Phoenix CXIX: We're Just Not Executing

[TheLegend]

Carry on folks.......

Click to read more...

 

[mesamonster]

I can`t seem to get past the fact that this is not a real business opportunity for anyone involved, that is precisely why the "execution" has not occurred. The marketplace has spoken loud and clear, without public subsidies and/or an owner with deep pockets the Coyotes have worn out their welcome in the desert, the media ratings are a good indicator of this.

What is in it for the NHL looking forward? I am assuming that via their debt vehicles extended to IA that they are the entity that is providing the working capital for these fellows. How much longer do they continue to pour good money after bad when just up the road a brand new SW franchise is about to open their doors without the need public subsidies and NHL lines of credit. Yep, satnd alone financial security, promoting the game in the SW USA! Does the NHL really need two franchises in this part of the country to promote their sport? I don`t think so, the differences could not be greater when viewing the projected future of each of these ventures, why not promote the sport through LV and proclaim that the new market for those in Az. that still are interested!

 

[kihekah19*]

I can`t seem to get past the fact that this is not a real business opportunity for anyone involved, that is precisely why the "execution" has not occurred. The marketplace has spoken loud and clear, without public subsidies and/or an owner with deep pockets the Coyotes have worn out their welcome in the desert, the media ratings are a good indicator of this.

What is in it for the NHL looking forward? I am assuming that via their debt vehicles extended to IA that they are the entity that is providing the working capital for these fellows. How much longer do they continue to pour good money after bad when just up the road a brand new SW franchise is about to open their doors without the need public subsidies and NHL lines of credit. Yep, satnd alone financial security, promoting the game in the SW USA! Does the NHL really need two franchises in this part of the country to promote their sport? I don`t think so, the differences could not be greater when viewing the projected future of each of these ventures, why not promote the sport through LV and proclaim that the new market for those in Az. that still are interested!

The population of Phoenix dwarfs that of Las Vegas. The only thing LV has going for it is that it's population is more dense, thought being access to games may be better. However, the level headed among us, that know both communities would assert that because of that density, access will be no better.

You also assume that LV will be a success. They have no track record whatsoever, merely an initial response. What leads you to this premature assumption?

 

[Killion]

I can`t seem to get past the fact that this is not a real business opportunity for anyone involved, that is precisely why the "execution" has not occurred. The marketplace has spoken loud and clear, without public subsidies and/or an owner with deep pockets the Coyotes have worn out their welcome in the desert, the media ratings are a good indicator of this.

What is in it for the NHL looking forward? I am assuming that via their debt vehicles extended to IA that they are the entity that is providing the working capital for these fellows. How much longer do they continue to pour good money after bad when just up the road a brand new SW franchise is about to open their doors without the need public subsidies and NHL lines of credit. Yep, satnd alone financial security, promoting the game in the SW USA! Does the NHL really need two franchises in this part of the country to promote their sport? I don`t think so, the differences could not be greater when viewing the projected future of each of these ventures, why not promote the sport through LV and proclaim that the new market for those in Az. that still are interested!

Ok. Well I'll plays Devils Advocate & mind you, its not that I myself would buy into what Im about to say if being pitched by IA, but its obviously the motivation, sizzle to the steak if you will in the pursuit of a not only new arena but so too a complete build-out including hotel/commercial and I would imagine possible residential (condo's perhaps).... That IA isnt necessarily selling a piece of the franchise & dream (though that too could be on the table, an option), that investors arent just buying into a new arena but a total development, same model as Ellman with the arena & Westgate.... only rather than Glendale of course, the far more attractive easterly valley location, Scottsdale... where the money lives.

That obviously what their trying to put together is Two Pronged, running on parallel tracks to the same station. One track being to corral in investors for the arena & surrounding development; the other track in attempting to induce ASU into that mega project while simultaneously lobbying the State. As CF pointed out earlier those efforts should be ramping up right now with the next Legislature sitting in January so they'll need to find a sponsor or two to present & float that Bill, fast-tracked, voted yes or no as quickly as possible. If the answers "no" I'm guessing the whole package is dead in the water. If the answers "yes, you can have your special tax district" then its game-on. Now just where IA comes up with $100M, $175M or more, their stated contribution is anyones guess but I dont think LeBlanc would be saying that if he wasnt entirely confident that he could do so & had the backing lined up... or I suppose you can believe he's a congenital liar merely buying time, selling false hope as this season plays itself out & BAM! team gone out of State.

