Phoenix LXXI: Daydream Belever

Status
Not open for further replies.

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,525
34,900
I have sympathy for people with cancer. I have admiration for doctors. I have neither for anyone "grieving" the demise of a sports franchise.

- There was a known fact going into this: Phoenix is not a viable market for the NHL product.
- There is a known fact coming out of this: Phoenix is not a viable market for the NHL product even if you lob $300MM or so in public subsidies into the mix.

I posted this the other day but I've never been one to shy away from repeating myself: The city has exhausted sole source procurement on the arena. In fact, they stubbornly attempted it again with JIG after it had already failed with IEH and Hulzinger. Any competent legislative/administrative body would explore competitive bidding for managing the arena. That bidding would likely include a paradigm shift away from purely pursuing sports entertainment. M4B posted the agenda earlier. The council is going to an executive session next week on the topic. That makes sense. I would think it's likely to cover the legal mechanics of the bid process for the freshman council members.

From a hockey fan perspective, I can understand that may be disappointing. I'm sure they'd prefer to endlessly try to drive that square peg into the round hole. But from the city's perspective, it is prudent and it is their fiduciary duty to explore options that are, you know, feasible. The city owned arena facility is currently operated on a tolling version of the NHL AMUL which provides no performance standards or incentives for the league to do anything to program the arena. As a result, there are currently only a handful of non-NHL events booked. The city has to bid this out so their arena asset can begin to perform for them instead of being grossly mismanaged by the NHL. The Pollstar data that KDB brought to the forum is a disturbing snapshot of how the NHL derailed the productivity at the arena. By the way, Glendale obligated themselves to $50MM in fees for that lackluster management effort. Posts by BarneyG and OA have illustrated exactly how desperate the fiscal condition is in Glendale. It would be extremely unwise for the city to ignore that reality to play another round of NHL subsidy roulette.

As for Clark/BeavisPAC, its just Dunning-Kruger on crack. They have no idea what they're talking about and they're incapable of perceiving their own ignorance. The mechanics of governance are completely lost on them. The most obvious example was the asinine Phoenix Monarch conspiracy where the covenants of competitive bidding were somehow suspended so a Council member could guide a contract to a preferred vendor. I probably shouldn't find it so amusing but whatever. I think you captured it perfectly in your post: without all of these boogie men to blame it on, the only thing left is the reality that JIG couldn't raise the necessary funds because the market is untenable.

Maybe "admiration" isn't the right term, but I do feel badly for the actual Coyotes' fans that have had to endure the longstanding uncertainty of the future of their hockey team.

You're completely right about the duty of Glendale city council to now move towards a more rational and responsible approach to the management of the Jobing.com arena. They should cast aside previous false analyses and apocalyptic prognostications regarding Westgate center and conduct their due diligence to see what real market options there are for the management of the arena.

They've now learned that even $300+ in subsidies is not enough to attract an owner for the Coyotes, and should feel relieved that they are no longer obligated to further decimate their budget with that sort of extravagance.

If the NHL were so insistent on keeping the team in the Phoenix market, then it would be incumbent upon them to provide the subsidy by slashing the selling price. For whatever reason, they refused to do so. Maybe Clark and Fallar and others will finally realize that the NHL has been playing them and ultimately refused to put any money on the table to facilitate a local sale. Instead, I guess they somehow feel better sniping at old men like Jones who never really had any influence on the outcome. (By the way, they seem to conveniently forget that the GWI and Clark were on the same side regarding the Hulsizer deal).
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
I don't know where you got the "folding" idea. I was just replying to the guy's post.

Yes, i saw and was paying attention, you don't see me stating that was your point in my post, did i?

You replied to a post that had folding in it.
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
Under the circumstances as they stand *today*, can CoG pull an Atlanta and lock them out of the arena?

OH NO!!! you didn't just go there ,oh no.

Payback?

Stop trying to make me smile.
 

Nordskull

WAITING FOR NORDS
Sep 29, 2011
2,268
44
Saguenay, Qc
We should ask ourselves is there an impact on the value of the 29 other franchises if the league folds a team?

If there's an impact, how much?

On the strict public relations side, not sure a pro league folding a franchise is a good thing.

