Group offered $500 million for Hawks/Philips Arena/Thrashers on May 20

[AllByDesign]

I see. How'd that work out for Jerry Moyes?. If true, Jerry wouldve had the option of either accepting Jerry Reinsdorfs or Balsillie's offer pre BK. Before you jump all over that example, yes, it was more complicated than that but in essence, if you can "sell to anyone you want" then a reasonable analogy can be drawn. The NHL inserts itself into every single sale process and only with their complete and utter approval can owner 'A' sell for relo to market 'B' even if & when their could well be bona-fide' local offers. Remember how in Winnipeg at the last minute there was a group of dozens who had the coinage to keep the Jets?. The NHL then demands to see a half a billion worth of credit facilities. They change the rules to suit there own objectives. The goalposts constantly being moved.

A new strategy that will be employed on this year's "WENDY'S kick for a Million"

None of these conspiracy theories make any sense to me. I am not trying to be a know it all, but this is how I see things. Is my understanding of things flawed?

1. TNSE knew the thrashers were for sale. Why didn't anyone else? Why couldn't another group have gotten their act together in enough time to offer on the team? ASG may have only been in a position to sell since early this year, but if they have been trying to sell for years, other groups could have put their ducks in a row, and wait for the lawsuits to end.

Some did... exclusivity agreements were made, and nothing ever came from them. People were on the lot kicking the tires, no deals made.. no undercoat sold..

Mr... Lundegaard....

2. The deal with TNSE was not rushed through. ASG is a dirty money grubbing corporation (so i have been led to believe repeatedly). If they truly only had been broadcasting they wanted to sell since February, why would they not have stalled as long as possible waiting for other offers, to create a bidding war? Seems to make more sense that they tried finding other buyers, and none came forward. Makes sense if they had been looking for someone for a few years.

The fact that they had made it implicitly clear that they would not lose a penny more on the Thrashers operation. A bidding war would not net the return to cover more losses. They have lost a bundle, they are cotterizing the wound as quickly as possible, while there is some blood to save.

3. The NHL, Bettman, and the BoG did not want to leave Atlanta. They had no choice. Bettman didn't address the fans in Atlanta, but why would he? As of June 21 (pending the vote), their is no team in Atlanta, and thus nobody to address.

There are enough fires to tend to at present time... they weren't provided enough time to "create" a solution for Atlanta.

4. The exclusivity agreement on the Hawks and arena are completely unrelated to the NHL team. The NBA is a different league, and therefore does not answer to Bettman, the NHL, or the BoG. ASG couldn't be forced to sell the Hawks or the arena.

Bang on.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Bettman's and ASG's statements about no serious/credible local offers could be true.

They are very true.

No one in their right mind would buy an NHL team that is losing between 8-12 million (the 20 million in losses commonly attributed to the Thrashers is actually the Thrashers, Hawks and Phillips Arena combined), in a situation where said potential ownership would hold no vestment in the other two holdings.

This essentially means that they would have to get into a lease with ASG, which, as I stated, no one in their right mind would do.

It also means that ASG could basically kick the Thrashers out by offering a completely ludicrous lease to anyone "kicking the tires" for the Thrashers and destroying any potential ownership.

 

[tarheelhockey]

If people want to spend the next 8 days hoping for a miracle, that's thier prerogative.

At this point nobody seems to expect a miracle anymore. But if they did, would that be such a crime? Winnipeg of all places should have some sympathy here. These fans want to know why they're losing their team, and that's only right.

Trust me, they did their due-dilligence and saw that there wasn't any real interest in keeping the team in Atlanta. No point in dragging it out and lose millions while doing that.

You're saying 'trust me' as though you have inside information. Do share!

Why couldn't another group have gotten their act together in enough time to offer on the team?

Any group with its "act together" in the business sense wouldn't bother writing up an offer. ASG was determined to get the Thrashers out of their arena; there was no point in making overtures for them.

If they truly only had been broadcasting they wanted to sell since February, why would they not have stalled as long as possible waiting for other offers, to create a bidding war?

4. The exclusivity agreement on the Hawks and arena are completely unrelated to the NHL team. The NBA is a different league, and therefore does not answer to Bettman, the NHL, or the BoG. ASG couldn't be forced to sell the Hawks or the arena.

