Phoenix XXIV: How many twists does the scriptwriter have left?

[OthmarAmmann]

I have a question regarding the arena parking.
According to this old article:
New Hockey Arena Will be Ready for 2003-04 Season
Glendale Officials Step Up to Keep NHL Coytoes in the Valley of the Sun

http://hockey.ballparks.com/NHL/PhoenixCoyotes/newindex.htm

Upon completion of the arena in 2003, the city will reimburse Ellman for all associated construction costs up to $180 million and will become the owner of the arena. Both the Coyotes and Glendale will use the arena for other public uses throughout the year.

The arena will be funded from taxes generated from the site, from General Obligation bonds earmarked for related projects, parking revenues and other dedicated revenue streams. Funding for this project will not affect current city services or delay any planned projects.

The question I have is how can parking revenue be pledged to initially pay for the arena (still paying off the bonds for this purchase) and now again be pledged to repay the Hulsizer bond issue?

Because that article was written before the parking rights were given to Ellman.

So can anybody write an opinion piece and post on AZCentral? Seems like it. On top of that, he's not even a local citizen. Probably some Western Canadian. Geez.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/03/07/20110307monlets075.html

I think that was a letter to the editor. Those usually appear on the opinions page in print.

I proposed this earlier in the thread, but how about:

Phoenix XXV: Charlie Sheen v. Goldwater Institute

I like it. It should have something to do with "winning"

Evil Canadian media article from G&M...

So anywhere NHL hockey was being played this past weekend, the chatter among reporters and agents and team officials was that the announcement of the Coyotes’ relocation to Winnipeg was both inevitable and imminent.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...-prayers-about-to-be-answered/article1931713/

There goes "imminent" again

Probably more like two weeks if you ask me.

 

[Wham City]

Tortious Interference in Arizona

http://books.google.ca/books?id=bLwo6cPtFlEC&lpg=PA31&ots=qCs0EYAqvw&dq=arizona%20tortious%20interference&pg=PA31#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

[Jeffrey93]

Editorial

http://coyotes.azvibe.com/2011/03/0...usiness-outcomes-with-no-business-experience/

Did you write that?

 

[Jeffrey93]

http://books.google.ca/books?id=bLwo6cPtFlEC&lpg=PA31&ots=qCs0EYAqvw&dq=arizona%20tortious%20interference&pg=PA31#v=onepage&q&f=false

Does any of this hold up if the contract is unconstitutional?? For some reason I doubt it does...

 

[RR]

More:

So can anybody write an opinion piece and post on AZCentral? Seems like it. On top of that, he's not even a local citizen. Probably some Western Canadian. Geez.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/03/07/20110307monlets075.html

In my day the aforementioned post on AZCentral was called a "Letter to the Editor." I know it's a term foreign to anyone born earlier than the 1980s, but there was a time when media encouraged common citizens to comment on the stories of the day.

They were exactly as presented: comments from the readers/viewers/listeners.

Yet today, many view a reader, viewer or listener comment as some kind of an anomaly. Amazed that anyone can express an opinion on something disseminated in print/radio/television/Internet media, within that same media's paper/website/broadcast area of control



On the menu this morning: poached eggs, Cream of Wheat or grits, jello w fruit, coffee or tea.

 

[XX]

Because that article was written before the parking rights were given to Ellman.

Incorrect. The Coyotes, by virtue of using the arena, were charged $2 or so for every car parked at Jobing.com Even though the team never charged for parking. The more people that came, the more money the Coyotes had to pay back to the city. What is traditionally a robust revenue stream, along with booking other events, was never utilized.

 

[RR]

I don't think Glendale is doing much but threatening. They're in no position to sue goldwater because they know that that'd be the worst possible scenario right now.

It reminds me of the kid in school that, whenever harassed, would go, "I know five point palm exploding heart technique, I'm prepared to use it!" but never did.

Yeah, they're prepared to sue, but they sure as hell don't want to.

If COG sues two things happen, IMO: GWI backs off and Coyotes stay; GWI counters and Coyotes leave.

After that, gloves are off as COG and GWI fight it out in court while the Yotes assume another name and call another City home.

 

[OthmarAmmann]

Incorrect. The Coyotes, by virtue of using the arena, were charged $2 or so for every car parked at Jobing.com Even though the team never charged for parking. The more people that came, the more money the Coyotes had to pay back to the city. What is traditionally a robust revenue stream, along with booking other events, was never utilized.

Did you even read the question?

 

[RR]

Incorrect. The Coyotes, by virtue of using the arena, were charged $2 or so for every car parked at Jobing.com Even though the team never charged for parking. The more people that came, the more money the Coyotes had to pay back to the city. What is traditionally a robust revenue stream, along with booking other events, was never utilized.

