Phoenix LXXV: It's Like Deja Vu All Over Again

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ludwig Fell Down

Registered User
Feb 19, 2005
3,943
3,065
South Shore, MA
I still think one option is the NHL owning it again for one more season, just to see if they can eventually close with someone, OR they just don't like their options for relocation at this time. Then again it's just AWAG, so who knows.

.

I need a refresher. Is the $25mm subsidy -- err, arena management fee -- renewable on an annual basis at solely the NHL's discretion? I think that is how the agreement stands, but can't recall.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,224
AWAG - A Wild A** Guess

.... :laugh: oh ok. I didnt realize ass was filtered. (and I see its' not, use freely cbc, CRTC doesnt seem to mind)

Failure is a great teacher, I suppose, but success is a legitimate alternative. ;)

Yepp. A man can fail many times, but he isnt really a failure until he starts blaming someone else. And whatdya' wanna bet Gary Bettman does just that if & whenever this teams moved?.... rhetorical question.
 

cbcwpg

Registered User
May 18, 2010
20,577
21,844
Between the Pipes
I need a refresher. Is the $25mm subsidy -- err, arena management fee -- renewable on an annual basis at solely the NHL's discretion? I think that is how the agreement stands, but can't recall.

The $25MM was not an AMF and is not part of the 10 year agreement the NHL and the CoG came up with, which can be renewed by the NHL on a year by year basis. The two times the CoG put up $25MM were one or two time deals. Think of it as blackmail. Nasty I know, but what else would you call it? The NHL is not going to get that kind of money to offset losses again.
 

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
There really is no reason to believe there is any legitimate interest in owning the team in Glendale. The Darin Pastor and Anthony LeBlanc stories are essentially worthless. This whole thing is still very simple: Glendale is not a viable NHL market. Everything that has occurred since Fall of 2008 is the direct result of that indisputable fact. This story has an arc and nothing has been introduced to change it. The NHL cant sell this franchise in it's current location. They've tried. We've seen the results. They are going to have to move it; fold it; or float the losses themselves.

The league doesn't appear to have any interest in contracting/suspending the operation, so that pretty much leaves move it or fund the losses as their options.

It appears the league could easily exercise their right to AMUL extension and keep the team at Jobing.com for another season. They don't actually need a local ownership offer to do that.

For relo, a quick review of arena facilities leaves QC and KC as the most probable options. Leipold's comment is the only thing that I have seen to make me think the league actually has an option for 13-14 Season.
 

Ludwig Fell Down

Registered User
Feb 19, 2005
3,943
3,065
South Shore, MA
The $25MM was not an AMF and is not part of the 10 year agreement the NHL and the CoG came up with, which can be renewed by the NHL on a year by year basis. The two times the CoG put up $25MM were one or two time deals. Think of it as blackmail. Nasty I know, but what else would you call it? The NHL is not going to get that kind of money to offset losses again.

Thanks. So if the league does stay, and can't prop up a buyer to keep the team in Glendale, there goes their leverage and their $25mm. Which means if they extend by another year, they either 1) have a buyer who will let the sale price continue to increase; 2) the other 29 owners have agreed to cover the losses; or 3) the losses are just a loan from the other owners until expansion fees cover them.
 

Wheathead

Formally a McRib
Apr 4, 2008
4,635
5
Saskatoon
I would imagine that if the NHL were close to an actual sale, they would be loudly trumpeting the fact. I know that any other sale that's been "close" has had a lot of publicity, and I get the idea that they may want to try something different and stay away from publicity to help complete the sale, but I would imagine that Gary's ego would want to shove it in the face of naysayers if the team were close to staying in Glendale.

No news for Coyotes' fans is bad news.
 

LeafShark

Registered User
Feb 2, 2010
1,724
294
There really is no reason to believe there is any legitimate interest in owning the team in Glendale. The Darin Pastor and Anthony LeBlanc stories are essentially worthless. This whole thing is still very simple: Glendale is not a viable NHL market. Everything that has occurred since Fall of 2008 is the direct result of that indisputable fact. This story has an arc and nothing has been introduced to change it. The NHL cant sell this franchise in it's current location. They've tried. We've seen the results. They are going to have to move it; fold it; or float the losses themselves.

The league doesn't appear to have any interest in contracting/suspending the operation, so that pretty much leaves move it or fund the losses as their options.

It appears the league could easily exercise their right to AMUL extension and keep the team at Jobing.com for another season. They don't actually need a local ownership offer to do that.

For relo, a quick review of arena facilities leaves QC and KC as the most probable options. Leipold's comment is the only thing that I have seen to make me think the league actually has an option for 13-14 Season.