There are several key elements working together here:

1) ASG purchased the Thrashers with the intention of "flipping" them immediately, and only ended up stuck with them for 6 years because of a contract blunder and self-lawsuit. They are and have always been committed to the Hawks, but not to the Thrashers.

2) ASG had no interest in keeping the Thrashers in Philips Arena, as they had been driven so far into the ground as to be a toxic asset to the whole operation, and ASG would have made it impossible for another owner to feasibly negotiate a profitable lease.

3) ASG had no serious interest in selling off the Hawks or the arena, so offers for all 3 would have been pointless as well.

4) The role of the exclusivity agreement was to shut out any possibility of any "inconvenient" offer for the whole package. By the time the agreement expired, there was no time left for a new offer to be proposed, vetted and negotiated. Essentially, they locked in relocation as the only outcome as soon as they signed that exclusivity deal, while also maintaining a legally-secure "good faith" status.

If anything, the offer in the OP highlights exactly how underhanded the whole process was. Setting aside the credibility of the offer, that group had to sit in the wings until the 11th hour and put an offer on the table that was apparently not even acknowledged due to ASG having run out the clock. The whole concept of an ownership "search" was just a charade.

 

[DungeonK]

At this point nobody seems to expect a miracle anymore. But if they did, would that be such a crime? Winnipeg of all places should have some sympathy here. These fans want to know why they're losing their team, and that's only right.



You're saying 'trust me' as though you have inside information. Do share!



Any group with its "act together" in the business sense wouldn't bother writing up an offer. ASG was determined to get the Thrashers out of their arena; there was no point in making overtures for them.





There are several key elements working together here:

1) ASG purchased the Thrashers with the intention of "flipping" them immediately, and only ended up stuck with them for 6 years because of a contract blunder and self-lawsuit. They are and have always been committed to the Hawks, but not to the Thrashers.

2) ASG had no interest in keeping the Thrashers in Philips Arena, as they had been driven so far into the ground as to be a toxic asset to the whole operation, and ASG would have made it impossible for another owner to feasibly negotiate a profitable lease.

3) ASG had no serious interest in selling off the Hawks or the arena, so offers for all 3 would have been pointless as well.

4) The role of the exclusivity agreement was to shut out any possibility of any "inconvenient" offer for the whole package. By the time the agreement expired, there was no time left for a new offer to be proposed, vetted and negotiated. Essentially, they locked in relocation as the only outcome as soon as they signed that exclusivity deal, while also maintaining a legally-secure "good faith" status.

If anything, the offer in the OP highlights exactly how underhanded the whole process was. Setting aside the credibility of the offer, that group had to sit in the wings until the 11th hour and put an offer on the table that was apparently not even acknowledged due to ASG having run out the clock. The whole concept of an ownership "search" was just a charade.

So slippery, I wonder how much of a hand Gary Bettman had in helping them figure all of that out.

 

[orangethrasher]

There are several key elements working together here:

1) ASG purchased the Thrashers with the intention of "flipping" them immediately, and only ended up stuck with them for 6 years because of a contract blunder and self-lawsuit. They are and have always been committed to the Hawks, but not to the Thrashers.

2) ASG had no interest in keeping the Thrashers in Philips Arena, as they had been driven so far into the ground as to be a toxic asset to the whole operation, and ASG would have made it impossible for another owner to feasibly negotiate a profitable lease.

3) ASG had no serious interest in selling off the Hawks or the arena, so offers for all 3 would have been pointless as well.

4) The role of the exclusivity agreement was to shut out any possibility of any "inconvenient" offer for the whole package. By the time the agreement expired, there was no time left for a new offer to be proposed, vetted and negotiated. Essentially, they locked in relocation as the only outcome as soon as they signed that exclusivity deal, while also maintaining a legally-secure "good faith" status.

If anything, the offer in the OP highlights exactly how underhanded the whole process was. Setting aside the credibility of the offer, that group had to sit in the wings until the 11th hour and put an offer on the table that was apparently not even acknowledged due to ASG having run out the clock. The whole concept of an ownership "search" was just a charade.

This is a stellar analysis. Like DungeonK I think this probably could not have been pulled off without some assistance or at least "looking the other way" by the NHL.

