Phoenix CVI: It's good to talk these things out
- Thread starter Major4Boarding
- Start date
- Status
I am going to assume this is a question desiring a real answer, not an argument.
So, here goes...
We have seen enough of a teaser of emails from COG legal staff to know that there is some what of a case there that Frisoni and Tindall were 'significantly involved' in the contract with IA. It seems very reasonable to me that what COG legal staff introduced to the court was really just tip-of-the-iceberg. Thus, I conclude that COG has a very, very strong case which is very likely to win, should this go to court.
Therefore, they don't have to settle. If the case goes to court and they win, it just means they are back at the table, negotiating with IA.
Now, from IA's side.... It seems to me again that they have a week case should this be decided in court. Were they to lose in court, they have no place to play.
So, what risk does COG have right now? The very small possibility in my mind that IA wins in court. That's all. Current City Council seems to have figured out that IA as Arena Manager is a loser for Glendale. They seem to have decided that they would like the team to be there, but if it can't happen, they are OK with that. So, in their minds, the risk of the team leaving is no risk. Thus, COG has very little risk in the negotiations.
What risk does IA have? Well, effectively, right now, they have no place to play. Their window to negotiate a sale out of town is closed. The Suns' arena is not an option. They literally have no place to play. If they run the case to a judgment in court, and COG wins, the lease could be cancelled in mid-season. Then what? This is a lot of risk.
Thus, my conclusion that COG has all the leverage.
Some people believe Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are reptilian shape shifters from outer space. To each their own.
LeBlanc said the city's case would be laughed out of court. It wasn't.
LeBlanc said the team would not renegotiate. They are.
Glendale has more flexibility in their risk tolerance to begin with, just as MNN described.
Glendale has much better leverage and IAs actions confirm it.
Wait, you mean IA isn't going to win $200 million in damages from Glendale?
Even more assumptions. The only leverage the COG has is the bad press potentially effecting ticket sales and advertisers. If the COG didn't have a signed contract, they would be in the drivers seat.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,224
I wouldnt characterize it as Glendale now holds all the leverage as MNN did there, but theyve certainly turned the tide, reversed the onus of responsibility in voiding the Lease & Arena Management Agreement with Ice Arizona. And while initially Anthony LeBlanc & Grant Woods backed by the NHL angrily & derisively laughed it off as being a case without merit, not the case at all as Judge Bergin clearly agreed, moving forward. Doesnt matter what you think, what I think one way or the other as to the validity & strength of the Cities case when invoking the Statute to nullify the contract, naming Tindall & Frisoni & thus IA as being in breach thereof. What matters is that the Court did accept it in as much as it then forced IA into seeking relief through the issuance of a TRO. Glendale demanding surety in the form of funds to be paid by IA into escrow to cover costs and the court while falling short of what was initially requested by the COG still dinging IA for a sizable chunk of change. Now sits at a million bucks & that stings when your as clearly cash strapped as this organization is.
That it wasnt thrown or "laughed" out of Court as LeBlanc/Woods suggested it would be a serious problem obviously. Often in civil cases like this & regardless the amounts of money involved merely launching a suit or voiding a contract more than enough for a miscreant debtor or non-performing vendor as is the case here to either start bucking up or delivering what was promised "or else", see you in Court. Goes to Court, the debtor or non-performing vendor loses all control. Glendale does have a case. For IA/NHL to wind up in litigation with the City is a no win proposition even if they do win the case. Hence, theyve lost their leverage with the City. They no longer control their destiny. Judge Bergin does. And if they lose the case, whatever appeal Courts they have to then go to to try & get that decision overturned & so on & so forth. The optics absolutely dreadful as in Deposition of people like LeBlanc, Tindall, possibly Bill Daly & others, completely unmasked, exposed. The NHL does not want that happening, believe me. Beyond embarrassing, open themselves & the various Bad Actors in this theater of the absurd to all kinds of possible further legal jeopardy, civil and even possibly criminal. The only "leverage" the NHL/IA has is that the City would like to see the team stick around. But not at this price, not with that contract.
Last edited:
wildcat48
Registered User
You mean like TeamTony on their School Girl Press Tour telling everyone that the case would be LOL'd out of court and they'd never re-negotiate with CoG because they've already been shot in the head.
The fact they're even talking would say that Glendale has Tony by the cojones.
wildcat48
Registered User
Yeah, because they wouldn't be paying 15M to some hustler and the team would likely be in Winnipeg right now.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,224
What does this even mean? Like if this was all just done on a handshake? Not following you.
Weren't you the one saying that IA wouldn't renegotiate at all?
You were wrong about that and you're just as wrong about this.
He is saying that right now, the agreement from 2013 is still in effect. What that really means is, he doesn't think COG has a right to cancel.
Mightygoose
Registered User
Llama19
Registered User
07/24/15 9:00 a.m. Council meeting agenda (with amendments)...
https://glendale-az.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=412105&GUID=ACE8B3FD-C847-467E-9D08-2C10AB28C7B9
https://glendale-az.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=412105&GUID=ACE8B3FD-C847-467E-9D08-2C10AB28C7B9
They chopped the AMF to $6.5 and the lease expires on June 30, 2017
How's that for IA having the leverage
How's that for IA having the leverage
- Aug 12, 2002
- 2,085
- 629
They chopped the AMF to $6.5 and the lease expires on June 30, 2017
How's that for IA having the leverage
Is this speculation or is there a source for this?
Glacial
Registered User
- Jan 8, 2013
- 1,704
- 116
And I was about to say this has been such a quiet week.
This vote will likely be a formality of however the negotiations went. If things went along smoothly and they reached a consensus decision, it should easily pass. If things were contentious and this week, IceArizona says "This is our final offer, take it or leave it", not having given much ground, then it should easily be shot down. ... Or maybe it's kind of a mixed bag, somewhat unpalatable to old AMF opponents & proponents, but not unpalatable enough to reject it outright, meaning how the vote goes could be completely up in the air as it would be down to each individual to decide if they can personally vote for the deal. I mean, in that case, it could be 4-3, but the 4 & 3 would be an unlikely mix of both sides.
RandR
Registered User
- May 15, 2011
- 1,939
- 486
COG doesn't want the Coyotes to leave, Ice Arizona don't want to leave, the NHL doesn't want them to leave. And nobody other than us onlookers wants to take this all the way to court.
Where there's a will, there's a way, even if they are all negotiating over a pie that isn't as big as they'd like it to be.
Where there's a will, there's a way, even if they are all negotiating over a pie that isn't as big as they'd like it to be.
cbcwpg
Registered User
If a deal is re-done with the CoG, I can't wait to see how LeBlance tells everyone how he struck a new re-negotiated deal with the CoG without ever re-negotiating, since that was something IA said they would never do.
Mightygoose
Registered User
They chopped the AMF to $6.5 and the lease expires on June 30, 2017
How's that for IA having the leverage
And the Coyotes keep the other revenue that previously went to CoG. Where have we heard that before?
I think they came to this board looking for ideas.
Mightygoose
Registered User
- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,751
- 12,006
JimAnchower
Registered User
- Dec 8, 2012
- 1,465
- 265
Kind of limits any relocation options at that point if NHL expands to QC and LV in September. Will Seattle have firmer plans for an arena? Will NHL sell team to Portland for a cut rate price and potentially anger LV and QC?
They chopped the AMF to $6.5 and the lease expires on June 30, 2017
How's that for IA having the leverage
Out-standing. This team is portable in two seasons, right around the time expansion teams are coming online. Gives Seattle time to get their ducks in a row.
- Status