Disregarding, ignoring IA's & the Coyotes performance of the past 20yrs granted is a leap for any investor looking at it however one can overcome such an obstacle by simply maximizing, extenuating the positive of the proposed development itself, that this a "brand new day" for the franchise, the past best forgotten, betrayed by a feckless municipality, teams never had decent ownership, doomed to failure. That no one could have saved them where is as is nor could they save the City of Glendale from itself. From shooting themselves in the foot. And... they have supporters to that narrative... Jerry Reinsdorf, the Bidwells & God only knows who else who over the years who became completely disenchanted with the City. That in addition to it just being a counterproductive & lousy location, municipality is completely dysfunctional. Theres enough truth to that to make it stick, an excuse that can be rationalized & sold to prospective investors.

Finally, "does the NHL really need two franchises in the Southwest"?... Are you forgetting about Texas? One should also include Colorado, part of the 4 Corners along with Utah, New Mexico, Arizona. So thats 4 teams, not 2, but if you wanna just keep it to Nevada & Arizona as being the SW and that "one team is enough"... that Id strongly disagree with. The existence of the Coyotes will strengthen the team in Vegas just as the team in Vegas is a big positive for the Coyotes (along with the Stars, Av's, Kings, Ducks & Sharks). Thats the kind of NHL I like, the kind I want in a perfect World. Strong SW Division & that includes Arizona, game flourishing... Look, whats happened here is a tragedy, screw-up of epic proportions. If it wasnt for Bad Luck, this franchise wouldve had No Luck at All. There is a glimmer of hope, candle still burns... too early to be calling it a night mesa. We just dont know.

 

[Killion]

The population of Phoenix dwarfs that of Las Vegas. The only thing LV has going for it is that it's population is more dense, thought being access to games may be better. However, the level headed among us, that know both communities would assert that because of that density, access will be no better.

You also assume that LV will be a success. They have no track record whatsoever, merely an initial response. What leads you to this premature assumption?

Quite right... while initial response & enthusiasm all positive and obviously a great owner in Foley... well... lets just look down the road a little ways... Bill Foleys no spring chicken, a tad troubling that the Maloofs are involved albeit at the minority ownership level but still. Dont think I'd want any member of that family getting first right of refusal as is often the case & buying up Foleys majority shares from his estate, calling the shots thereafter... And what happens if the NBA comes to town? Im sorry, not seeing Vegas capable of carrying & supporting two teams and its pretty clear who the victim would be should that happen. Sort of like Milwaukee. Be a great NHL market but theres just no way they can support it. Bucks rule, just not enough corporate etc to go around. But as a stand-alone, only major league team being the NHL, yeah, I think they'll do well, its great for Arizona, Texas, Colorado & the teams in California.

 

[mesamonster]

The population of Phoenix dwarfs that of Las Vegas. The only thing LV has going for it is that it's population is more dense, thought being access to games may be better. However, the level headed among us, that know both communities would assert that because of that density, access will be no better.

You also assume that LV will be a success. They have no track record whatsoever, merely an initial response. What leads you to this premature assumption?

I realize that Phoenix and surrounding areas are substantially larger and thus should have a greater potential to attract the patronage that could support an NHL franchise. Unfortunately, for 20 years that has not happened, you can blame ownership and the arena location for some of that. How do you explain their inability to attract any sense of stable and reliable local media support (cable TV). Those numbers are beyond poor and speaks to the issue of how much real support do they have? Attendance reflects this as well with the lowest ticket prices to go along with!

