Metro Seattle: NHL, NBA and Arena - Part II

[MoreOrr]

But the trouble with that is seattle arena plan may not happen. NHL is watching whats going on in that front but they won't give a team unless there is a plan finalized and funding secured. So its possible that they could announce seattle gets the team right when it gets finalized and announced.

Seattle will have a new arena. And the plans will be in place for that new arena before the new Quebec City arena is completed. Now that's what I believe. Is the League willing to take that risk in order to secure Seattle into the NHL fold?

 

[beenhereandthere]

Number 1 MNNumbers. I just think at this point QC is too far ahead.

I would think for several reasons, 1 of them being the NBC contract that Phoenix would choose QC instead, only if all reasonable options in Seattle, ran out. I'm confident that the league won't act on the Coyotes until late June, to give time for Seattle to get its arena plans in order. QC said though, they will build an arena, Coyotes or not.

 

[MNNumbers]

I would think for several reasons, 1 of them being the NBC contract that Phoenix would choose QC instead, only if all reasonable options in Seattle, ran out. I'm confident that the league won't act on the Coyotes until late June, to give time for Seattle to get its arena plans in order. QC said though, they will build an arena, Coyotes or not.

Not to argue, Here. Are you thinking for 2012-13? The reason I ask is that I have no idea how long it actually takes to get the team structure up and running as regards, front office, ticket sales, arrangements with temp arena, arena support staff, locker rooms, etc. Like I say, I don't know how long that all takes.

Would you agree that QC is ahead in all that as well? I mean, there is lots to do for prospective owners in Seattle just with arena business (QC has that mostly done), so the Seattle people will be running hard if they want to be ready for opening day 2012, especially if they don't get confirmation until June.

Or, is there something I am missing?

 

[MoreOrr]

Not to argue, Here. Are you thinking for 2012-13? The reason I ask is that I have no idea how long it actually takes to get the team structure up and running as regards, front office, ticket sales, arrangements with temp arena, arena support staff, locker rooms, etc. Like I say, I don't know how long that all takes.

Would you agree that QC is ahead in all that as well? I mean, there is lots to do for prospective owners in Seattle just with arena business (QC has that mostly done), so the Seattle people will be running hard if they want to be ready for opening day 2012, especially if they don't get confirmation until June.

Or, is there something I am missing?

I agree, I think late June is pushing it. Early May is a better bet. If the NHL truly wants to see plans in place for a new arena in Seattle before it's a serious option to relocate the Coyotes there, then those arena plans will have to be confirmed by early May, i would think.

 

[beenhereandthere]

Not to argue, Here. Are you thinking for 2012-13? The reason I ask is that I have no idea how long it actually takes to get the team structure up and running as regards, front office, ticket sales, arrangements with temp arena, arena support staff, locker rooms, etc. Like I say, I don't know how long that all takes.

Would you agree that QC is ahead in all that as well? I mean, there is lots to do for prospective owners in Seattle just with arena business (QC has that mostly done), so the Seattle people will be running hard if they want to be ready for opening day 2012, especially if they don't get confirmation until June.

Or, is there something I am missing?

The the fact that they have their new arena plans already lined up where Seattle's is almost lines up is the main reason why QC is ahead, right now. As soon as Seattle has final details, that will change overnight.
Not saying that Seattle is more of a hockey market of course, but the league really doesn't want to (of course they're not going to come out and say it), lose 2 major US markets to small Canadian ones, back to back years.
If this scenario happened at least 3 years apart (assuming a future QC move), that may be a different story.
The Avalanche didn't have their announcement until June of the year they got their team, so I don't think June is too late. July? That may be a different story.

FYI: In May 1995, the COMSAT Entertainment Group announced an agreement in principle to purchase the team.[17] The deal became official on July 1, 1995, and 12,000 season tickets were sold in the 37 days after the announcement of the move to Denver.[17]

 

[Nordskull]

I'd change that up a bit and say that Seattle might be seen as too far behind.

But I jumped on this Seattle bandwagon, that Seattle would get a relocated Coyotes, with no consideration that a plan would be in place, as early as this year, to build a new arena.

Don't take it rude.

Our posts have stricly no importance at all for the owners, whatever side. But its fun to exchange on these topics.

 

[MoreOrr]

Don't take it rude.

Our posts have stricly no importance at all for the owners, whatever side. But its fun to exchange on these topics.

Did I suggest that anything we say here is even seen or remotely considered by ANYONE in any sort of real decision-making position?

I simply said that I made a personal prediction that if there are potential owners in Seattle who want to bring a relocated Coyotes franchise there, and who are willing to live with the team playing in the Tacoma Dome or even The Key for a few years until a new arena is in place, that the NHL might very well take that risk to get Seattle into the League. And that both those owners and the League would risk the city ultimately deciding that it will not, any time in the near future, agree to any kind of funding of a new arena.