What an underhanded way to do things, when they could have just come clean and said what they were doing. The upside of that would have been that people would at least have a more accurate picture of what happened to hockey in Atlanta (again). The downside would be that perhaps there would have been enough stink raised about it that the NHL would have been forced to do something.

 

[Killion]

The whole concept of an ownership "search" was just a charade.

Excellent post tarheel. Do you think they wouldve been willing to sell the Thrashers & provided a workable lease for the new owner to play out of Philips 6yrs ago (had their internecine legal war not erupted)?. Or do you think they planned to somehow force the NHL into accepting a sale for relo to KC or wherever shortly after acquisition of the Thrashers, Hawks & Arena?. I believe so, and I believe they may have had a buyer waiting in the wings. They wanted the team gone before they bought it & only did so because it was part of the package.

 

[AllByDesign]

There are several key elements working together here:

1) ASG purchased the Thrashers with the intention of "flipping" them immediately, and only ended up stuck with them for 6 years because of a contract blunder and self-lawsuit. They are and have always been committed to the Hawks, but not to the Thrashers.

2) ASG had no interest in keeping the Thrashers in Philips Arena, as they had been driven so far into the ground as to be a toxic asset to the whole operation, and ASG would have made it impossible for another owner to feasibly negotiate a profitable lease.

3) ASG had no serious interest in selling off the Hawks or the arena, so offers for all 3 would have been pointless as well.

4) The role of the exclusivity agreement was to shut out any possibility of any "inconvenient" offer for the whole package. By the time the agreement expired, there was no time left for a new offer to be proposed, vetted and negotiated. Essentially, they locked in relocation as the only outcome as soon as they signed that exclusivity deal, while also maintaining a legally-secure "good faith" status.

If anything, the offer in the OP highlights exactly how underhanded the whole process was. Setting aside the credibility of the offer, that group had to sit in the wings until the 11th hour and put an offer on the table that was apparently not even acknowledged due to ASG having run out the clock. The whole concept of an ownership "search" was just a charade.

Tarheel... on a lot of subjects we see eye to eye, this situation isn't one of them. The breakdown that is put forth, borders on conspiracy theory. There were many journalists that claimed to be in the know (backed by many local fans) who stated quite clearly, that the offers to purchase the team were of sound backing and intent.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Tarheel... on a lot of subjects we see eye to eye, this situation isn't one of them. The breakdown that is put forth, borders on conspiracy theory. There were many journalists that claimed to be in the know (backed by many local fans) who stated quite clearly, that the offers to purchase the team were of sound backing and intent.

I have no doubt that the offers were sound. But they didn't get very far, did they? Must have been awfully tough to negotiate for the team when ASG didn't want them as a tenant, and had closed off any bids to buy them in a package deal.

There's a difference between a "conspiracy" and a "plan". It's really, starkly obvious what ASG planned to do.

 

[Positive]

why would the arena through out the club, those 41 dates of revenue can't be replaced.

ASG's thinking was that they can. As someone else on here said, they would rather host 41 bar mitzvahs. Evidently any revenue they were getting from hosting Thrasher games was still resulting in an operating loss in the tens of millions of dollars yearly.

And as others pointed it, who in their right mind would want to buy only the Thrashers, and lease the arena from ASG. It would be crazy. Basically you'd be taking over a team which has been sustaining losses for years, and now you don't even get full concessions from the arena. Sure ASG would like to find a local buyer, because they get to host the show without incurring the huge losses. But it's a horrible deal for any prospective buyers, who are already facing an uphill battle as the owners of the #4 (or #5?) sports attraction in Atlanta.

There really wasn't a nice way out of this I'm afraid.

 

[knorthern knight]

So slippery, I wonder how much of a hand Gary Bettman had in helping them figure all of that out.

Do you really believe that Bettman wanted to give up on the NHL's "southern strategy"? If so, 33 million Canadians disagree with you. The NHL was "run out of town" by ASG. This is an unusual situation for the NHL. They're used to cities begging and pleading for a franchise. It was quite a shock to be forced out of Atlanta.

The Thrashers' train has left the station. If Woodside+Chappell really do buy the Arena+Hawks, and are interested in an NHL franchise, the Coyotes will probably be available next spring, barring more gifts from Glendale. However, my gut feeling is that ASG wanted to get rid of the Thrashers, and keep Phillips Arena. I feel sorry for Atlanta fans that David McDavid didn't get the arena+teams.

 

[Jeffrey93]

Isn't there a quote in here by the ASG owner that he wasn't going to sell the Hawks or the Arena anyway? I would think that this is a pretty good source to say that this offer, even if real, is moot.

Why does it keep coming up that Atlanta Spirit LLC can sell the arena? They don't own it.

Atlanta Spirit, LLC is the parent company of the NBA's Atlanta Hawks, the NHL's Atlanta Thrashers and owns the operating rights to the world-class entertainment venue Philips Arena.

They could sell the operating rights I imagine....not the arena. I know this has been gone over again and again whenever the Thrashers were brought up....but it's right on their website (and the Philips Arena site) that they own the OPERATING RIGHTS.

The arena is OWNED by the 'Atlanta Fulton County Recreation Authority'.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Do you really believe that Bettman wanted to give up on the NHL's "southern strategy"? If so, 33 million Canadians disagree with you. The NHL was "run out of town" by ASG. This is an unusual situation for the NHL. They're used to cities begging and pleading for a franchise. It was quite a shock to be forced out of Atlanta.

The Thrashers' train has left the station. If Woodside+Chappell really do buy the Arena+Hawks, and are interested in an NHL franchise, the Coyotes will probably be available next spring, barring more gifts from Glendale. However, my gut feeling is that ASG wanted to get rid of the Thrashers, and keep Phillips Arena. I feel sorry for Atlanta fans that David McDavid didn't get the arena+teams.

Agreed. The bitterness towards the NHL and Bettman I believe stem from two things.

-The feeling that they did not try as hard to keep the franchise here as Phoenix and possibly other franchises. The gas on the fire here is the lie that Bettman is spewing about trying to find investors for years when the team couldn't have sold until Belkin was bought out in February. It's obvious that they just want A$G out.

-The fact that, other than a couple vague quotes during his radio show and at games, Bettman never went out of his way to address the fans. While the sale was almost complete, Bettman instead went on Tampa radio (during their series with the B's), and was quoted saying that he believes all the franchises success is cyclical and that Tampa proves that good, committed ownership can bring success and interest to any team.

 

[AllByDesign]

I have no doubt that the offers were sound. But they didn't get very far, did they? Must have been awfully tough to negotiate for the team when ASG didn't want them as a tenant, and had closed off any bids to buy them in a package deal.

There's a difference between a "conspiracy" and a "plan". It's really, starkly obvious what ASG planned to do.

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

 

[Grudy0]

To clarify Jeffrey93's post, yes, we all know that ASG doesn't own the arena, but they do own the operating rights. When anyone talks about the "sale of the arena", they are talking about the operating rights.

Agreed. The bitterness towards the NHL and Bettman I believe stem from two things.

-The feeling that they did not try as hard to keep the franchise here as Phoenix and possibly other franchises. The gas on the fire here is the lie that Bettman is spewing about trying to find investors for years when the team couldn't have sold until Belkin was bought out in February. It's obvious that they just want A$G out.

-The fact that, other than a couple vague quotes during his radio show and at games, Bettman never went out of his way to address the fans. While the sale was almost complete, Bettman instead went on Tampa radio (during their series with the B's), and was quoted saying that he believes all the franchises success is cyclical and that Tampa proves that good, committed ownership can bring success and interest to any team.

The NHL could not do anything to "fix" the Thrashers. Unlike the problems that have crept up over the past five years in Pittsburgh, Tampa, St. Louis, Nashville and Phoenix, the entire issue here is the "other tenant". The group that owns the NBA's Hawks owned the operating rights to the arena. This second tenant made it impossible to force a sale. Within the list I just rolled off, there weren't second tenants of the building, and the groups that ran the NHL franchises also owned the operating rights to the arena.

The Thrashers couldn't be saved with the arena rights and the NBA Hawks still being run by ASG. The only place the Thrashers could play was run by ASG. In hindsight, we know that ASG ran the Thrashers into the ground and out of town.

After all, to hear one of ASG's members state that he isn't interested in selling his share of ASG should all point to one thing, especially after entering into an exclusive period to sell the Hawks and arena rights, which expired quickly: ASG is interested in running an NBA team, and only an NBA team in Atlanta.

So unlike any of the other situations, the NHL couldn't "force" anything. ASG held all of the cards. And in order to finally pay for their buyout of their partner, they had to come up with about $125 million that was borrowed from the NBA. Now where was ASG going to come up with that kind of money?

 

[cbcwpg]

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

The question is, how much could ASG make from having someone own the Thrasers locally and pay to lease the arena for those events. IMO, for the hockey team to be financially viable while paying a lease, said lease wouldn't or couldn't amount to much for ASG. The theory is that ASG feels they can make more by hosting 41 non-hockey events, then what they would make from leasing to a hockey team.

 

[Grudy0]

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

Without concessions or a share of the arena operating rights in order to receive revenue from suite and box sales, no one could buy the Thrashers and keep them viable in Atlanta. Yes, it's my assertion as well. And the kicker is now that ASG is about to receive $110 million, that money can be used to finance the debt that ASG accrued by tapping the NBA's credit facility in order to buy out their former partner in December, 2010.

 

[tarheelhockey]

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

Yes, that is exactly right.

 

[AllByDesign]

The question is, how much could ASG make from having someone own the Thrasers locally and pay to lease the arena for those events. IMO, for the hockey team to be financially viable while paying a lease, said lease wouldn't or couldn't amount to much for ASG. The theory is that ASG feels they can make more by hosting 41 non-hockey events, then what they would make from leasing to a hockey team.

As it had been discussed at length in other threads, booking 41 "non-hockey" dates is a task that presents more challenges than can easily be described in one post.

Without concessions or a share of the arena operating rights in order to receive revenue from suite and box sales, no one could buy the Thrashers and keep them viable in Atlanta. Yes, it's my assertion as well. And the kicker is now that ASG is about to receive $110 million, that money can be used to finance the debt that ASG accrued by tapping the NBA's credit facility in order to buy out their former partner in December, 2010.

In regards to the bolded portion. Exactly... this is why a deal to keep the team locally was not consumated. The argument being presented is trying to take the "blame" for the re-location away from the actual business fundamentals, and present an "X-Files" type argument that the fix was in right from the get-go.

In regards to the 2nd potion of your post, they could accomplish the same goals by selling locally for $110 mill and then having income from a lease agreement that pays every year, rather than I one time dispersement.

Yes, that is exactly right.

... okay... So the motivation for ASG selling for re-location over selling locally is what then? If it is greed as your premise indicated before, how is the route that provides less dollars constitute greed? It would constitute stupidity. if given the choice, the way to go would be to keep the team local and generate revenue from a long-term lease. I don't believe the ASG had any option in the matter. There wasn't a credible offer to buy the team and keep it local.

 

[Positive]

if given the choice, the way to go would be to keep the team local and generate revenue from a long-term lease. I don't believe the ASG had any option in the matter. There wasn't a credible offer to buy the team and keep it local.

I agree. Keeping the team local would probably have been the ideal situation for ASG...but only for ASG. It's money pit for the local team owner. No prospective purchasers would want to own the team under those operating conditions; it would be a horrible investment.

 

[tarheelhockey]

... okay... So the motivation for ASG selling for re-location over selling locally is what then? If it is greed as your premise indicated before, how is the route that provides less dollars constitute greed?

Where are you getting the idea that keeping them local would generate more dollars for ASG? The only way that could happen would be for them to bilk the franchise in their lease arrangement, thus making it impossible for the new owners to turn a profit. You can see the conflict of interest there, between ASG's motives and the motives of a potential investor. In order for one to make a little money, the other would have to lose a LOT of money.

I don't believe the ASG had any option in the matter. There wasn't a credible offer to buy the team and keep it local.

Why would any credible businessperson buy into a business model where there is no hope of turning a profit? Even if Bill Gates thought hockey in Atlanta was a nifty idea, he wouldn't have been dumb enough to get tied up in a lease which would torpedo the franchise.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

2) I also thought I read, while the arena is state of the art, if the Thrashers wanted to stay they were being kicked out of the arena?
Now that CAN NOT be right, why would the arena through out the club, those 41 dates of revenue can't be replaced.