The issue, however, that nobody wants to address is the business model! K19, I might give up my maniacal rant if just one person could explain how a team that has to exist with a minimalist payroll and perpetually "cheap" ownership habits is going to all of a sudden come up with $200MM to support a business model that does not work in this market? I assume the $200MM comes from someones pocket lets just say it comes from Drummond and Barroway. Each throws in $100MM which in conjunction with the debt owing to the NHL of $200MM+. So before the puck drops in the new East side arena this group is into the team for $400MM and have a part ownership in an arena. The capital cost alone on the $400MM in debt surpasses their present gate revenue! Do you think this group would then have enough wherewithal to christen their new building by spending real money to the cap ($75MM)? The cost of playing at GRA ($500,000) per season is a drop in the bucket compared to what their real out of pocket costs would be if they were playing in a new arena. I remind you, a new arena and supposedly an entirely new mandate to succeed would certainly suggest that they will need to show the fans their desire to win by spending more money! I realize , no guarantees, but it does tell the consumer you are putting your money where your mouth is. Pretty tough to ask your STH`s to pony up for higher seat prices when you are spending at the floor!


Again, as for LV, the spectacle of the only professional sports team in town and the annual pilgrimages of so many people will give this franchise strong potential for selling seats and entertainment in the entertainment capital of the world, No?

 

[mesamonster]

Watching the game tonight from afar, tough opponent, it is obvious that this team is overmatched in just about every game, they have a real issue with the back end! I know this is not a team site so let me say that this team will likely finish in the bottom five in the league! this will be the fifth straight year that they have disappointed!

Ever wonder why a coaching change has not been made? Because he is the best they could get and even that does not mean success. The system in Az. has been tainted by the lack of leadership from the ownership. think of it, here is group of wannabes who really don`t know the first thing about running a first rate organization. Fact is Tip is the only person who has the background and experience to give this organization any hope at all. Unfortunately he is saddled with the worst ownership group in the NHL, and it is not close.

Herein lies the root of the problem with this franchise, we all want to look elsewhere to the COG,to the marketplace, to Moyes, Ellman and on and on. This group of owners is so inept it is frightening, Tony the phone salesman, Drummond, an oil guy and Barroway a hedge fund manager [MOD]! So why is this franchise in trouble? Just look at the top and you have your answer! There is no direction or cohesive plan to see this through to the end. This is a group of men with hope, but not a clue. None of them have had any experience to suggest that they could come in and run a successful franchise in a business that not one of them has any experience in. The smartest and best executive resides behind the bench and can only do so much when given a salary cap that handicaps this team from day one.

Don`t buy this rhetoric that they are young and maybe in the future they will have a competitive team. The future is now, a fifth year out of the playoffs and no place top play next year? A joke spokesperson who can`t find his way home and thinks that someone in the public owes his group a new arena? Really, folks this is more than a farce, this is a group of people who have no business doing what they are attempting to do,to be competitive in an industry that requires prior experience and a significant amount of capital. They have neither and this explains why they will struggle until time that GB says to them their time is up. It could not be more obvious, struggles on the ice and at the box office are the result of poor ownership and a marketplace that knows that!

 

[aqib]

They did draw 16.5k tonight. Not to sound snarky but are there a lot of Bruins fans in AZ or is it just because its a Saturday night.

 

[0point1]

They did draw 16.5k tonight. Not to sound snarky but are there a lot of Bruins fans in AZ or is it just because its a Saturday night.

I went to the Boston @ AZ game last season. More than half of the fans are Boston fans, probably closer to 75%. Being on Saturday and many people off work is definitely a help as well. Traffic on Saturday is significantly better too.

Yotes attendance does well against Boston, Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Detroit. Phoenix is Chicago south and those always sell out with standing room only seats. Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Montreal, Calgary often do well. Sharks and Blues aren't too bad. The rest are pretty weak in terms of fans from other teams showing up and helping the attendance count.

 

[TheLegend]

They did draw 16.5k tonight. Not to sound snarky but are there a lot of Bruins fans in AZ or is it just because its a Saturday night.

I went to the Boston @ AZ game last season. More than half of the fans are Boston fans, probably closer to 75%. Being on Saturday and many people off work is definitely a help as well. Traffic on Saturday is significantly better too.

