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

[ur almost right]

Sounds like you're telling Atlanta fans to "deal with it".

I am, just not in the context you may be taking it. I mean no offence to you or fellow Atlanta fans.

Going through this in Winnipeg, EVERY TIME an article popped up, or a "new" group had something to say, the city and Jets fan base went off the rails with a new found hope that the team would infact stay. As we know, it did not.

The reality of the Jets moving took 15 years to get over, so I am not suggesting that the feelings in Atlanta should be any less, or move any quicker. Just that coming to realize what is infact happening and learning to not put a false hope in all the latest rumours is "better", not "easier" for fans to do.

You and ALL fans are more then welcome to hope and wish that articles and rumours are true, and there is a possibility of the team staying. But they are not.

Again, no offence intended.

 

[btn]

Tarheel: Who is Gary's boss? The BOG wanted Atlanta out, no doubt to get a other team into the East, appease their Canadian fanbase, take advantage of the strong Canadian dollar, and get some hard cash to thrown in the money pit in Glendale.

Don't think for one second this will prevent the relocation of the Thrashers, just mildly sully a few people's reputations.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Interesting but perhaps ASG just decided they didn't want to sell Phillips and the Hawks? They then sold off the Thrashers because they lose money or figured the available dates were more valuable for concerts...considering the costs of running the hockey team...salaries, ice plant in the arena and other expenses that is. Or perhaps an even crazier idea is that they sold the Thrashers because they owned them and they have the autonomy to sell them if they wanted to?

There are two possibilities here:

1) The NHL was not informed of this bid, in which case ASG is not operating in good faith with the league.

2) The NHL was informed of this bid, in which case Bettman et al are not operating in good faith with their fans, particularly those in Atlanta ('nobody wants to own a team in this market').

Either way, this needs to be sufficiently explained. Otherwise, it is a game-changer in regards to the BOG vote as it speaks directly to several subsections of Rule 36.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Tarheel: Who is Gary's boss? The BOG wanted Atlanta out, no doubt to get a other team into the East, appease their Canadian fanbase, take advantage of the strong Canadian dollar, and get some hard cash to thrown in the money pit in Glendale.

Don't think for one second this will prevent the relocation of the Thrashers, just mildly sully a few people's reputations.

In that case, it rests on the fans to make a HELL of a lot of noice about this while you still have to opportunity for it to be significant. This should more than "mildly" sully Bettman's reputation if he either refuses to act on it, or turns out to have known about it before.

The big difference between Atlanta and Phoenix has always been the lack of an offer on the table. Well, now there's an offer.

 

[William Satterwhite]

The Spirit already are in the process of selling the NHL franchise to Winnipeg. When the Thrashers officially vacate, the bid then would be adjusted downward.

I think this is the key part of the article, I'm not sure these guys are/were truly serious about including the Thrashers as part of the package and really just want the Hawks. They may see value in having a hockey team if it could be included for a minimum price but it obviously isn't something that they're adamant about.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

??????

Money rules the day. Would you sell your house for far less than its value for any reason? Talk is cheap.

True, actions do speak louder than words, and the NHL has, up to this point, been consistent in its actions by demonstrating that when local ownership can be had, it's preferable to relocating a team, even when the potential owner of the relocated franchise has deep pockets. Again there are a lot of questions to be answered with this story - either ASG operated in bad faith or operated in collusion with the NHL in violation of the NHL's own bylaws and at the end of the day I think there may be some egg on some faces.

 

[MaskedSonja]

Playing Devils Advocate here:


500 Million for an arena and 2 Teams seems rather undervalued-and that the Atlanta would just be a "throw in"-that being the case, would that not in affect lower market value of the franchise?

I mean it's probably just me, but 500 Million divides up into 150 million for thrashers, 150 million for Hawks, 200 million for arena.

I would assume the arena is worth more than 200 million (closer to 300), but still 150 mill for Thrashers, when the team was BOUGHT for 170 million, that delvaues the franchise, and I say the NHL DID know, but undervalued the franchise by at AT LEAST 20 million.