Actually it was a per-ticket surcharge, not a per-car surcharge. In the original MUDA, the COG assigned the rights to charge for parking to Ellman in return for the per-ticket surcharge. In the new agreement MH will continue to pay that per-ticket "surcharge," but not in lieu of owning the rights to charge for parking that Ellman, Moyes, and now the NHL possess. Instead MH is selling those rights to the COG, while continuing to pay the surcharge.

Had that per-ticket surcharge been removed from the new lease, that would be a clear violation of the gift clause. COG cannot give up any revenue streams it was entitled to in the prior lease, even though Moyes filed bankruptcy.

One of the reasons this deal is so complex: protecting every single revenue stream the COG was entitled to under the original Ellman AMULA and MUDA (that Moyes assumed when he bought the team, as did the NHL when it bought the team out of BK); while trying to find additional revenue streams (parking, for example) the COG could tap going forward.

 

[Dalton]

If only the NHL had worked half this hard working on a deal with Balsillie.

Who'd have thought this unloved, bankrupt team in the desert to be more important to the future of hockey in NA than a successful team in Hamilton or a second in Toronto. Makes me think this is far from over.

Maybe the next NHL leader should be a businessman who likes a good profit instead of a lawyer who likes a good fight.

Just my 2 cents worth. FWIW, IMHO, carry on.

 

[OthmarAmmann]

Actually it was a per-ticket surcharge, not a per-car surcharge. In the original MUDA, the COG assigned the rights to charge for parking to Ellman in return for the per-ticket surcharge. In the new agreement MH will continue to pay that per-ticket "surcharge," but not in lieu of owning the rights to charge for parking that Ellman, Moyes, and now the NHL possess. Instead MH is selling those rights to the COG, while continuing to pay the surcharge.

Had that per-ticket surcharge been removed from the new lease, that would be a clear violation of the gift clause. COG cannot give up any revenue streams it was entitled to in the prior lease, even though Moyes filed bankruptcy.

One of the reasons this deal is so complex: protecting every single revenue stream the COG was entitled to under the original Ellman AMULA and MUDA (that Moyes assumed when he bought the team, as did the NHL when it bought the team out of BK); while trying to find additional revenue streams (parking, for example) the COG could tap going forward.

But the city is charging for parking at the rate of $2.80 per ticket. At the industry standard assumption of 2.5 patrons per car, that's $7 per vehicle if everybody that bought a ticket shows up. If only 80%* actually show up, thats $8.75 per vehicle parked. Once they add the $13 parking fee at the lot, it will be up to $21.75 per vehicle parked.

* I just pulled the 80% out of the air.

unloved

I think that's a mis-characterization.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

I think that's a mis-characterization.

His whole post was a mischaracterization. Gary Bettman isn't a mattress salesman who will give a customer his shirt to make a buck and get a deal go through. If he's going to allow one of his teams to be sold and moved, it will be he and the BOG who decide the terms, not the buyer.

 

[MotorMaster]

But the city is charging for parking at the rate of $2.80 per ticket. At the industry standard assumption of 2.5 patrons per car, that's $7 per vehicle if everybody that bought a ticket shows up. If only 80%* actually show up, thats $8.75 per vehicle parked. Once they add the $13 parking fee at the lot, it will be up to $21.75 per vehicle parked.

* I just pulled the 80% out of the air.

What about 66.4%

 

[Grumpz]

But the city is charging for parking at the rate of $2.80 per ticket. At the industry standard assumption of 2.5 patrons per car, that's $7 per vehicle if everybody that bought a ticket shows up. If only 80%* actually show up, thats $8.75 per vehicle parked. Once they add the $13 parking fee at the lot, it will be up to $21.75 per vehicle parked.

* I just pulled the 80% out of the air.



I think that's a mis-characterization.

Sure, sounds close. And the CoG, and members of this forum who want the Coyotes to stay, don't believe $20 bucks to park will deter people from going to games, nor will actually having to pay for tickets.

Attendance is going to plummet without $25 tickets that include parking and all you can eat and drink (excluding booze of course).

 

[Kismet]

Thread title suggestion:

Given the evasiveness of some of the parties (or all of the parties some of the time), the threat of litigation from both sides, and the heartbreak-in-waiting for one group of passionate fans stuck in the middle, I suggest a return to musical thread naming with:

Runaround Sue (or Runaround…Sue)

 

[CBJ goalie]

A couple of questions/issues I see with the COG planning to file this lawsuit:
1) What if GWI didn't send that letter, the bonds were issued, and then a lawsuit was started down the road, destroying the value of the bonds? Don't you think the bondholders would initiate their own action, stating 'they were never warned of impending litigation a/o circumstances surrounding the bonds'?
For the GWI, it's almost a 'damnend if you do/damned if you don't' scenario in that regard.

Based on that, I think GWI took the best course of action sending that letter out - in court, it would have been much easier to prove the effect of such a letter towards the sale of these bonds vs. what they are dealing with now.

2) I don't beleive the COG can sue the GWI directors directly - I mean, they can (anyone can sue anyone) but I think that part will be thrown out and any lawsuit commenced by the COG will just be against the GWI.
Suing GWI members individually is plainly a scare tactic - COG is attempting to place a 'bad faith' label on these people - wouldn't COG have to prove EACH of these individuals somehow were negligent and caused harm to their deal?

 

[Hamilton Tigers]

.I don't think Glendale is going to win much of anything....that city doesn't seem to have Tiger's blood & Adonis DNA either....

Did you say Tiger's blood?

Oh, how I wish.

 

[Coach]

Originally Posted by cbcwpg
Assuming that the CoG does in fact file suit on Monday March 7th AND the true NHL deadline in March 15th, does anyone thing that the courts can make a ruling on this in 8 days?

Yes.

Yes , but can they get the court case done, then sell the bonds and then complete all of the final details in the lease and close this thing by the 15th?
Based on the speed of this process over the last 2 years I don't think so.

 

[HamiltonFan]

The only way that if the Yotes relocate they go anywhere other than Winnipeg will be because of a protracted Phoenix crash (this would require a continued and enhanced/renewed NHL commitment to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix assuming yet another delay due to the potential COG suit, bond sale, GWI direct and indirect involvement, etc.). This transaction will not fall to the open market (assuming there is one available for this fall).

There never has been an open market, and you can bet your last dollar that the lying weasel bettman will continue in the future to see that there will never be an open market with respect to nhl franchise locations. The problem for little gary is that when you try to stick your nose into the middle of the natural flows of supply and demand, there's a price to be paid.

 

[Dalton]

His whole post was a mischaracterization. Gary Bettman isn't a mattress salesman who will give a customer his shirt to make a buck and get a deal go through. If he's going to allow one of his teams to be sold and moved, it will be he and the BOG who decide the terms, not the buyer.

This is also a mischaracterization* since I never suggested Bettman do that.

Gary Bettman reminds me more of Walmart in Korea or Canadian Tire in Texas except he doesn't have the wherewithall to admit his mistake and move on. I doubt he's about to give up on hockey in the desert. I think he's just decided to take on the GWI.

*A hat trick! LOL

 

[pepty]

If only the NHL had worked half this hard working on a deal with Balsillie.

Who'd have thought this unloved, bankrupt team in the desert to be more important to the future of hockey in NA than a successful team in Hamilton or a second in Toronto. Makes me think this is far from over.

Maybe the next NHL leader should be a businessman who likes a good profit instead of a lawyer who likes a good fight.

Just my 2 cents worth. FWIW, IMHO, carry on.

The NHL BOG previous experience with Mr Balsillie and Mr Rodier in Nashville and Pittsburgh told them al they needed to know about those two gentlemen,Bettman was not acting on his own.

 

[Dalton]

The NHL BOG previous experience with Mr Balsillie and Mr Rodier in Nashville and Pittsburgh told them al they needed to know about those two gentlemen,Bettman was not acting on his own.

I seem to remember the Anaheim owner breaking ranks if memory serves.

I've seen your statement about Balsillie and Rodier posted before but I've never seen anything but posters opinions as an explanation of what it means.

In any event I'm saying Bettman should have looked into a deal way back then, not during the Phoenix fiasco.

You got a guy with deep pockets who wants a team. Was this ever explored by Bettman or did he just panic because the team's location was not conducive to his TV contract aspirations?

All I see today is the chicken coming home to roost. Will Bettman really give the team to Winnipeg? I think not.

 

[Evil Doctor]

The NHL BOG previous experience with Mr Balsillie and Mr Rodier in Nashville and Pittsburgh told them al they needed to know about those two gentlemen,Bettman was not acting on his own.

Ah, the wonderful blame game. When the Coyotes leave (and yeah, I'm officially declaring it), it will be interesting and amusing to see what gets the blame. I'm betting it won't be "the market failed", my money is on "evil Canadian media"...

 

[yotesreign]

Since it appears resolution is on the horizon... should the next thread be

Phx XXV: "The End of the Imminence"?

 

[Dalton]

Ah, the wonderful blame game. When the Coyotes leave (and yeah, I'm officially declaring it), it will be interesting and amusing to see what gets the blame. I'm betting it won't be "the market failed", my money is on "evil Canadian media"...

With Burke and Wilson as point men.