It's not a problem with the Phoenix market, it may be a problem with the Glendale market, but I think it's just a case of the well being poisoned beyond repair. The Coyotes are going to have to move no doubt, there is no potential owner that would be committed to the franchise long term. Most of the owners we are hearing about currently either want the sweetheart deal of the century, or they want to relocate asap. The Phoenix market is still worth exploring in the future, but the Coyotes brand today is dead in the water. Hockey might not work in Glendale, but it could still (and probably does) work in Phoenix. That being said, the Coyotes have to move, and the market will probably have to wait 15+ years before it sees another NHL team. Every additional year the Coyotes don't move is an additional year the Phoenix market has to wait before it sees a stable NHL franchise. Bettman's actions to try to "save" Phoenix, has only hurt it in the long run. Hey Seattle isn't a guaranteed home-run either, and Phoenix was among the best options to relocate at the time.

Phoenix's best chance in the long run is to arise from it's fallen ashes similar to Winnipeg, Quebec, and Atlanta 2.0.
 

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
I would imagine that if the NHL were close to an actual sale, they would be loudly trumpeting the fact. I know that any other sale that's been "close" has had a lot of publicity, and I get the idea that they may want to try something different and stay away from publicity to help complete the sale, but I would imagine that Gary's ego would want to shove it in the face of naysayers if the team were close to staying in Glendale.

No news for Coyotes' fans is bad news.

I don't think anybody is expecting a last minute sale in the next month to save the team and keep them in Glendale. Still, I think there are quite a few people who might still expect the team to be around next season in Glendale. Probably the vast majority of those folks think it will still be under NHL control, however.
 

Ugmo

Registered User
Oct 24, 2011
12,300
0
I don't think anybody is expecting a last minute sale in the next month to save the team and keep them in Glendale. Still, I think there are quite a few people who might still expect the team to be around next season in Glendale. Probably the vast majority of those folks think it will still be under NHL control, however.

How would that work... isn't this the first time since the saga started that the league would have to cover the massive losses entirely by itself? I can't imagine why the league would do that unless PKP really isn't in a hurry to buy the team.
 

NHLfan4life

Who is PKP???
Nov 22, 2010
688
0
Glendale
I would imagine that if the NHL were close to an actual sale, they would be loudly trumpeting the fact. I know that any other sale that's been "close" has had a lot of publicity, and I get the idea that they may want to try something different and stay away from publicity to help complete the sale, but I would imagine that Gary's ego would want to shove it in the face of naysayers if the team were close to staying in Glendale.

No news for Coyotes' fans is bad news.

...or they are just concentrating on the playoffs? :shakehead

Silence has never been an indication of anything in this mess.
 

NHLfan4life

Who is PKP???
Nov 22, 2010
688
0
Glendale
How would that work... isn't this the first time since the saga started that the league would have to cover the massive losses entirely by itself? I can't imagine why the league would do that unless PKP really isn't in a hurry to buy the team.

I think the league must know something we don't, that is how it works.

As far as PKP, maybe he is waiting for expansion? Or doesn't want to pay an inflated price for a team? There has been no indication from PKP, the NHL or anyone as to how this is going.

Lack of news is just that...no news.
 

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
How would that work...

Submit written notice to Glendale of AMUL extension within 3 days of end of season. That's it. NHL retains control of Jobing.com and team has venue to play in for next season. There is date certainty with that. They extend or AMUL expires at end of next week. To stay in Glendale after that, the league would have to respond to the Glendale RFP; get a sub-lease from the eventual arena manager; or get the city to rescind the RFP and give the NHL another Prof Svcs agmt.

isn't this the first time since the saga started that the league would have to cover the massive losses entirely by itself?

I think it would be the 3rd: 2009-10; 2012-13; 2013-14. It would be the first season without the approval/promise of a large scale subsidy from the city though. So there's that.

I can't imagine why the league would do that unless PKP really isn't in a hurry to buy the team.

And therein lies the question. What is NHL content worth to Quebecorp? More or less than the losses they'd take by playing season(s) in a venue lacking modern revenue opportunities.
 

GuelphStormer

Registered User
Mar 20, 2012
3,811
499
Guelph, ON
And therein lies the question. What is NHL content worth to Quebecorp? More or less than the losses they'd take by playing season(s) in a venue lacking modern revenue opportunities.
has that been established? that playing in the colisee would result in a operating loss?
 

beenhereandthere

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
728
13
Evergray State
It's not a problem with the Phoenix market, it may be a problem with the Glendale market, but I think it's just a case of the well being poisoned beyond repair. The Coyotes are going to have to move no doubt, there is no potential owner that would be committed to the franchise long term. Most of the owners we are hearing about currently either want the sweetheart deal of the century, or they want to relocate asap. The Phoenix market is still worth exploring in the future, but the Coyotes brand today is dead in the water. Hockey might not work in Glendale, but it could still (and probably does) work in Phoenix. That being said, the Coyotes have to move, and the market will probably have to wait 15+ years before it sees another NHL team. Every additional year the Coyotes don't move is an additional year the Phoenix market has to wait before it sees a stable NHL franchise. Bettman's actions to try to "save" Phoenix, has only hurt it in the long run. Hey Seattle isn't a guaranteed home-run either, and Phoenix was among the best options to relocate at the time.