When ASG decided to "search for investors" (sell the team), they hired a firm to find someone with deep pockets.

The firm (whose name slips my mind) did some quick evaluation of their own on the Thrashers, and ended up advising them that ASG would make more money if they replaced some (not all) of the hockey dates with concerts, air shows, monster trucks and laser nights with loud noises and shiny things.

Personally I don't agree with their assessment in some regard (not all: concerts don't require payment to be advertised), but that was the way that ASG felt, and why they kicked them out (among other reasons).

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

Remember, the firm that I mentioned above advised ASG that they would make more money if they replaced those 41 dates with concerts and other various shows.

So they would only keep the Thrashers if someone would sign a lease that would bring in a hefty profit. Which is essentially equal to kicking the Thrashers out.

Remember, most (if not all, I am not sure) sports franchises have leases that are purposefully geared toward their success. Whether it be a joke amount of rent or a large slice of parking and concessions or even revenue from other events, these teams have great leases.

Do you think that ASG would give up any of the above? They would probably want an Islanders-esque lease, where all concessions and parking goes to them. Probably advertising and TV money as well.

 

[Killion]

So your assertion is that the ASG would rather sell and re-locate, than sell local and earn residual dollars via a lease agreement?

Yupper, thats what tarheel's sayin. Impossible not to agree with that assertion & perspective ABD. ASG has openly admitted it. They were not about to negotiate a fair and equitable lease agreement with anyone. This whole thing was mapped out. They needed cash, liquidity in order to pay down the NBA LOC & move on. Suggesting they could book 40+ individual event nights into the arena replacing the Thrashers & making a profit is absolute nonsense. These guys only bought the hockey club in the first place as it had to be included in the sale of the Hawks and arena mgmnt contract. Frankly, I suspect they were planning to monetize the team through a relo sale before they even got there hands on it 5-6yrs ago; stopped only by their internal legal wranglings.

....with about $125 million that was borrowed from the NBA. Now where was ASG going to come up with that kind of money?

.... and BINGO was his name.

 

[Grudy0]

In regards to the 2nd potion of your post, they could accomplish the same goals by selling locally for $110 mill and then having income from a lease agreement that pays every year, rather than I one time dispersement.

This assumes anyone was willing to pay $110 million to keep the franchise locally. I remember a report that someone offered $50-60 million to keep the team locally.

No one in their right mind was going to pay $110 million and stay in Atlanta, with what would have been the worse lease deal in the NHL.

... okay... So the motivation for ASG selling for re-location over selling locally is what then? If it is greed as your premise indicated before, how is the route that provides less dollars constitute greed? It would constitute stupidity. if given the choice, the way to go would be to keep the team local and generate revenue from a long-term lease. I don't believe the ASG had any option in the matter. There wasn't a credible offer to buy the team and keep it local.

As I said, $110 million now is better than $50-60 million now and any residual lease payments and/or revenue generation that could be offset by holding Thrashers games at Philips Arena.

ASG ran the Thrashers into the ground and any possible owner keeping the team in Atlanta would have been saddled with the worst lease terms in the league, courtesy of ASG. Every team in the NHL receives (or controls) suite and box revenue, which would not happen for other potential Thrasher owners with ASG having control of the arena.

Of course, ASG could have run the team like it was a long-term investment instead of running it like it was their red-headed stepchild.

 

[tarheelhockey]

ASG ran the Thrashers into the ground and any possible owner keeping the team in Atlanta would have been saddled with the worst lease terms in the league, courtesy of ASG. Every team in the NHL receives (or controls) suite and box revenue, which would not happen for other potential Thrasher owners with ASG having control of the arena.

Not only that, but there's still the matter of the team having operating losses due to massive erosion in its STH base and almost no playoff revenue in its history. The new ownership group would have been looking at a minimum of 2-3 years recovery time, assuming all went well. Probably more like 5-7 years given how long it takes to develop a competitive team and then wait for the STH bump to take effect.

So they would be looking at a horrible lease arrangement, massive short-term operating losses, and still the matter of paying $100m up front for the privilege.

The only way to make it work would be to buy the operating rights to the arena (thank you Jeffrey93 ) and that was prevented by the exclusivity agreement. Checkmate, ASG.