Phoenix bankruptcy/ownership Part XVIII: Is that a pale horse in the distance?

[Wetcoaster]

That is an interpretation, not proving what I said isn't a fact. That Moyes stopped paying bills and the league had to step in to make up for it is a fact.



This is an interpretation, not proving what I said isn't a fact. Balsillie wasn't approved and Moyes conspired (yes, the proper term, since their emails were pretty explicit in making sure the league didn't find out) to sell the team to him without permission from the league. That is a fact.



Who said anything about surprises? Is what I said a fact or not? Did Moyes engage in actions that would have a chilling effect on any other bid, yes or no?



Oh, it's not stopping there. Glendale will see to that. In any event, you seem to be agreeing that this one is a fact, Moyes has been charged with contempt of court.



I'm using the same figures as you. I notice you didn't use 2008. Why's that? Because every team gained value except Phoenix?

Once you hit the years around the lockout there are other factors in play. However, in 2008 Forbes noted Phoenix was the only team that did not gain in value. A fact.

So again, I ask you, what facts did I get wrong?


As for Ross, he may have the education but he is letting a severe bias interfere with his opinion. He is clearly antagonistic towards the league's ownership. If his opinion is to be taken as fact, why did the CCB disagree with him?

I'm afraid Ross sounds more like a "witness for the defense" than an objective viewer, and I don't think anyone with an objective view of the situation could see his comments any other way. For example, has he ever been an "expert" witness or other participant where he wasn't on the "antitrust" side? Is he, in fact, inclined to judge anything that even has a hint of being relevant to anti-trust in favor of the offending (in his view) business?

Given Ross has been fanatically pro-Balsillie in this affair makes the question, as you are fond of saying, rhetorical.

You asked me to deal with the "facts" which were not so much facts as your opinion and interpretation thereof. I did so. I took the same facts and interpreted them differently.

Professor Ross is an expert with credentials and therefore something upon which to base his expert opinion.

As you are fanatically anti-Balsillie and have no expert credentials I will go with Professor Ross' opinion.

 

[bbud]

That's a good point about Buffalo being the NHL's best television market in the US, in terms of ratings. I'm sure that's not something the NHL would want to easily give up, given how mightily they struggle to achieve even meager TV ratings in many places.

One thing that I think people don't understand, who argue that moving Buffalo sports franchises just across the border (to Toronto, Hamilton, or wherever) would allow the teams to keep their existing American fanbase - no, it wouldn't.

Logistically, yes, those fans could still attend a lot of games if the Sabres or Bills moved to Canada. But they wouldn't. You have no idea of the capacity for Bitterness, and the ability to hold long-term grudges, of Buffalo sports fans. The more likely scenario is that the vast majority of Buffalo area fans would go out of their way to avoid giving those franchises any more money or support, if they ever moved. There would be an incredible feeling of betrayal, that would most likely last for decades.

Not to take anything away here as i have no desire to see the sabres move but sabres fans say canadian fans going to games make up big parts of teh teams success id hope you are not saying a one way option is how it should work?
That is a bad arguement to set up in here for those reasons.

 

[billy blaze]

. Is there a cable company that does?

MSG shows games when their is no conflict with the New York City teams they cover

 

[New User Name]

MSG shows games when their is no conflict with the New York City teams they cover

I wish Rogers would pick that up. I'm guessing the Leafs would be against it

I'm not one that believes that the Leafs are the ones holding up a team in Hamilton.
I believe it's not in Garys plan to grow the game where HE thinks (sic) it doesn't need growing.

 

[Wetcoaster]

You have no idea of the capacity for Bitterness, and the ability to hold long-term grudges, of Buffalo sports fans.

Actually Canadians kind of do have an idea - Winnipeg? Quebec City?

 

[billy blaze]

National Post on yesterdays hearing

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=1987682

 

[New User Name]

Actually Canadians kind of do have an idea - Winnipeg? Quebec City?

For some reason Canadians aren't supposed to be bitter..........especially when it was all our fault the Jets and QC left. at least from the so called experts on here tell us.

 

[nye]

While we may not be in court of law, some posters are trying to make what amounts to expert legal opinion arguments. Credentials would seem to be critical particularly when a poster claims that the legal expert's opinion should be disregarded.

There are two opinions being offered. I happen to accept the one from the legal expert with the superior credentials. YMMV.

I believe that Professor Ross has solid basis for his opinion. You do not.

I guess not (about you having anything else).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

[MayDay]

Not to take anything away here as i have no desire to see the sabres move but sabres fans say canadian fans going to games make up big parts of teh teams success id hope you are not saying a one way option is how it should work?
That is a bad arguement to set up in here for those reasons.

They're not analogous situations at all.

The fans in Buffalo have had a pro hockey team for four decades, and have had it become an integral part of the community in that time. If it ever left and moved to Canada, the fans would be bitter about losing the team and would not want to continue to support it, and rightfully so.

The fans in Hamilton do not have a team, have not had a team, and have not lost a team (unless they've been alive since 1925, which is unlikely), so they have no reason to be bitter. The Sabres were never in Canada, and did not relocate to Buffalo, so they have nothing to hold against the organization in that respect.