On the money side (selling another franchise rightafter), may be it is.
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
QC fan I'm guessing? What is wrong with a seller attempting to maximize the return on an item they are selling? Can't imagine having an issue with that, unless you happen to be a prospective buyer that is!

MOD

You seem to think there would be no blow back from interested parties and stake holders.

Your assumptions of inflated quarter billion dollar price tags are beyond the pale.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
You seem to think there would be no blow back from interested parties and stake holders.

Your assumptions of inflated quarter billion dollar price tags are beyond the pale.

What blow-back? The only stakeholders at current are the NHL, FYI.

So, then by extension you basically are saying that you feel the NHL should just settle and accept an overnight relocation buyer and price not necessarily of their own choosing and act under the gun... versus taking their time, making the asset available to a wider number of parties and thereby increasing the return to the seller.

Just because overnight relocation is the default position of many here does not necessarily mean that is what will occur in the end. It may or may not happen.
 

Confucius

There is no try, Just do
Feb 8, 2009
23,325
7,898
Toronto
What blow-back? The only stakeholders at current are the NHL, FYI.

So, then by extension you basically are saying that you feel the NHL should just settle and accept an overnight relocation buyer and price not necessarily of their own choosing and act under the gun... versus taking their time, making the asset available to a wider number of parties and thereby increasing the return to the seller.

Just because overnight relocation is the default position of many here does not necessarily mean that is what will occur in the end. It may or may not happen.

Overnight? It's been 4 freakin years and if the league would have got their price they would have moved long ago.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
Overnight? It's been 4 freakin years and if the league would have got their price they would have moved long ago.

Citing "4 years" isn't really a fair portrayal of what has occurred during the period. The league was in position to get their price from TNSE when COG stepped in and promised to pay another $25 million, twice. The franchise has never really been up for auction though because of that as such.

TNSE was considered the preferred bidder at that time because they were the only ones with a building and were essentially "plug in and play". Now there are more buyers on the horizon and by extension no real need to move on an overnight sale to what is perceived to be a lone bidder. QC, Seattle, Koules would supposedly like a team in Vegas, Gallacher, etc. They've more prospective buyers to play against one another now and a limited inventory to sell. No need to act under the gun now.
 

Coramoor

Registered User
Aug 8, 2011
462
0
The league was in position to get their price from TNSE when COG stepped in and promised to pay another $25 million, twice. It has never really been up for auction though because of that as such. TNSE was considered the preferred bidder at that time because they were the only ones with a building and were essentially "plug in and play" as such. Now there are more buyers on the horizon and as such no need to move on an overnight sale to what is perceived to be a lone bidder. QC, Seattle, Koules would supposedly like a team in Vegas, Gallacher, etc. They've more prospective buyers to play against one another now and a limited inventory to sell. No need to act under the gun overnight.

They have 4 months.

That rules out Vegas and in truth, who is going to outbid PKP. Seattle could but they still need that NBA team which even 4 months from now might not be a guarantee if it goes to court
 

blues10

Registered User
Dec 10, 2010
7,300
3,316
Canada
Under the circumstances as they stand *today*, can CoG pull an Atlanta and lock them out of the arena?

It is my understanding that the NHL has 8 years remaining on a 10 year lease for jobing.com that it had previously agreed to with the COG. The lease carries no AMF but the braintrust at the COG negotiated where as the lease is solely renewable at the NHL's discretion and the COG has no recourse to boot the NHL out for 8 more years. IF the NHL chooses to stay. The lease had been renewable on a yearly basis but at times has been renewed on a monthly basis.

So simply, no the COG can not lock the NHL out of jobing.com.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
They have 4 months.

That rules out Vegas and in truth, who is going to outbid PKP. Seattle could but they still need that NBA team which even 4 months from now might not be a guarantee if it goes to court

They have four months until.... what?

They can suspend/kill the franchise and resell it whenever they wish, for delivery at a date (and to a buyer) of their own choosing.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,224
My answer to you is because when professionals...

When did professionals take over owning & operating franchises but for maybe a half a dozen of them in a 30 team league; employing anything more than legal minds to carry out there wishes, hatchet & yes men at NHL HQ with the exception of Collins and a few others? These guys arent professionals by any stretch of the imagination.... and ya, some people do sell their Voyageurs or Vegas' to the neighbour as they dont wanna go through the hassle of Craigslist or whatever. They'd rather expedite the matter here & now, receiving what they think is fair market value, get the thing out of the driveway.