I guess I'm the only one here who, yes from a transparency standpoint there's an issue, but from a value standpoint? I think the NHL STILL would have gone through with it as it devalued the franchise IMO.

 

[Mwd711]

There are two possibilities here:

1) The NHL was not informed of this bid, in which case ASG is not operating in good faith with the league.

2) The NHL was informed of this bid, in which case Bettman et al are not operating in good faith with their fans, particularly those in Atlanta ('nobody wants to own a team in this market').

Either way, this needs to be sufficiently explained. Otherwise, it is a game-changer in regards to the BOG vote as it speaks directly to several subsections of Rule 36.

Or they aren't legitimate. The one guy is a pastor with a blog while the other lost properties to a tax sale. A little Googling goes a long ways. These guys aren't legitimate, period. They don't have the financials to make any type of bid unless they have secretly acquired all of this money or they have some secret partners that are loaded with money.

 

[ur almost right]

Ya, theres no chance the sale gets reversed, shot down or challenged unless say a group of fans decides to pool some funds, hire some pricey attorneys & slap an injunction on things (a long shot at best). But tell you what, if this is true & the group was in fact ready willing & able to buy the Thrashers, Hawks & Philips for that kind of money then what the Hell happened here?!. This is an "issue", as it strikes at the very heart of the NHL's integrity, its self proclaimed "covenant" with the fans that "it doesnt run out on cities" yadda yadda yadda. Gary Bettman, if this is true, is holding a smoking gun. In the blink of an eye the teams gone when theres a serious offer for all 3 pieces sitting on the table?. C'mon. We need some answers & clarification here. Some closure. Sadly, I doubt we'll get any, as ASG will demand non-disclosures on the sale process including the Thrashers move in selling the arena & Hawks. Never mind Forbes "franchise valuations", we need to know what ASG wants for the Hawks & the arena, what they get, what the investment group winds up paying, if one can ever reasonably expect to believe "announced" sale prices with what they really are (see Vinik; Tampa Bay).

Again, I thought I worded everything correctly, and mean no offence if it is taken out of context. I have no doubt this would indeed be an "issue". I meerly sugested that with all things business, this would not be at the forefront in a court at this time.

There seems to be some more "pressing" issues going on in ALL (US and CDN) courts with regards to billion dollar businesses, banks, politicians, homes, recessions, foreclosures and bankruptcies then whether or not a company wants to keep or sell a sports franchise. (barring that franchise being the Yankess or Cowboys or Leafs)

I would also suggest that the interested buyer may be at the front of the line to file some sort of injunction if infact, there was really something to cry foul on.

Just a thought.

 

[William Satterwhite]

There are two possibilities here:

1) The NHL was not informed of this bid, in which case ASG is not operating in good faith with the league.

2) The NHL was informed of this bid, in which case Bettman et al are not operating in good faith with their fans, particularly those in Atlanta ('nobody wants to own a team in this market').

Either way, this needs to be sufficiently explained. Otherwise, it is a game-changer in regards to the BOG vote as it speaks directly to several subsections of Rule 36.

There is a third possibility in that the Hawks being included in the bid means that the NHL can't actually use it to block a sale of just the Thrashers, especially when the bidders themselves are willing to do business without the hockey team. If the NBA decided to block or act against this bid for whatever reason (different leagues, different standards and rules), where would that leave the Thrashers then?

 

[Killion]

1) The NHL was not informed of this bid, in which case ASG is not operating in good faith with the league.
2) The NHL was informed of this bid, in which case Bettman et al are not operating in good faith with their fans, particularly those in Atlanta ('nobody wants to own a team in this market').

There is a 3rd option Tarheel, this group didnt have the readies & or credit facilities to make it happen. Thats a possibility. Unless & until such time as they move in on a sale all the article does is raise a ton of unsavory questions & speculation. As another poster pointed out having done a search on these guys, the cupboard seems a bit bare. However, if they are legit, then ya, this could get ugly.