 

[MNNumbers]

The the fact that they have their new arena plans already lined up where Seattle's is almost lines up is the main reason why QC is ahead, right now. As soon as Seattle has final details, that will change overnight.
Not saying that Seattle is more of a hockey market of course, but the league really doesn't want to (of course they're not going to come out and say it), lose 2 major US markets to small Canadian ones, back to back years.
If this scenario happened at least 3 years apart (assuming a future QC move), that may be a different story.
The Avalanche didn't have their announcement until June of the year they got their team, so I don't think June is too late. July? That may be a different story.

Sorry, my question about being ahead was not clear enough. I did not mean ahead - like, favored by NHL right now.

I meant, ahead in process. In other words, let's compare:
QC - PKP. Right now, he is the owner, the arena plans are in place. Scheduled for April groundbreaking (at least that is my impression going by the overall weight of all posters here and in the QC thread). Luxury box contracts are being sold. Seat licenses, etc. All that is being worked on. If a person chooses to believe reports, some feelers are going out in regard to broadcast teams, etc. All those are things that need to be done. How long does it all take? I don't know.

SEA - Owner? but working in conjunction Hansen. All the things listed above are things that this new owner has to do, all after getting the arena plans together, as well as any financing to purchase the team.

So, for time - it seems QC has more done already.

Seattle would have lots to do. Good point about Denver. I didn't pay any attention when that all happened. What was the state of their arena? Did they have some under-the-table word ahead of time? I don't know. I am simply asking.

 

[gstommylee]

Seattle will have a new arena. And the plans will be in place for that new arena before the new Quebec City arena is completed. Now that's what I believe. Is the League willing to take that risk in order to secure Seattle into the NHL fold?

The problem is there are other reasons why the new arena could not happen besides not securing a NBA and/or a NHL team.

 

[Nordskull]

Did I suggest that anything we say here is even seen or remotely considered by ANYONE in any sort of real decision-making position?

I simply said that I made a personal prediction that if there are potential owners in Seattle who want to bring a relocated Coyotes franchise there, and who are willing to live with the team playing in the Tacoma Dome or even The Key for a few years until a new arena is in place, that the NHL might very well take that risk to get Seattle into the League. And that both those owners and the League would risk the city ultimately deciding that it will not, any time in the near future, agree to any kind of funding of a new arena.

No you did not.

Anyway, you got lots more posts here then me and therefore know this very well.

 

[gstommylee]

Sorry, my question about being ahead was not clear enough. I did not mean ahead - like, favored by NHL right now.

I meant, ahead in process. In other words, let's compare:
QC - PKP. Right now, he is the owner, the arena plans are in place. Scheduled for April groundbreaking (at least that is my impression going by the overall weight of all posters here and in the QC thread). Luxury box contracts are being sold. Seat licenses, etc. All that is being worked on. If a person chooses to believe reports, some feelers are going out in regard to broadcast teams, etc. All those are things that need to be done. How long does it all take? I don't know.

SEA - Owner? but working in conjunction Hansen. All the things listed above are things that this new owner has to do, all after getting the arena plans together, as well as any financing to purchase the team.

So, for time - it seems QC has more done already.

Seattle would have lots to do. Good point about Denver. I didn't pay any attention when that all happened. What was the state of their arena? Did they have some under-the-table word ahead of time? I don't know. I am simply asking.

Indeed seattle has a lot to do. Theoretically, there is time for seattle to get the arena plan finalized and funded if all goes well. But then again the league may not want to play in the tacoma dome or Key Arena for some reason. Perhaps NHL would at least sell the team to the Seattle owner but have them stay in phx until the new arena is done.

 

[MoreOrr]

The problem is there are other reasons why the new arena could not happen besides not securing a NBA and/or a NHL team.

I was never relating a new arena to the securing of an NBA and/or NHL franchise, at least not in the order that you are apparently implying. I'm predicting that the city and/or some entity there will eventually come forward and get a new arena in the city because they will want to bring an NBA/NHL franchise there, and they will want Seattle to have that modern arena in place as a landmark of the city. The decision may not be made this year, it might not be made next year, but it will be made, I'm speculating, before the new Quebec City arena is completed.

I'm willing to go out on a limb, aren't I? Though again, I think it's a fairly reasonable prediction.

 

[beenhereandthere]

Sorry, my question about being ahead was not clear enough. I did not mean ahead - like, favored by NHL right now.

I meant, ahead in process. In other words, let's compare:
QC - PKP. Right now, he is the owner, the arena plans are in place. Scheduled for April groundbreaking (at least that is my impression going by the overall weight of all posters here and in the QC thread). Luxury box contracts are being sold. Seat licenses, etc. All that is being worked on. If a person chooses to believe reports, some feelers are going out in regard to broadcast teams, etc. All those are things that need to be done. How long does it all take? I don't know.

SEA - Owner? but working in conjunction Hansen. All the things listed above are things that this new owner has to do, all after getting the arena plans together, as well as any financing to purchase the team.

So, for time - it seems QC has more done already.

While that all could be true, I'm not sure if QC is the 1st choice of the league. Seems to move, based on the overall mission that a major US market like Seattle is. Before people start to take that as a Canadian slamming, I'm sure if Toronto had a 2nd modern arena ready to go, then that would be more of a choice for the league than Seattle.
That's why I'm under the impression the league will be a little more lenient with Seattle, with this (doesn't mean they will be lenient overall though) that one would think. I'm sure Bettman was not thrilled about Atlanta to Winnipeg and the owners did it as just as a quick cash recoop from what they were paying to operate the Coyotes.

 

[MoreOrr]

No you did not.

Anyway, you got lots more posts here then me and therefore know this very well.

Thanks, , but truly I doubt I know anything related to this "very well".

 

[gstommylee]

I was never relating a new arena to the securing of an NBA and/or NHL franchise, at least not in the order that you are apparently implying. I'm predicting that the city and/or some entity will eventually come forward and get a new arena in the city because they will want to bring an NBA/NHL franchise there, and they will want Seattle to have that modern arena in place as a landmark of the city. The decision may not be made this year, it might not be made next year, but it will be made, I'm speculating, before the new Quebec City arena is completed.

I'm willing to go out on a limb, aren't I? Though again, I think it's a fairly reasonable prediction.

Of course and its a reasonable prediction. Although there is that possibility the arena that would eventually host NHL/NBA games might not be in Seattle. It would be in Bellevue.

 

[MoreOrr]

Of course and its a reasonable prediction. Although there is that possibility the arena that would eventually host NHL/NBA games might not be in Seattle. It would be in Bellevue.

Well, I mean the Seattle area.

 

[MNNumbers]

While that all could be true, I'm not sure if QC is the 1st choice of the league. Seems to move, based on the overall mission that a major US market like Seattle is. Before people start to take that as a Canadian slamming, I'm sure if Toronto had a 2nd modern arena ready to go, then that would be more of a choice for the league than Seattle.
That's why I'm under the impression the league will be a little more lenient with Seattle, with this (doesn't mean they will be lenient overall though) that one would think. I'm sure Bettman was not thrilled about Atlanta to Winnipeg and the owners did it as just as a quick cash recoop from what they were paying to operate the Coyotes.

So, if the league would be wooed by the possibilities in Seattle and want to move there (and after all, they are the owners of the team - which seems farcical in my opinion), I see the possibility that all news stops for a long time in the next few months, because if they are going to Seattle, I see advantages to keep everything quiet for another year.

Again, I am not arguing in favor of QC, here. I am instead trying to get a better picture of what is necessary to go to Seattle. And, I think that there might not be time enough to get it done for the 12-13 season. That's doesn't necessarily mean that QC is a slam dunk - not at all. Like I have often said, I wish both communities best of luck getting a team (we have ours, and its future looks bright, even on the ice).

Again, I am trying to see if it is possible/improbable/impossible to go to Seattle for 2012-13. Thanks.

 

[gstommylee]

Well, I mean the Seattle area.

My concern is not rather we get a team or not which is why i dropped. Its rather the arena gets built regardless of where it is hence why dropped my stance on that Seattle will get the yotes.

Right now its more open with the NBA and which team could end up in seattle since there is no competition for an NBA team and there are several possibilities. There is no plan b right now for Seattle if QC gets the yotes.

 

[MoreOrr]

So, if the league would be wooed by the possibilities in Seattle and want to move there (and after all, they are the owners of the team - which seems farcical in my opinion), I see the possibility that all news stops for a long time in the next few months, because if they are going to Seattle, I see advantages to keep everything quiet for another year.

Again, I am not arguing in favor of QC, here. I am instead trying to get a better picture of what is necessary to go to Seattle. And, I think that there might not be time enough to get it done for the 12-13 season. That's doesn't necessarily mean that QC is a slam dunk - not at all. Like I have often said, I wish both communities best of luck getting a team (we have ours, and its future looks bright, even on the ice).

Again, I am trying to see if it is possible/improbable/impossible to go to Seattle for 2012-13. Thanks.

The questions I have here, MNNumbers, are: Are there truly potential owners who would really want to bring a relocated Coyotes to Seattle for the 2012-13 Season, assuming they could come up with a means to have the team play out of one of those arenas (The Key or the Tacoma Dome)? And if those potential owners aren't really ready to make that move for 2012-13 but tell the League that for 2013-14 it's a definite go... Will the League be willing to wait until then?

 

[MoreOrr]

My concern is not rather we get a team or not which is why i dropped. Its rather the arena gets built regardless of where it is hence why dropped my stance on that Seattle will get the yotes.

Right now its more open with the NBA and which team could end up in seattle since there is no competition for an NBA team and there are several possibilities. There is no plan b right now for Seattle if QC gets the yotes.

EXACTLY! And that's a stong reason why, IMO, Seattle gets a strong nod from the League here, if the Leagues sees any way to make it happen. The chances seem fewer for the NHL, and Seattle is a big fish to let get away.

 

[gstommylee]

So, if the league would be wooed by the possibilities in Seattle and want to move there (and after all, they are the owners of the team - which seems farcical in my opinion), I see the possibility that all news stops for a long time in the next few months, because if they are going to Seattle, I see advantages to keep everything quiet for another year.

Again, I am not arguing in favor of QC, here. I am instead trying to get a better picture of what is necessary to go to Seattle. And, I think that there might not be time enough to get it done for the 12-13 season. That's doesn't necessarily mean that QC is a slam dunk - not at all. Like I have often said, I wish both communities best of luck getting a team (we have ours, and its future looks bright, even on the ice).

Again, I am trying to see if it is possible/improbable/impossible to go to Seattle for 2012-13. Thanks.

Its hard for me to say if its possible, improbable and impossible for a team to be in seattle by next season. Possible, improbably and impossible are all fair guess depending on if they get the arena plan finalized and funding secured in time and the league accepts Key or tacoma dome as a temporary facility.

If NHL doesn't accept Tacoma Dome and Key as temp facilities then its impossible, if arena plan and funded are finalized and secured late its improbable and if everything is on time and league accepts the temp facility then its possible.

Two keys that has to happen for a team in 2012-13: 1) Plan and funding must be finalized and secured in time. 2) The league must accept Tacoma dome or Key arena as temporary faculties.

Neither of those 2 happen than specifically #2 then its impossible there will be a team in Seattle for 12-13 season.

 

[MNNumbers]

The questions I have here, MNNumbers, are: Are there truly potential owners who would really want to bring a relocated Coyotes to Seattle for the 2012-13 Season, assuming they could come up with a means to have the team play out of one of those arenas (The Key or the Tacoma Dome)? And if those potential owners aren't really ready to make that move for 2012-13 but tell the League that for 2013-14 it's a definite go... Will the League be willing to wait until then?

So, More, you are not confident in reports of a 'mystery man' who is working along with Hansen and the NBA owners?

Sorry, i only now what I read here. It fascinates me. I have read several things about a joint effort: one building, 2 tenants, etc. Many have said that the whole thing doesn't work without both leagues, because there won't be much public funds for the building.

But, you seem to be saying that you are not confident in reports of an NHL owner. Is that right?

 

[gstommylee]

The questions I have here, MNNumbers, are: Are there truly potential owners who would really want to bring a relocated Coyotes to Seattle for the 2012-13 Season, assuming they could come up with a means to have the team play out of one of those arenas (The Key or the Tacoma Dome)? And if those potential owners aren't really ready to make that move for 2012-13 but tell the League that for 2013-14 it's a definite go... Will the League be willing to wait until then?

In my opinion even if the league has to wait on relocation of the team to Seattle, just getting the team to the new owner would be good for them.

 

[MoreOrr]

So, More, you are not confident in reports of a 'mystery man' who is working along with Hansen and the NBA owners?

Sorry, i only now what I read here. It fascinates me. I have read several things about a joint effort: one building, 2 tenants, etc. Many have said that the whole thing doesn't work without both leagues, because there won't be much public funds for the building.

But, you seem to be saying that you are not confident in reports of an NHL owner. Is that right?

No, I'm saying that I'm not confident that there are potential owners who are keen to bring a relocated Coyotes team to Seattle for next Season and would have to live with using the Tacoma Dome or The Key starting out that early. So I'm not second guessing the desire to bring the NHL there, but to do it and have the team playing there 7 months from now.

Although, certainly there is the advantage of getting an established, quite competitive team as compared to an Expansion team which would cost them much more. The question here is: Will potential owners prefer foregoing Expansion Fees and a struggling expansion team over having to play at least a few years in a substandard arena?

As for wanting both major league tenants, I would assume that relates to a new arena, not at all to having both the NBA and NHL playing there in 2012-13 in an old arena.

 

[MNNumbers]

No, I'm saying that I'm not confident that there are potential owners who are keen to bring a relocated Coyotes team to Seattle for next Season and would have to live with using the Tacoma Dome or The Key starting out that early. So I'm not second guessing the desire to bring the NHL there, but to do it and have the team playing there 7 months from now.

As for wanting both major league tenants, I would assume that relates to a new arena, not at all to having both the NBA and NHL playing there in 2012-13 in an old arena.

Which, in your opinion, would require the Coyotes staying another year (or more?) in Phoenix? And, that, to you, would be why the NHL would love it (???) if Glendale offered another $25M?