Glendale: Still incompetent, and now attemping to wiggle out of the lease (Post 200)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Howler Scores

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
6,024
18
Maricopa County

I am really worried when the Reverend and Azcentral is on our side.

The losses would far eclipse what the city is seeing now: $8.1 million last fiscal year, expected to grow to $8.7 million this year.

It would have made more sense to work with the ownership group to increase concert and non-hockey events at the arena, which would do more to close the funding gap than paying lawyers.
 

Coyotes2000

Registered User
Jun 25, 2007
1,996
238
AZ
Came across this on Twitter. Had to share it:

LeBlanc%20walk.gif

Amazing
 

kihekah19*

Registered User
Oct 25, 2010
6,016
2
Phoenix, Arizona
Rhonda Pearson, you are a Goddess.

Best of luck to all of you Yotes fans throughout this crap. You deserve so much better. Stay true!

Rhonda is a great gal AND a very good hockey player, nice to see the emotion. She is correct, their actions (in not holding up their end of the contract, or at least not wanting to) are childish.
 
Last edited:

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
And many residents of Glendale aren't fans of the Coyotes. It's not question of if a Coyotes or not in Glendale voted in these politicians but rather a question of how well educated the voter is in any place. One of the key reasons why democracy is failing all over the country is because too many people don't take the time to properly educate themselves on the issues and the candidates before voting.

You are correct. The people are sick and tired of hearing all the bs that comes out of these liars, most don't want to waste their time getting to know the candidates. But make no mistake, most voters know the issues at hand, but have realized once elected, the candidates change their minds, and most times to benefit themselves.
 

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
I am trying to think of the strategy COG is using when taking the course of action they took last night and I came up with 2 scenarios:

1. They have the judge in there pocket and know how he will rule. Crazy, but it is possible.

2. Maybe this was a "last stand", knowing the city is going to file BK anyway. If the Coyotes renegotiate, they can avoid BK, if not they are going BK anyway. If they are going BK, any damages the coyotes would be awarded, would likely be unsecured in a BK filing. In other words, the coyotes damages would be behind many other secured creditors. So the city has little risk of paying the coyotes any damages. When the COG is sued by the Coyotes, they can blame the coyotes for the BK all the way around.

When making a legal argument, you want to either have form or substance on your side, better to have both. In this case, the city has neither. The former city attorney was neither employed by the COG or "substantially" involved with the negotiation at the time of the lease negotiation and signing. The fact that they sent him an email and asked for his opinion does not mean he was an employee or substantially involved.

The damage done to the coyotes could be significant. Season ticket sales, advertisers, attracting UFA's, could all be dealt a major set back. In this respect, I know the deal was signed 2 years ago, and a deal is a deal, you have to honor a contract. I think the city misplayed there hand.

The city should have said to the coyotes, " we are considering BK as an option, to avoid BK, we would like to renegotiate the lease. We are also considering canceling the contract because we feel you might have violated the agreement". If we cancel the contract, think about the harm that would cause the coyotes. We know you will file a lawsuit if we cancel the contract, but so what, you will suffer damages, and we will file BK, so you won't ever be paid a damage award.

If the COG took that tactic, The coyotes ownership group would have to think longer and harder about renegotiating the lease. They wouldn't legally have to, but the COG would have had some leverage with the cancellation threat and all the repercussions. If the Coyotes ownership were told or knew the cancellation announcement was a possibility, they are dumb for not thinking about the repercussions of that vote last night. I don't think they knew. One or two of the council members wanted to delay the vote last night, and I think that would have been smarter because the coyotes could have thought about the repercussions and maybe, just maybe, they renegotiate.

I still think the COG misplayed their hand. Sorry for the long post/rant:)
 

Plub

Part time Leaf fan
Jan 9, 2011
14,932
1,744
Arizona
Anthony is on 98.7 right now. Mentioned there is a cure period in which they would have 30 days to fix any breeches with the contract. Glendale isn't using that obviously. Said he would be surprised if they didn't get their temporary relief order. He went on to discuss how he wont trust the council in the future.