It's apples and oranges.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/694266
CP on the wait


http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/09/07/daily84.html
Biz Journal looks at strength of bids

Baum’s decision may come down to whether Glendale has a $500 million claim against the Coyotes if the team is to move to Canada, or if that claim is capped by U.S. bankruptcy rules. The judge’s decision also is complicated by how confident he is in the NHL’s ability to find a viable owner to keep the team in Arizona and not lose money.

http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/09/14/story11.html?b=1252900800^2075311

Baker and Nemecek manage sports bars and restaurants near University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, where the Cardinals play, and they hope the team’s bandwagon of new fans can boost business.

Pinning hopes on the Cardinals to buoy revenue comes at a tough time for many bars and restaurants near UOP Stadium and Jobing.com Arena, home of the Phoenix Coyotes. The National Hockey League team is in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and could move to Canada, and eating and drinking establishments throughout the area have been hit by the economic slide.

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2...91209-coyotes-case-enters-another-wait-cycle/
NY Times - the wait cycle

 

[bbud]

I guess not (about you having anything else).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Ok would you put those up going against ross in court and say his view shouldnt count here is your evidence ?
i think the issue is up to the judge in said case but fill your boots discrediting him here i am sure baum reads us lol

 

[bbud]

They're not analogous situations at all.

The fans in Buffalo have had a pro hockey team for four decades, and have had it become an integral part of the community in that time. If it ever left and moved to Canada, the fans would be bitter about losing the team and would not want to continue to support it, and rightfully so.

The fans in Hamilton do not have a team, have not had a team, and have not lost a team (unless they've been alive since 1925, which is unlikely), so they have no reason to be bitter. The Sabres were never in Canada, and did not relocate to Buffalo, so they have nothing to hold against the organization in that respect.

It's apples and oranges.

Im not arguing it as i said many posters who do not want a hamilton franchise cite the huge #s of fans from S Ontario that cross the border to see the sabres to the point losing them would hurt the team so my point is you might step gently on canadians here they keep you alive according to many.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

You asked me to deal with the "facts" which were not so much facts as your opinion and interpretation thereof. I did so. I took the same facts and interpreted them differently.

No, actually, you characterized the facts as opinions and said you disagreed with them, then proceeded to admit all five of them were factually true. There were no interpretations in my original post, except to suggest the city would sue Moyes.

Professor Ross is an expert with credentials and therefore something upon which to base his expert opinion.

As you are fanatically anti-Balsillie and have no expert credentials I will go with Professor Ross' opinion.

That's your right. I'm going with the CCB's and Judge Baum's, since both of them disagreed with him. Pretty sure their credentials are pretty good.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

For some reason Canadians aren't supposed to be bitter..........especially when it was all our fault the Jets and QC left. at least from the so called experts on here tell us.

The problem starts when the bitterness leads them to support something that is actually bad for other Canadian teams.

As I said a few pages ago, had Pocklington thought of doing this when he still owned the team, the Oilers would be in Houston right now. It (the move) would have been successful.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2...91209-coyotes-case-enters-another-wait-cycle/
NY Times - the wait cycle

Someone remind slapshot that SOF are secured creditors, not unsecured.

National Post on yesterdays hearing

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=1987682

Wow and I thought the G&M was partisan. These guys are going to be drinking kool-ade if the league wins.

"Frankly, we believe there's less legal risk in accepting the NHL bid," said Steven Abramowitz, attorney for SOF Investments. "For that reason, we strongly prefer the NHL bid."

Just an example of the way neutral observers believe the winds are blowing. The harm that did Balsillie's attempt can't be understated.

 

[mouser]

http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/09/14/story11.html?b=1252900800^2075311

Small sample size, but some figures cited by bar/restaurant owners on the impact of sports on Westgate business:

Jamie Parton, Western vice president for Gordon Biersch Brewery Restaurant Group, said the company’s Westgate location is offering happy-hour drink specials on Sundays. He said business goes up by 50 percent to 70 percent on Sundays when the Cardinals play at home.

...

Parton said Coyotes fans account for as much as 30 percent of Gordon Biersch’s business during the NHL season.

“It’s still important. They are bringing in people,†he said.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

no but those two teams have reps on executive committee who should have disclosed

And whose responsibility is it to disclose this? The people involved. NHL executives can't be everywhere all the time and certainly don't have the means to monitor every communication between people around the league. It's quite easy for two people in an organization to engage in a transaction that is prohibited by the organization and then conceal it. [You can see these examples in the news every day.] When this happens, how are the heads of those organizations supposed to know it's going on if (A) they don't know themselves, (B) no one involved says anything, and (C) in the normal course of business nothing happens to indicate that something is amiss?

Of course, those people should have never been involved in this kind of a transaction in the first place. When this came to light, I'm sure the league pulled people into the office and chewed ***** and levied fines.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

I still have question regarding how a guy like Boots who was allready running into issues got past those guys it dose not say much for the AEG guy and GB letting him head expansion .

he fooled a lot of other people too. Fraud can go undetected you know, and that is what happened in this case.

