losses in the near term

it will be nice to get some meat on the bones (presumably on the 14th) for us to tear into...but this might be as simple as a scaled back and doable version of IEH's offer that can pass all the hurdles.....its just that the primary money man in that deal moved into the #1 spot which makes sense if you are bringing the money to the dance.....then Matt says he will bring in a top notch president and leave the current hockey operations untouched.....all really good news for the Yotes fans

its just and interview but if i was a fan of the Yotes i would like what i was reading.....Matt sounds pretty normal and is getting in for the same reason allot of guys get into pro sports i imagine (from an article yesterday by Dierdra McMurdy):

"It used to be that along with a trophy wife, a private jet, a vast yacht and a half-dozen homes, three other things set individual billionaires apart from the rest of the general pack: ownership of a major league sports franchise, an airline or a media outlet.

All three businesses offer a better return on personal vanity than on investment, but particularly when it comes to owning sports teams, most rich guys freely admit that it's mainly about personal enjoyment and fulfillment of a childhood dream. A great number of teams are money losers — or operate on a thin margin of financial profitability."


http://money.ca.msn.com/investing/deirdre-mcmurdy/article.aspx?cp-documentid=26600870

 

[Agalloch]

I can't see Hulsizer making any kind of deal without the potential to move the team in a few years, so even if he is successful, I think he'll just be delaying the inevitable.

You mean like Nashville ?

 

[bleed_oil]

Hi folks.
Question from a Phoenix Saga novice struggling to understand the situation:
If in fact this Hulsizer fellow is truly worth 300M, how could he ever hope to cover the Coyotes losses for the duration of the lease?
Assuming he keeps the team in Glendale for another 7 years one would assume losses related to the team would eat up a good chunk of his total net worth.
Is the COG somehow guaranteeing he doesn't lose money? If so why is it so hard to find an owner. Lets start a consortium right here, I would happily invest in a hockey team thats guaranteed against losses and could be moved to Mississauga or Houston in 7 years and would make money hand over foot.
Not being snide, I'm dead serious.

 

[Jesus Christ Horburn]

Saskatoon...

On that note, do we know exactly where Hulsizer stands with the possibility of playing out of market home games in Saskatoon?

It was a key component of Ice Edge's bid, and considering Hulsizer essentially seems like an extension of their bid (it's probable that he's working off their initial MOU), so I wonder where Hulsizer stands on the issue?

 

[cheswick]

Hi folks.
Question from a Phoenix Saga novice struggling to understand the situation:
If in fact this Hulsizer fellow is truly worth 300M, how could he ever hope to cover the Coyotes losses for the duration of the lease?
Assuming he keeps the team in Glendale for another 7 years one would assume losses related to the team would eat up a good chunk of his total net worth.
Is the COG somehow guaranteeing he doesn't lose money? If so why is it so hard to find an owner. Lets start a consortium right here, I would happily invest in a hockey team thats guaranteed against losses and could be moved to Mississauga or Houston in 7 years and would make money hand over foot.
Not being snide, I'm dead serious.

Where are you getting the right to move it in 7 years from? Hulsizer has said he intends to keep the team there for 25 years. If Glendale is giving any sort of concessions it's safe to assume there would be no out for the lease.