Coyotes for Sale?

[thinkwild]

It has been mentioned before that Arizona has somewhat of a strange fan base, as people will flock to the winning team.

Well its a good standard response, but you will have to change this line. There is nothing strange about it. It is typical and any system must be designed to accomodate this reality. No owner deserves constant sellouts with a bad team. A bad team should be rebuilding - cheaply - and needs a system that allows that

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

Well its a good standard response, but you will have to change this line. There is nothing strange about it. It is typical and any system must be designed to accomodate this reality. No owner deserves constant sellouts with a bad team. A bad team should be rebuilding - cheaply - and needs a system that allows that

Yeah, you are right, that happens for almost every team. It seems to me that it happens here even moreso, since our teams are new and thus lack much tradition, and the fact that most people here did not grow up in Arizona, but I could be wrong about that. Not that that statement matters too much in this exact situation though, as we still fill more seats than they did in Winnipeg, and chances are it will only get better. Thanks for the comments though, I really appreciate it.

 

[vanlady]

I've got news for ya. The reason why the NHLPA doesnt want to get into bed with the owners has nothing to do with their "concern" about the owners morality or truthfullness as there are ways & means of monitoring that (just ask the NBAPA or the NFLPA, but I guess you are smarter than them) , it has to do pure greed as the NHLPA is of the view that the players will make way more money with any systym (sp) other that an cap or a partnership. To believe otherwise is infantile.

No it probably has to do more with the 1994 Ontario Supreme Court ruling Bathgate et al v The National Hockey League. You know the scam the owners ran on the players pension fund. I wonder if the 42 million the owners were ordered to repay is in the losses for the last 10 years.

 

[Sammy*]

No it probably has to do more with the 1994 Ontario Supreme Court ruling Bathgate et al v The National Hockey League. You know the scam the owners ran on the players pension fund. I wonder if the 42 million the owners were ordered to repay is in the losses for the last 10 years.

Ohh, is that why it is. Yeah ok, nothing to do with the players been able to **** & pillage under the present system. Is that why the players still have the NHL, in a variety of forms, pay into the fund? And by the way, you should ask your friends at the NHLPA to actually brief you as to what the case was about. For your information, it was about whether the NHL teams were entitled to the excess contributions they had made to a pension fund & whether because of that the teams could take a contribution holiday. Get your facts straight, apologist.

Btw, I have a real question for you. Are you in any way associated with the NHLPA or its members?

 

[BAdvocate]

And one more thing:

I dont care if youve been a hockey fan all your life, if youve got season tickets for the Coyotes since day one of if you even OWN the team. Phoenix, Arizona along with all the teams in the Southern United States should have NEVER been given franchises ever.

Hmmm...you don't care? I forget, who are you?

I bet the former Leaf Andreychuk is glad there is hockey in the Southern United States. He was never going to win anything with the underachieving Leafs.

Yeah the Leafs almost made it to the finals about 10 years ago...too bad those 'Southern United States' LA Kings sent them packing.

Too bad that soft captain of yours has no idea what it takes to lead a team to the Stanley Cup.

 

[Guest]

It's statements like no13matssundin's that remind me of days when people said that women and minorities shouldn't have the right to vote, and other narrow-minded theories that should be quickly abandoned.

Keep hate alive

 

[Sammy*]

It's statements like no13matssundin's that remind me of days when people said that women and minorities shouldn't have the right to vote, and other narrow-minded theories that should be quickly abandoned.

Keep hate alive

I agree with you, & I would like to see hockey teams stay in Canada. On a more rational basis, I just dont think that many US cities are all that supportive of NHL hockey, particularly if a team is going through a rough stretch.

 

[Guest]

I agree with you, & I would like to see hockey teams stay in Canada. On a more rational basis, I just dont think that many US cities are all that supportive of NHL hockey, particularly if a team is going through a rough stretch.

I am pro-Canada for the NHL as well and wish that more teams were in the league from Canada still. However they are not, and I think the best markets (most money to be made) are where you'll see NHL teams in the long run. Like it or not, Phoenix may be a better business venture for an NHL team than Winnipeg.

I think it's a little foolish when people say there shouldn't be any teams in the south. You rarely hear the Dallas, Colorado, San Jose, Tampa Bay, or Los Angeles should not have a team, while you do hear how Phoenix, Raleigh, Miami, Nashville, Atlanta, and Anaheim shouldn't have a team. It takes time for a new sport to take to a new region. That's the whole point of expansion. If it can work in 5 markets, it might work for the other 6, or it might not. Some people are so conservative to expansion I'm shocked that they don't complain about there being more than 6 teams, and point to the late 60's expansion as the decline of hockey.

In the case of Phoenix, it's not just hockey, if your pro team isn't winning -- the fans aren't showing up. I think that is becoming an increasing example of the United States fan and maybe a result of the economy today as well. It also might speak volumes about the cost of tickets for a sport that doesn't have the tradition in these markets. If the NHL's prices in Phoenix, Miami, Atlanta, etc. were competitive with those of the NBA or MLB...well I'll save that for another discussion.

 

[vanlady]

Ohh, is that why it is. Yeah ok, nothing to do with the players been able to **** & pillage under the present system. Is that why the players still have the NHL, in a variety of forms, pay into the fund? And by the way, you should ask your friends at the NHLPA to actually brief you as to what the case was about. For your information, it was about whether the NHL teams were entitled to the excess contributions they had made to a pension fund & whether because of that the teams could take a contribution holiday. Get your facts straight, apologist.

Btw, I have a real question for you. Are you in any way associated with the NHLPA or its members?

NO this case was about the fact that the owners controlled the players pension fund until this decision. The "excess" contributions were the interest earned on the principal, the owners were taking out the interest, dividing it among themselves and putting it back in the pension as there annual contributions. Boy now I know you haven't read anything other than NHL.com. Oh and I have been a fan of this game for over 30 years and listened to this garbage in 94, same garbage different decade. Funny with all the doomsday quotes from Bettman in 94, the league is still here and the revenues have quadrupled, what have the owners done wrong? Oh and I have no connection to the PA or any NHL player.

 

[mudcrutch79]

I am pro-Canada for the NHL as well and wish that more teams were in the league from Canada still. However they are not, and I think the best markets (most money to be made) are where you'll see NHL teams in the long run. Like it or not, Phoenix may be a better business venture for an NHL team than Winnipeg.

I'm not one of the Jets diehards-they're gone, and they're never coming back. That said, I can understand why it's a little frustrating for Canadians to see teams leave for a "better business climate" when the "better" part is effectively dependent on government handouts and mysterious land deals. I'm not an America-basher by any means, but this drives me nuts. Hopefully Zimbalist catches on down there.

 

[Sammy*]

NO this case was about the fact that the owners controlled the players pension fund until this decision. The "excess" contributions were the interest earned on the principal, the owners were taking out the interest, dividing it among themselves and putting it back in the pension as there annual contributions. Boy now I know you haven't read anything other than NHL.com. Oh and I have been a fan of this game for over 30 years and listened to this garbage in 94, same garbage different decade. Funny with all the doomsday quotes from Bettman in 94, the league is still here and the revenues have quadrupled, what have the owners done wrong? Oh and I have no connection to the PA or any NHL player.

Your wrong, read the decision lady. It was who was entitled to the excess contributions.
You know, clowns like you who lie & mis-characterize everything they can in the hopes of trying drum up support for the NHLPA is one of the reasons why the NHLPA is getting crushed in the court of public opinion.
You've been called out numerous times on these matters, & never once have you backed up you lies & mischaracterization's with any facts.
You are a waste.

 

[Guest]

I'm not one of the Jets diehards-they're gone, and they're never coming back. That said, I can understand why it's a little frustrating for Canadians to see teams leave for a "better business climate" when the "better" part is effectively dependent on government handouts and mysterious land deals. I'm not an America-basher by any means, but this drives me nuts. Hopefully Zimbalist catches on down there.

No, we agree on this issue I think. Oddly enough, it's similar to how a lot of American jobs are lost to places overseas. It's not right, but if you are losing the jobs you have to look to someone to set a new standard (make sure teams can be profitable in Canada via the CBA). I'd like to see the growth into Canada instead, if it was feasible in the league to do so, because right now it isn't. If Phoenix doesn't survive, I'd rather see them go to Quebec than Portland.

 

[old kummelweck]

I have a hard time believing that an owner would put a team up for sale during a lockout. Talk about a buyers market.

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

I'm not one of the Jets diehards-they're gone, and they're never coming back. That said, I can understand why it's a little frustrating for Canadians to see teams leave for a "better business climate" when the "better" part is effectively dependent on government handouts and mysterious land deals.

... and much bigger catchment areas for sports as well... Winnipeg's population doesnt even approach Phoenix's which is the fifth largest in the States and still rising fast. I read recently that Winnipeg is just not growing and soon will be knocked out of the top ten Canadian cities by places like Kitchener and London.

 

[kenabnrmal]

If the Coyotes fanbase is non-existant, then how come there have been more people turnout for a single hockey game in Phoenix then has ever turned out for a game anywhere near Winnipeg?

How come attendance in Phoenix has been better then Winnipeg?

Are Winnipeg fans just cheap? Or are they just full of crap about being hockey fans?

I've never been one in Winnipeg to begrudge Phoenix, or anyone in the south, their NHL team. I think hockey in the south has worked, and can work in places that are presently struggling. I'd like to see a team back in Winnipeg, sure. But, not just because its a Canadian city. I want to see the Coyotes succeed. Hell, I still follow the team. So I'm not one of the typical, ignorant types saying that the Coyotes should return to Winnipeg, just because.

However, you clearly don't know s**t about Winnipeg as a city or as a hockey town, and you definitely don't know a thing about the fans. Anyone judging the city by the attendance numbers (in an old, run-down building) is similarly ignorant. Support Phoenix because fans there deserve it. But, don't bad mouth a city and people you have absolutely no knowledge of.

 

[GabbyDugan]

An update to the story

Despite the fact the denials from Phoenix were pretty strong when his first story appeared on New Year's Eve, David Shoalts has written another article concerning the Coyotes...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050113.wcoyotes13/BNStory/Sports/


A few interesting tid-bits in the article, but I don't expect too much reaction from Phoenix to this one either. The arena is built, Ellman still has all that property to develop, and there doesn't seem to be much urgency from anyone directly involved in Phoenix to hold Ellman and Moyes to any deadline obligations....

I did find this somewhat interesting, though...

"Mr. Moyes has more than $200-million invested in the team and the project and I have more than $60-million invested," Ellman said.

He refused to go into any more detail about their financing."

Considering the City of Glendale financed the arena and land for the most part and Forbes values the Phoenix Coyotes at roughly $ 136 million, Ellman and Moyes are pumping a lot of cash into this venture...does the "and the project" part have enough potential to make up for the loss leader investment in the hockey franchise? What happens when that new football stadium becomes the new focus of attention?

 

[Sinurgy]

does the "and the project" part have enough potential to make up for the loss leader investment in the hockey franchise? What happens when that new football stadium becomes the new focus of attention?

Considering the "project" is a massive retail center located right next to the arena and the football stadium, the opening of the latter is going to bring A LOT of business! Not to mention over the next few years that retail center will be the main entertainment desitnation for Fiesta Bowl visitors, Super Bowl visitors and (hopefully) NHL All-Star visitors.