 

[New User Name]

The problem starts when the bitterness leads them to support something that is actually bad for other Canadian teams.

As I said a few pages ago, had Pocklington thought of doing this when he still owned the team, the Oilers would be in Houston right now. It (the move) would have been successful.

Jude Baums decision if he gives the team to Jim is applicable to American teams, not Canadian teams.

While we're at it, at this moment none of the Canadian teams are in trouble.
Will the dollar go back down? who knows, maybe, but that's why there is revenue sharing.

Even Bettman said had the league had the very generous RS and not the cheap CAP the Jets very well could sill exist.

Funny how that works. When 4 Canadian teams needed help mainly because of the low dollar, that help was a couple of million, now we're seeing American teams needing welfare and that pay out is millions more.

Imagine if the Jets and QC had the local TV contracts that Philly, the Rangers and a few others have and no national contract, they very well might not have needed the CAP.

A few American owners DO NOT want a national American TV contract, it'll cut into their own lucrative contracts.

One day the truth will come out how it's the Canadian teams and Canadian $$ that's keeping the league afloat.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Because they're sacked/deceased or otherwise former, this invalidates completely the statements they made on the topic at hand?

You know very well that is not the point.

They are talking about whatever the situation was a decade and a half (and more, in some circumstances) ago. It is entirely irrelevant. E-N-T-I-R-E-L-Y irrelevant.

For that matter, the answer is "yes" to your question. The "topic at hand" is "Is there a veto in the NHL today as practiced - or even recently practiced, for that matter - by the current NHL ownership?" Citing the opinions of ex-owners, or (even more laughably) other peoples' opinions of the opinions of ex-owners, is downright goofy . There is a reason why Balsillie did not cite those opinions, which I am sure were made available to him. It is because Jeff Kessler would have known that, if he put them forward as evidence, Baum J. would have looked at him as if he was a first-year law student, and not much of one at that.

 

[New User Name]

You know very well that is not the point.

They are talking about whatever the situation was a decade and a half (and more, in some circumstances) ago. It is entirely irrelevant. E-N-T-I-R-E-L-Y irrelevant.

For that matter, the answer is "yes" to your question. The "topic at hand" is "Is there a veto in the NHL today as practiced - or even recently practiced, for that matter - by the current NHL ownership?" Citing the opinions of ex-owners, or (even more laughably) other peoples' opinions of the opinions of ex-owners, is downright goofy . There is a reason why Balsillie did not cite those opinions, which I am sure were made available to him. It is because Jeff Kessler would have known that, if he put them forward as evidence, Baum J. would have looked at him as if he was a first-year law student, and not much of one at that.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't legal counsel for the league say a veto exists for expansion but not for relocation?

 

[Wetcoaster]

For some reason Canadians aren't supposed to be bitter..........especially when it was all our fault the Jets and QC left. at least from the so called experts on here tell us.

Is that because we have ice in our veins and sleep on frozen ponds?

 

[Wetcoaster]

I guess not (about you having anything else).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

It is kind of how legal arguments are constructed.

If you want to play in the legal sandbox you need to know the rules.

 

[Wetcoaster]

No, actually, you characterized the facts as opinions and said you disagreed with them, then proceeded to admit all five of them were factually true. There were no interpretations in my original post, except to suggest the city would sue Moyes.

That's your right. I'm going with the CCB's and Judge Baum's, since both of them disagreed with him. Pretty sure their credentials are pretty good.

I said from the beginning I did not consider them facts - just your interpretation thereof.

As I have said I believe that you are not reading the CCB opinion correctly and interpreting it too narrowly.

 

[Wetcoaster]

National Post on yesterdays hearing

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=1987682

Some great nuggets in there from the court exchanges.

"There are three things that it takes to be an owner of an NHL franchise," argued NHL attorney Tony Clark, as passionate as he was condescending.

"One, you've got to be wealthy. ... Two, you've got to love hockey. And Mr. Balsillie, he has got both of these in his favour in spades. Nobody's denying that. But No. 3, your Honour, you've got to play by the rules that bind NHL owners. You know, there's an old rock and roll song by Meat Loaf."

"Meat Loaf ?" interrupted Judge Redfield T. Baum.

"Meat Loaf," continued Mr. Clark. "He's a big fat guy. He actually had a good voice. He may actually still be around. And I apologize to Meat Loaf, maybe he's slimmed up. The name of the song was Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad. Well, that doesn't cut it for the NHL."

When Wayne Gretzky's name came up several hours in, Judge Baum took a sudden interest.

"Let me ask a question about that," the judge said. "Is he coaching the team right now?"

An NHL lawyer replied, after a pause, "I've been told there's no change in his status for the moment."

Judge Baum, undeterred, said, "Does that mean he's coaching the team?"

The NHL lawyer waffled around, said something about "delicate negotiations," and never really answered the question. Eventually, he said, "one way or another, we will come to a resolution."