MOD
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dado

Guest
So simply, no the COG can not lock the NHL out of jobing.com.

Well, I have to hand it to CoG, we're four years into this mess and they've only actually had to shell out for two of them. And even one of those they short-changed on.
 

Coramoor

Registered User
Aug 8, 2011
462
0
They have four months until.... what?

They can suspend/kill the franchise and resell it whenever they wish, for delivery at a date and to a buyer of their own choosing.

they would never ever ever do that, That is a complete PR disaster and if they just turn around and sell Quebec or Seattle a new team, that really doesn't change anything, folding the team is the argument of people who have literally no understanding of sports markets
 

Dado

Guest
...folding the team is the argument of people who have literally no understanding of sports markets

There may well be accounting/legal benefits to formally shutting it down and immediately starting up somewhere else. In reality, it would look just like a relocation, other than to the lawyers handling the paperwork.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
When did professionals take over owning & operating franchises but for maybe a half a dozen of them in a 30 team league; employing anything more than legal minds to carry out there wishes, hatchet & yes men at NHL HQ with the exception of Collins and a few others? These guys arent professionals by any stretch of the imagination.... and ya, some people do sell their Voyageurs or Vegas' to the neighbour as they dont wanna go through the hassle of Craigslist or whatever. They'd rather expedite the matter here & now, receiving what they think is fair market value, get the thing out of the driveway....
Lawyers would also likely advise any client selling an asset to do so in a manner that maximizes return to the seller, FYI.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sipowicz

The thrill is gone
Mar 16, 2011
32,233
43,166
It is my understanding that the NHL has 8 years remaining on a 10 year lease for jobing.com that it had previously agreed to with the COG. The lease carries no AMF but the braintrust at the COG negotiated where as the lease is solely renewable at the NHL's discretion and the COG has no recourse to boot the NHL out for 8 more years. IF the NHL chooses to stay. The lease had been renewable on a yearly basis but at times has been renewed on a monthly basis.

So simply, no the COG can not lock the NHL out of jobing.com.

8 more years, great the USA today's hockey writer must be overjoyed, the NHL can own and operate the Coyotes to small crowds with AHL ticket pricing until 2020!:handclap:
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
192,997
43,487
I don't mean to be modest, or even naive, but I don't find coming up with $170M to buy a professional sports franchise as a terribly difficult venture if anyone really really wanted it.
 

Nordskull

WAITING FOR NORDS
Sep 29, 2011
2,268
44
Saguenay, Qc
Well, if the NHL want to look like the WHA, they know what they need to do...

Lets FOLD'EM!

They certainly could do it, all they want is $$$$$. What's the NHL crediblity tonight? Who cares?

Now, they have 4 months, no question, not more.
 

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace

Coramoor

Registered User
Aug 8, 2011
462
0
There may well be accounting/legal benefits to formally shutting it down and immediately starting up somewhere else. In reality, it would look just like a relocation, other than to the lawyers handling the paperwork.

they might actually do that as part of the paperwork for all I know, but you don't fold them and announce open season on buying a new one
 

Coramoor

Registered User
Aug 8, 2011
462
0

Gump Hasek

Spleen Merchant
Nov 9, 2005
10,167
2
222 Tudor Terrace
Yes, and it's now 2013, times changed a long time ago. Leagues never fold teams, it just looks bad, they move them now. I'd be fascinated to know the last time the NHL/NBA/NFL/MLB folded a franchise, but i'm pretty sure they haven't in the last 50 years or so

So, you are moving the goalposts now. Thanks for the clarification.

Again, just because an overnight relocation seems to be the default position here does not dictate that it will actually occur. It may or may not; that is yet to be determined.

Am going out for dinner now. Carry on!
 

Coramoor

Registered User
Aug 8, 2011
462
0
So, you are moving the goalposts now. Thanks for the clarification.

Again, just because an overnight relocation seems to be the default position here does not dictate that it will actually occur. It may or may not; that is yet to be determined.

Am going out for dinner now. Carry on!

i'm not moving the goalposts at all, i'm talking about economic relocation as well and as I'm saying, times changed, in the last 50 years it just doesn't happen, which is all that is relevant for a discussion about relocation today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad