the NHL never "stepped in" for the Oilers though....there were a collection of owners that wanted to buy the team and keep it in Edmonton
Actually, I was just stating facts. If that got a reaction out of you, ... OK, whatever, that was unintentional but a bonus, I guess.
Yeah, what a weird concept. Especially since I never claimed the NHL is all-powerful and always gets the final say on everything.
The EIG would not have been allowed to buy an NHL team under any other circumstance whatsoever. There was not any majority partner with enough funds to guarantee solvency (not a single one could muster even 10% of the total), and the number of folks involved was nearly an order of magnitude more than permissible. The NHL didn't just willfully ignore that, they actively invited them in to purchase the team as a stopgap measure, in the process chasing off offers that were considerably more valuable. That is the NHL stepping in to save the franchise - by taking a massive risk and accepting a deal that had a great deal of potential to backfire horribly and leave the League with a fiscal disaster on their hands during an already economically strained period.
Let me break the post you are referring to down into pieces for you:
Actually, I questioned how much "real clout and authority" the NHLPA really has, but didn't feel like investing nearly as much time as you are.
I really didn't feel the need to sully all of your post considering I'd pointed out the flaws in 2/3rds of it.
It's not silly, but I can tell further elaboration is going to be pointless.
... OK, I guess? I mean, it doesn't change anything I think, but if you need to state this publicly for your own self-assurance, I'm always supportive of everyone having good self-esteem.
I'm sorry you're unable to grasp what I said and that you're going to considerable effort for ... whatever this is supposed to be. If that causes you to reassess your assessment of me, I'll make sure to give it the proper attention it's due.
You're thinking of the Canadian Assistance Plan, which is a different NHL intervention and is not what I was referring to. That's the go-to citation when folks start complaining about the existence of revenue sharing, which is a program that grew out of the Plan. This is more about ownership shenanigans.
All good. We've probably run our course. I'll just leave you with your two direct quotes:
This is an assumption on your part that is not in evidence - there was no viable local ownership in Edmonton that anyone was taking seriously until the NHL decided to pay attention to what Cal Nichols was doing. And you're leaning hard on motivated reasoning and fundamental attribution errors because you're uncomfortable with the idea of your Oilers being in the same breath as a franchise whose very existence you seem to despise.
there was a location agreement in 1994 that stipulated Pocklinton must sell to local ownership before selling to an American buyer:
edmontonjournal.com
I suppose so, but if you want to bring in those sorts of circumstances, that opens the door for other extenuating circumstances in Arizona - for example, Peter Pocklington (as hated as he was) wasn't deliberately trying to bypass the NHL entirely like Moyes and thereby potentially undermine the whole of North American sports franchise management policy; he was just an asshole in debt.
This would be a more fair comparison if Wayne Gretzky had also been on the ice in Arizona rather than miserably failing behind the bench.
As opposed to the many many convoluted twists and turns the Coyotes have had with the city of Glendale? That's so much of a soap opera that I can't even sum up the whole story, but it did go through a "don't you dare leave or we'll sue" phase as well.
Yes, and? That's true of everyone. You might as well also say that the Oilers were a hockey team; it has as much significance and is just as unique. Hell, it was true in Atlanta for the Thrashers as well; ASG sidestepped that because they also owned and operated the arena and there were no such requirements for its sale, and then quoted ruinous rates for any rental agreement with all concessions and luxury revenues and the like going to them rather than any potential Thrashers owner.
There has never been a shortage of parties interested in buying the Coyotes. There has been a shortage of parties who could complete a lease agreement with Glendale, clear the NHL's ownership requirement and satisfy concerns others have had re: transfer of monies and so on - which, in no small part, arose from the original bankruptcy filing that left a lot of people holding a bag of shit while 3 individuals tried to skate away with all the loot.
For the assistance of those who still don't get the parallels I keep bringing up with Edmonton - the bolded is what the NHL decided to ignore when selling the Oilers to the EIG. They have not extended that consideration to the Coyotes and probably aren't going to.
I take it you didn't read the rest of the post. By the same standard, there was a massive shortage of local ownership possibilities in Edmonton.of course there was
I did, if there's owners not willing to take that burden on, then there's not many owners
The Coyotes have had three majority owners since the Moyes fiasco - LeBlanc, Barroway, Meruelo. That sure seems like a lot of interest to me.