Phoenix's best chance in the long run is to arise from it's fallen ashes similar to Winnipeg, Quebec, and Atlanta 2.0.


Even though it would over saturate the market with 3 modern arenas if this went down, what about, if it's still exists, renovating Veterans Memorial Coliseum and moving the Coyotes there?
 

pondnorth

Registered User
Dec 16, 2005
1,232
0
Does anyone one know for a fact who is covering this current season losses in Glendale,not rumor but fact?
 

LeafShark

Registered User
Feb 2, 2010
1,724
294
I don't think anybody is expecting a last minute sale in the next month to save the team and keep them in Glendale. Still, I think there are quite a few people who might still expect the team to be around next season in Glendale. Probably the vast majority of those folks think it will still be under NHL control, however.

Logically, this should be the best time to make a sale to keep the team in Phoenix. If the NHL can't make a sale now, then how would next year be any better? Prior years there was literally a subsidy to keep the team in Phoenix and/or an expectation of a sale that required a little more time. We don't exactly have either of those.

Also Quebec for the first time has shovels in the ground, and a committed owner.

Gary Bettman represents the owners' best interests. Why would the owners want to sustain another $20M+ loss when they could remove this entirely (and profit) with a sale to Quebec. This is also really the first time when Quebec has really become an option. The owners would literally have to be allergic to money to decline such an invitation. I think a sale price of $170M plus a relocation fee of $60M is fair. Any additional sum that could possibly be gained from expansion fees would at best be negated with a possible increase in the sale price (due to Phoenix losses). Adding a new team to Quebec would also be REALLY GOOD for the Canadian TV contract negotiation.

Before this year, Quebec was not an option because a new arena was not a guarantee, and playing out of the old arena could not be profitable or sustainable in the long term. Quebec now becomes a legitimate buyer a land of no legitimate buyers.

In short, I fail to see any benefit for waiting an additional year. The team alignment means next to nothing for this type of decision. Even if Quebec has to play out of the "Pacific" for 2 years, they'll just change the schedule around so those teams play Quebec when they have an Eastern road trip. The only reason the NHL might reluctantly stay an extra year is if they can't turn the franchise over to Quebec fast enough (a purchase for relocation would have to be made before June at the absolute latest, and ideally right now). The Jets were officially purchased May 30th and they barely had enough time.

No news is bad news for Phoenix and good news for Quebec. If there were a legitimate buyer that wanted to keep the franchise for long term in Phoenix, the price shouldn't really matter all that much and negotiations should be rather simple and straightforward. That clearly is not the case.

If Bettman really cared about the fans in Phoenix, we should expect announcement in hours, not days. :sarcasm:
 

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
has that been established? that playing in the colisee would result in a operating loss?

I'm not familiar enough to answer beyond the basics:
- New arena deal costs Quebecor more with NHL team
- Old arena lacks enhanced revenue opportunities found in new buildings (# suites/premiums, restaurants, etc)
 

barneyg

Registered User
Apr 22, 2007
2,383
1
Does anyone one know for a fact who is covering this current season losses in Glendale,not rumor but fact?

The only fact we know is that there is no $25M AMF (or any significant amount) to be paid by Glendale to the NHL for the 2012-13 season. Therefore we can only presume that the NHL will have to cover the loss. Quite frankly I don't know who else could.
 

Ugmo

Registered User
Oct 24, 2011
12,300
0
Submit written notice to Glendale of AMUL extension within 3 days of end of season. That's it. NHL retains control of Jobing.com and team has venue to play in for next season. There is date certainty with that. They extend or AMUL expires at end of next week. To stay in Glendale after that, the league would have to respond to the Glendale RFP; get a sub-lease from the eventual arena manager; or get the city to rescind the RFP and give the NHL another Prof Svcs agmt.

End of the regular season? So that means if the NHL doesn't extend the AMUL, we can assume it's almost certain the Coyotes are moving? Or could they just extend it just in case and then somehow rescind it if they sell the Coyotes to another city?
 

Mightygoose

Registered User
Nov 5, 2012
5,654
1,476
Ajax, ON
Submit written notice to Glendale of AMUL extension within 3 days of end of season. That's it. NHL retains control of Jobing.com and team has venue to play in for next season. There is date certainty with that. They extend or AMUL expires at end of next week.

Hopefully, we don't see any extensions 1 month at a time like we saw last summer.

A decision either way would be nice to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad