- Nov 17, 2011
- 7,659
- 2,541
I'm pretty sure I asked a week or more ago if this new arena talk was a 'done deal' and I was told (if I recall correctly.....errr....iirc) that it was.
Doesn't seem that way from what I'm reading.
Sorry for the confusion. I'm not sure anyone here would have said it was a done deal. Miscommunication. Sorry.
How anyone that could even be loosely judged to be 'sane' would dare enter into an agreement with this franchise is beyond me. Look at the track record....nevermind the on-ice or the financials.....just the lease issues, and the fact that after the league pulled out all the stops to save Glendale this franchise is almost immediately looking elsewhere afterward.
I mean....the sense I got from the NHL at the bankruptcy hearings is that they don't bail on their markets. Glendale built a rink and owes a pretty penny for it, so the league is going to make sure they give it the 'college try' to make it work for their sake. Otherwise.....cities would be less likely to fork over dough for new buildings across the league.
Not so long after.....the Owners are actively looking to build another venue while still playing in Glendale.
If I were Bettman I'd be fuming. To the point of purchasing the team and selling it for relocation fuming. If I were Glendale I'd be thinking "Damn...we should've taken that Canadian guy's money!". And, if I were ASU I'd be thinking "I don't want to agree to a coffee with these guys....we'll end up in 10 years of litigation over it!".
Bettman's not fuming because knows that many of his smaller markets are going to need more $$ in the future. So, anything that tightens screws on host communities to pay more to the team is a good practice in his mind. They would far rather play it out and then blame Glendale and the State of Arizona than to do anything that requires actual judgment. It's just how they operate.
One more 'If I were'......If I were the Coyotes Ownership.....and you're going to bail on Glendale.....why bail locally? Either sell for relocation and make some good coin (even after paying back what you owe the NHL....from what I've heard).....or get your franchise into a decent market where this isn't a constant issue?
There is no market to go to where IA can keep the ownership AND have an advantageous lease. That means they would have to sell. Yes, it would be the $$ wise move. But, these guys like the emotion of being owners. Ultimately, that's more important to them.
The Suns are going to want a new arena soon.....why on earth wouldn't current Coyotes ownership be partnering with them and the city of Phoenix to build a new rink.......why would they be trying to go it alone....again?
The Suns control all the revenue and all the events in their current rink. They have no reason to partner with the Coyotes and give up any $$. And, tbh, the Coyotes are not nearly as popular, so the Yotes don't have much leverage in the relationship between the 2 teams.
much of this situation has boggled my mind.....and it's been doing that for the better part of a decade now. Must be tiresome for actual fans.
Tiresome for fans, yes. As a test case of legalities, contracts, underhanded dealing, civic give-aways, power brokering, and poor choices, I hope it never ends.