 

[GKJ]

The article doesn't talk much about the Thrashers which leads me to believe they were going to try and get rid of them too.

 

[tarheelhockey]

There is a third possibility in that the Hawks being included in the bid means that the NHL can't actually use it to block a sale of just the Thrashers, especially when the bidders themselves are willing to do business without the hockey team. If the NBA decided to block or act against this bid for whatever reason (different leagues, different standards and rules), where would that leave the Thrashers then?

It's still a bid for the Thrashers, something that Bettman and ASG both have said publicly did not exist. If ASG simply "forgot to mention" this to Bettman, it violates a whole slew of bylaws regarding good-faith operations.

If ASG did mention this to Bettman and he "forgot to mention" it to the public, well...

 

[cbcwpg]

There are two possibilities here:

1) The NHL was not informed of this bid, in which case ASG is not operating in good faith with the league.

2) The NHL was informed of this bid, in which case Bettman et al are not operating in good faith with their fans, particularly those in Atlanta ('nobody wants to own a team in this market').

Either way, this needs to be sufficiently explained. Otherwise, it is a game-changer in regards to the BOG vote as it speaks directly to several subsections of Rule 36.

This could be semantics, but it is IMO, somewhat truthful when the NHL says nobody wants to own the HOCKEY team in Atlanta.

Lets say your #2 is true, the NHL knew of the offer to buy the arena, the Hawks, and the Thrashers. The NHL's ( and Bettman's ) mandate is to the hockey team and nothing else. ASG no longer wants to own the Thrashers and will no longer pay the bills. So at this point what option does the NHL have considering that a solution must be in place before the start of the next season? The NHL could own the team, but they have said they are not going to do that seeing how well that has worked for them in Phoenix OR the NHL can let ASG sell the team. Either way, the clock is ticking. The offer was for ALL 3 entities, not just the hockey team, and it could take a substantially long time ( months, years ) to sell all 3. So given the timelime the NHL was on, the fact that the BoG is concerned only with the selling of the hockey team, they had no choice but to allow the one asset ( Thrashers ) to be sold to TNSE.

The offer to buy all 3 assets as a package is not an offer to buy the hockey team. IMO.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

The article doesn't talk much about the Thrashers which leads me to believe they were going to try and get rid of them too.

At the same time though, the article is from USA Today's NBA news section. I wouldn't expect many questions about the Thrashers to come from a basketball-oriented reporter.

 

[smitty10]

The offer was for not only the Thrashers, but the Hawks and arena as well. The NHL has no say in whether or not the group has to sell their NBA franchise or the arena. If the offer was exclusively for the Thrashers that would be a completely different scenario, but it wasn't.

This has nothing to do with the NHL or Bettman. This is ASG not wanting to sell off their other assets. Seems like people are just looking for a reason to rag on Bettman and Daly for something.

 

[Killion]

I think the NHL STILL would have gone through with it as it devalued the franchise IMO.

Well, the actual "Sale Price" (what ASG received) was $110M. The league created & kept the $60M relo fee. Im afraid I personally cant take Forbes valuations of franchise values seriously when actual sales prices in 3 of the 4 sports are generally off by as much as 20-40% when sales do occur. Putting a price tag on buildings is even more problematical. Look at the boondoggle in Toronto over SkyDome nee' Rogers?. Glendale. Theres just a ton of factors involved. We need more information here, but on the surface, this doesnt look good at all.

 

[Mwd711]

It's still a bid for the Thrashers, something that Bettman and ASG both have said publicly did not exist. If ASG simply "forgot to mention" this to Bettman, it violates a whole slew of bylaws regarding good-faith operations.

If ASG did mention this to Bettman and he "forgot to mention" it to the public, well...

I don't believe they ever said that. What they did say was that there were never any credible offers. Judging from my research, this certainly falls in that category. They have no credibility at all. If the USA Today "journalist" would've done a little research, he would've figured that out. I don't see how their past makes them credible to be bidding on an arena and two sports teams.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This could be semantics, but it is IMO, somewhat truthful when the NHL says nobody wants to own the HOCKEY team in Atlanta.

Lets say your #2 is true, the NHL knew of the offer to buy the arena, the Hawks, and the Thrashers. The NHL's ( and Bettman's ) mandate is to the hockey team and nothing else. ASG no longer wants to own the Thrashers and will no longer pay the bills. So at this point what option does the NHL have considering that a solution must be in place before the start of the next season? The NHL could own the team, but they have said they are not going to do that seeing how well that has worked for them in Phoenix OR the NHL can let ASG sell the team. Either way, the clock is ticking. The offer was for ALL 3 entities, not just the hockey team, and it could take a substantially long time ( months, years ) to sell all 3. So given the timelime the NHL was on, the fact that the BoG is concerned only with the selling of the hockey team, they had no choice but to allow the one asset ( Thrashers ) to be sold to TNSE.

The offer to buy all 3 assets as a package is not an offer to buy the hockey team. IMO.

Minimally, that needs to be explained to the fans who have been led to believe there was "no offer" for several weeks now. There WAS an offer, semantics aside.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This has nothing to do with the NHL or Bettman. This is ASG not wanting to sell off their other assets.

They were in negotiations to sell the Hawks earlier that day. All along they have said a package offer would be acceptable.

Seems like people are just looking for a reason to rag on Bettman and Daly for something.

Are you serious? You think this is just a case of people digging for trivial reasons to hate on Bettman?

 

[rojac]

I suspect the best that Atlanta fans can hope for is that the NHL is somehow persuaded that those fans got a raw deal and grant Atlanta an expansion franchise in a few years. If I recall correctly, Seattle got the Mariners as an expansion franchise as a result of legal action over elements of the Pilots being moved to Milwaukee.

 

[ur almost right]

Dare we touch the "reputation" of Gary Bettman?

Would it be a fair statement to say that Gary bettmans reputation isn't exactly held in the highest regards?

From the timeline fiasco in Quebec, Winnipeg, Hartford..(while ALL valid concerning potential owners/arenas), to denying the NHL was paying bills in AZ, to squeezing the CoG for MORE money and keeping a floundering dog alive in the desert, there isn't exactly alot of "good vibes" bouncing off Gary to begin with.

Even with the relocation of ATL, Gary's words havent exactly been without hesitation or suspicion (IMO). (sell tickets/fill the building ALWAYS etc).

There is little doubt left that there is an excuse or reason already typed up should this story gain any sort of legs and grow. In the eyes of the fans, there is little Gary can do right, in the eyes of Gary, the fans are mistaken.

Just watch a prior interview when something comes up that makes the "twitch" start..

 

[rojac]

The owners and Waddell specifically said they would sell at a discount to any potential local owners.

But how much of a discount? 2%? 5%? 10%?

Saying they'll sell at a discount doesn't mean they'll take any kind of offer whatsoever.

And $500 million for 2 teams and an arena sounds low.

 

[tarheelhockey]

And $500 million for 2 teams and an arena sounds low.

It was also, by all indications, an opening bid which was never negotiated.

 

[Mwd711]

They were in negotiations to sell the Hawks earlier that day. All along they have said a package offer would be acceptable.




Are you serious? You think this is just a case of people digging for trivial reasons to hate on Bettman?

Yes, I actually think it is, tarheel. If you stepped back for a second and thought about this "offer", you would see that it makes little sense. These guys have zero background. They aren't financial success stories. According to Google, the one company doesn't even exist. If it's such a successful company, wouldn't they at least have a website, maybe some news articles? Mr. Woodside's credentials are some claims on his personal blog. There is nothing that I found that certify his claims, that he has a successful asset management company. The other guy lost his property after failing to pay taxes. Does this sound like a credible group to you? It smells to me and I think people are making something out of nothing.