Letting it be known he's out once his 5 years are up.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,978
9,040
I am trying to think of the strategy COG is using when taking the course of action they took last night and I came up with 2 scenarios:

1. They have the judge in there pocket and know how he will rule. Crazy, but it is possible.

2. Maybe this was a "last stand", knowing the city is going to file BK anyway. If the Coyotes renegotiate, they can avoid BK, if not they are going BK anyway. If they are going BK, any damages the coyotes would be awarded, would likely be unsecured in a BK filing. In other words, the coyotes damages would be behind many other secured creditors. So the city has little risk of paying the coyotes any damages. When the COG is sued by the Coyotes, they can blame the coyotes for the BK all the way around.

When making a legal argument, you want to either have form or substance on your side, better to have both. In this case, the city has neither. The former city attorney was neither employed by the COG or "substantially" involved with the negotiation at the time of the lease negotiation and signing. The fact that they sent him an email and asked for his opinion does not mean he was an employee or substantially involved.

The damage done to the coyotes could be significant. Season ticket sales, advertisers, attracting UFA's, could all be dealt a major set back. In this respect, I know the deal was signed 2 years ago, and a deal is a deal, you have to honor a contract. I think the city misplayed there hand.

The city should have said to the coyotes, " we are considering BK as an option, to avoid BK, we would like to renegotiate the lease. We are also considering canceling the contract because we feel you might have violated the agreement". If we cancel the contract, think about the harm that would cause the coyotes. We know you will file a lawsuit if we cancel the contract, but so what, you will suffer damages, and we will file BK, so you won't ever be paid a damage award.

If the COG took that tactic, The coyotes ownership group would have to think longer and harder about renegotiating the lease. They wouldn't legally have to, but the COG would have had some leverage with the cancellation threat and all the repercussions. If the Coyotes ownership were told or knew the cancellation announcement was a possibility, they are dumb for not thinking about the repercussions of that vote last night. I don't think they knew. One or two of the council members wanted to delay the vote last night, and I think that would have been smarter because the coyotes could have thought about the repercussions and maybe, just maybe, they renegotiate.

I still think the COG misplayed their hand. Sorry for the long post/rant:)

I don't think the COG is thinking BK. There was mention that their financials are better and their credit rating is being upgraded. I don't believe the Coyotes will renegotiate at all.
 

SniperHF

Rejecting Reports
Mar 9, 2007
42,632
21,042
Phoenix
Before we even knew about this vote, plenty of Coyotes Fans were bashing pretty much everyone in the franchise except for certain players and said relocation is 100% certain. Now that Glendale didn't vote the way the Coyotes Fans wanted, we're seeing now a 180 on the view of others in the franchise and now put all of the blame of relocation on Glendale? Talk about inconsistency and total major short sighted knee jerk reaction.

You really aren't seeing any nuance here at all. Maybe rethink it and get back to us.
 

letowskie

Registered User
Aug 16, 2002
3,506
0
In your worst nighmare
Visit site
I don't think the COG is thinking BK. There was mention that their financials are better and their credit rating is being upgraded. I don't believe the Coyotes will renegotiate at all.

What is the biggest hang-up on moving to the basketball arena for the time being (1-2 seasons). Would it mostly just be the logistics? or the the way revenues are structured there? Or something else that has to do with legal and contractual obligations.

For someone who doens't know much about Phoenix metro politics, it would seem like the natural emergency (although far from ideal) fall-back, should the injunction fail, or CoG make things too difficult.
 

Howler Scores

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
6,024
18
Maricopa County
I don't think the COG is thinking BK. There was mention that their financials are better and their credit rating is being upgraded. I don't believe the Coyotes will renegotiate at all.

Yes, it was stressed by council members that they had come a long way from the bleak 2009 era when they were close to it. Now, they are on a rebound.
 

Howler Scores

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
6,024
18
Maricopa County
What is the biggest hang-up on moving to the basketball arena for the time being (1-2 seasons). Would it mostly just be the logistics? or the the way revenues are structured there? Or something else that has to do with legal and contractual obligations.

For someone who doens't know much about Phoenix metro politics, it would seem like the natural emergency (although far from ideal) fall-back, should the injunction fail, or CoG make things too difficult.

The biggest issue would be the divide of concessions and suit rental revenue. When they left, they were getting too small of a portion. Plus they would have little control over the arena itself. Smaller crowds could also happen with the reduced attendance but that is hard to know. It could even be higher since more people would go during the week (just a lower threshold for a sellout on the weekends).

However, Phoenix is clearly seeing this as a way to make a new arena worthwhile. 3 major teams in one area would be nice for them.

Edit, 1060 am is planning on having Anthony at 505, Sherwood at 316, and a tbd phoenix councilman around 4...good lead in for alternatives.
 
Last edited:

Gras

Registered User
Mar 21, 2014
6,076
3,324
Phoenix
The biggest issue would be the divide of concessions and suit rental revenue. When they left, they were getting too small of a portion. Plus they would have little control over the arena itself. Smaller crowds could also happen with the reduced attendance but that is hard to know. It could even be higher since more people would go during the week (just a lower threshold for a sellout on the weekends).

However, Phoenix is clearly seeing this as a way to make a new arena worthwhile. 3 major teams in one area would be nice for them.

The restricted view seats also sucked.
 

letowskie

Registered User
Aug 16, 2002
3,506
0
In your worst nighmare
Visit site
The biggest issue would be the divide of concessions and suit rental revenue. When they left, they were getting too small of a portion. Plus they would have little control over the arena itself. Smaller crowds could also happen with the reduced attendance but that is hard to know. It could even be higher since more people would go during the week (just a lower threshold for a sellout on the weekends).

However, Phoenix is clearly seeing this as a way to make a new arena worthwhile. 3 major teams in one area would be nice for them.

So it seems that, even if the injunction fails, it would not be the end of the line; something temporary for next season could be work out with Phoenix, and then a new deal with Talking Stick and the Suns could be worked out with a view to moving into a new venue 3-5 years down the road.
 

Howler Scores

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
6,024
18
Maricopa County
So it seems that, even if the injunction fails, it would not be the end of the line; something temporary for next season could be work out with Phoenix, and then a new deal with Talking Stick and the Suns could be worked out with a view to moving into a new venue 3-5 years down the road.

I feel that is the most likely path. All the other venues already have owners who are pushing their ideas; they didn't put in the time to not have a seat at the table. The Coyotes would have to sell the team to move and right now it doesn't look like they are willing to do it. Of course they could do a quick flip and make quite a bit of cash in doing so. Saving face in the process and allowing the blame to go on Glendale's shoulders.
 

Howler Scores

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
6,024
18
Maricopa County
I was looking for an old pic of the obstructed view but the best i can come up with is the Rattlers layout. They roughly use the size of a hockey playing surface. Using this link, you can see that about 15 yards are cut off from view on that side of the stadium. This would cut off the faceoff circles and goal; meaning tickets would bring in less.

http://www.seats3d.com/afl/arizona_rattlers/sec_121_1.html?price_plan_selected=&

old article:

However, the view of about 4,300 of the Phoenix arena's about 16,200 hockey seats is obstructed, and there are other revenue concerns. The arena's operator, Jerry Colangelo, has said he would extend the lease for a new owner.

http://lubbockonline.com/stories/041900/pro_041900079.shtml#.VXnaXvlVhBc
 

Dirty Old Man

Anti-chatter Engine
Sponsor
Jan 29, 2008
7,889
5,915
Ostrich City
Not that I really think they'll ever end up in Talking Stick Arena (which really is a great name - if a bit weird - for a hockey team's arena, come to think of it), but at least Phoenix govt people are saying things closer to "it would be a shame if they left" vs "we're fine with them leaving"
 

zetajerk

Registered User
Jan 1, 2015
738
589
Coming from someone who has payed attention to the Coyotes since their inaugural season when I was in kindergarten, this flat out sucks. TFP's avatar sums it up pretty well. I feel for you guys and I hope something good comes out of all this.

One of the worst parts (to me) is if/when the move happens, all those experts in BoH are going to have that smug look on their faces and be all "We could've told you this was going to happen in 96. It was never going to work. Now lets work on getting rid of the other sunbelts." If I had the seven Dragonballs, I'd wish they'd move (if they had to) to Houston, Vegas, or Atlanta just so I could see their brains melt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->