Yotes attendance does well against Boston, Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Detroit. Phoenix is Chicago south and those always sell out with standing room only seats. Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Montreal, Calgary often do well. Sharks and Blues aren't too bad. The rest are pretty weak in terms of fans from other teams showing up and helping the attendance count.

Meh.... it's not a problem to mention the number of visiting fans.

There was also a major NASCAR race tonight a few miles to the south too.

Not going to bother responding to random rants about the roster because I can get plenty of that in the team forum.

But when you look at it..... there are no less than 9 first or second year players on the roster. Which is unheard of in the NHL these days. With at least a half dozen more itching for a shot down in Tucson (which has the best record in the AHL right now, BTW). Anyone who thought this team should be a cup contender is either deluding themselves or just wants another excuse to heap dung for the sake of it.

This franchise is trying to think long term...... not be desperate and look for quick fixes. They tried that for too long and outside of one magical season it's shown itself all too well.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

16.5 is another obvious sign this is a market worth fighting for.

 

[MNNumbers]

I'm not sure how to phrase this.....

It seems like there are several discussions going on in these threads, all overlapping each other. Sometimes it helps me to back up and try to look at everything and take the discussions apart.... So, here goes. These seem to be the questions?

1- Is the Phoenix Valley a valid hockey market? Answer: To me, we don't really know that because this franchise in the Valley has never really had enough stability to find out how many people with $$ connections might be interested. This phrasing covers both individual tickets and corporate sponsors. Further, it would take a good 10 years under stable conditions to settle the question.

2- Who really owns the team (corollary: How much involvement does the League office actually have here?)? Answer: Again, we don't really know. What we do know is that the League itself overruled their own ownership rules in order to sell the franchise to IA, when IA purchased it under heavy loan burdens. We also know this only happened because CoG was willing to give them a lease which basically promised them 10M/yr from the city plus all revenue they could generate (I know the lease was 15M/yr, but there were surcharges which returned to CoG, so I am making a generalization here. 10M/yr is close enough for my purposes). Without that, there was no local sale, and the team was headed away (reports were to Seattle, but I am still not sure about that).

3- Is there a new arena on the horizon? Answer: Again, we don't know. It's possible to interpret the information we have to either say 'yes' or 'no.'

4- What will happen? Answer: This seems a little more clear. Since we do not know of any discussions between IA and AEG about a temporary lease at GRA, is seems correct to say that if there is no arena deal in place by spring, that the team COULD well be moving out of market. Of course, that is not for sure. The owners, at the encouragement of the NHL offices, might well try for a single year rental again at GRA, and pursue another arena for another year. Who knows. In part, the answer to the question of what happens relates to who is really footing the bill. We are reasonably sure that the team is losing money. It was before, even with the COG lease, so it must be now. How deep are the pockets, and how long can that situation continue? Not my call. It's the decision of the one's paying.

5- How do you know any of this for sure? Answer: You don't. No one does. All of us are reading between the lines according as fits our own personal guesses and biases. Some of us have friends who are well-placed, and we think they have information to help us with our guesses. Others don't. But we all have our own opinions, and we want them to be right, so we read the tea leaves to make them right.

For myself: I want governmental agencies to make good decisions on behalf of their citizens.

Therefore, it's my opinion that Glendale should never have built GRA in the first place. And, it's my opinion that they were wise to find a way out of the original IA lease. And, it's my hope that they don't sell themselves out again through AEG just to keep the team.

It's also my opinion that the state of AZ should not create a special tax district for a new Yotes arena.

And, it's my opinion that ASU, which is an arm of the state, should not build an arena large enough for NHL and incur the extra costs to do so, and then turn around and give most of the revenues from said arena to the hockey team. If ASU wants to build a new arena, and partner with the team, with the team paying the extra to make it NHL-ready, that's on IA's dollar, and would be fine with me. If ASU gets most of the event revenue from said arena, that's fine with me.

If the native Tribes want to get involved, that would be a totally private arrangement, and while I might have an idea that I think it would or would not pay off in the end, that would still be a private deal, and I really have no comment about that.

Others may feel different, but that's my take. I got to these boards in the first place because I found out how NHL was taking advantage of COG and holding them hostage over the threat of moving the team, and I have been upset with Bettman, et al, ever since.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

16.5 is another obvious sign this is a market worth fighting for.

IMO the problem has never been the number of hockey fans in Arizona. The problem has been the number of Coyotes fans. It hasn't helped that IA's marketing has weighed heavily on providing a safe space for opposing team fans in order to sell tickets.

That's one thing I think an invested, local ownership would have as a much higher priority - making the game experience one where the fans feel like it's THEIR BARN, THEIR ICE, etc., rather than showing up to a game and treating it like a night at the theater. The only times I really felt that "home passion" in 12 years were the nights of our playoff games.

That, however, speaks more to Arizona being like an extended stay hotel rather than a real home for so many of its residents than anything else.

 

[Whileee]

Meh.... it's not a problem to mention the number of visiting fans.

There was also a major NASCAR race tonight a few miles to the south too.

Not going to bother responding to random rants about the roster because I can get plenty of that in the team forum.

But when you look at it..... there are no less than 9 first or second year players on the roster. Which is unheard of in the NHL these days. With at least a half dozen more itching for a shot down in Tucson (which has the best record in the AHL right now, BTW). Anyone who thought this team should be a cup contender is either deluding themselves or just wants another excuse to heap dung for the sake of it.

This franchise is trying to think long term...... not be desperate and look for quick fixes. They tried that for too long and outside of one magical season it's shown itself all too well.

Jets have been playing 8-10 1st or 2nd year players fairly often this season, but some of that is due to injuries.

Ehlers, Laine, Connor, Armia, Dano, Copp, Morrissey, Petan, Melchiori, Hellebuyck. However, they have some very good top-end vets who anchor the team. They also have a knowledgeable and patient fan base that keeps tabs on the draft and develop process. Are casual fans in Phoenix as plugged in and keen on this approach?


While I agree that the Yotes are looking long-term, they seem quite a bit further from competing than the Jets, all things considered. Do you think another two or three seasons without a competitive team might diminish the local fan base? Is it a good idea to try to bring in a lot of youth without having a strong group of vets to build a good team structure and culture? I think that the Yotes have cut salary costs excessively this season and it might have some long-term impacts on the development of their youth if they aren't careful.

 

[wpgallday1960]

They did draw 16.5k tonight. Not to sound snarky but are there a lot of Bruins fans in AZ or is it just because its a Saturday night.

Correct a lot of Bruin fans. I was at the game and I would guess that the ratio was 60/40 radio yotes fans to Bruin fans.

For those questioning Thursdays tilt with the Jets I was at that game as well. Of the 11185 in attendance at least half were dressed in Jets gear. I sat in $55 seats in section 119 row S. I was one of 6 people in the entire row.

16.5 is another obvious sign this is a market worth fighting for.

Not too sure about that. The only times the yotes draw close to capacity seems to be when an O6 team comes to town. That's a problem.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

Over the years my opinion of this market has changed a lot. I'm sure my original posts on this board were less than kind to the Coyotes fanbase.

I'm just sick of the drive by posts taking shots at attendance or the market. The fact that this team, with terrible ownership, an awful team, and NO LEASE FOR NEXT YEAR! managed to draw that number is impressive, and a credit to the strength of the market.

Did I say the ownership was terrible enough yet? I think I should re-iterate that.

This franchise has had exactly 0 good owners in its history, and may have salted the grounds for a few years.

 

[wpgallday1960]

Over the years my opinion of this market has changed a lot. I'm sure my original posts on this board were less than kind to the Coyotes fanbase.

I'm just sick of the drive by posts taking shots at attendance or the market. The fact that this team, with terrible ownership, an awful team, and NO LEASE FOR NEXT YEAR! managed to draw that number is impressive, and a credit to the strength of the market.

Did I say the ownership was terrible enough yet? I think I should re-iterate that.

This franchise has had exactly 0 good owners in its history, and may have salted the grounds for a few years.

On that I agree. I'm not convinced NHL hockey is viable in AZ but they have had no chance with the quality of ownership fans have "enjoyed".

 

[Fairview]

The NHL approved this ownership group, so that is on them. As has been mentioned by some posters previously, a better solution would be for the league to step up regain total ownership of the team and build up the market and team properly. As long as the NHL is paying the bills and they are consistent in helping any other franchise if need be, then I think that is fair.

 

[Fugu]

<snip>

Not too sure about that. The only times the yotes draw close to capacity seems to be when an O6 team comes to town. That's a problem.

This seems one of those things that makes sense until you step back and actually think about the statement a bit.

The Original Four in the US, plus Philadelphia, probably represent the core US population in terms of size of markets and educational systems. The South was downtrodden for a long time, and originally rurally-oriented. Texas & California became the earliest standouts, California far more than any state west of the Mississippi. Washington lagged by 3+ decades, but then also starting taking off. Atlanta has always bee the key southern city, but we know the issues there (and have two failed franchises now).

So back to the key NE markets. They were the ones fueling the transplant growth, and they seem to have taken their sport allegiances with them. The nontraditional markets simply did not have the population bases that were native - outside mainly Texas and California these days - to support hockey teams.

 

[mesamonster]

The NHL approved this ownership group, so that is on them. As has been mentioned by some posters previously, a better solution would be for the league to step up regain total ownership of the team and build up the market and team properly. As long as the NHL is paying the bills and they are consistent in helping any other franchise if need be, then I think that is fair.

This goes back to the question MNN answered earlier, who is actually paying the bills? I don`t for a minute believe it is IA! If they were it would suggest that they have plenty of money to burn and should appropriate some of that cash on the payroll in order to give this team and its faithful fans something to cheer about. Last nights on ice payroll was somewhere in the mid $30MM range due to the absence of Hanzal and Smith. Imagine trying to compete with that!


MNN, I share your disdain for the fleecing of Glendale by GB! The idea that this ownership group may be going back to the public coffers to rescue their future is their choice, lets hope the public officials involved on their side recognize what history should have taught them while attempting to do business with this group. IF IA is what they seem to say they are then let them show all of us the money, only after that will I believe anything more coming from this group.

 

[Mightygoose]

With an announced attendance of 16,500 and lets go with 60% on the high end per the above posts, that would mean around 10K actual fans of the Coyotes brand despite being a prime Saturday night where traffic wouldn't be a concern as opposed to mid-week.

Agreed on posts above that it does reflect the NE transplant dynamic playing in to the large amount of Bruins fans. The only larger crowd, Prime Saturday night too also against as NE opponent.

Though Bruin fans in the house are helping to pay the bills - still revenue. It also highlights the ineffectiveness of this ownership group that are still trying to figure out the market in their 4th season.

That's the problem with non local ownership. They need that learning curve and don't have the time for poeple from Canada and the Eastern Seaboard on how to sell hockey...or entertainment in general to Arizona. Buying homes in the area doesn't make them local. Homes can always be sold. The trouble is...so can other assets.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

The NHL approved this ownership group, so that is on them. As has been mentioned by some posters previously, a better solution would be for the league to step up regain total ownership of the team and build up the market and team properly. As long as the NHL is paying the bills and they are consistent in helping any other franchise if need be, then I think that is fair.

totally disagree, Fairview, again you missed this caveat, from the beginning of these megathreads over the Coyotes, the NHL, nor any league, wants to be in the business long-term of operating any of its franchises, the only way the league will assist IA is if they request the league's assistance.... that's why it took 4 years for the NHL to find an ownership group to suit their parameters, one of which is as evidenced by the blackballing of Balsillie, and that extended well past the Coyotes into two or three other clubs.

the NHL has been satisfied w/ how IA HAS SHOWN commitment to Arizona, otherwise we'd still be searching for an ownership group that fits the League's stipulation, that the franchise (or as the NHL Constitution, deems as a member club) same as w/ Pittsburgh when Howard Baldwin put that team in jeopardy through same issues that Moyes illegally did to place this franchise in the position to have said megathreads or in Buffalo, after Rigas/Adelphia, there was an interim owner for Buffalo before Pegula.

Are u stating that Pegula nor Mario Lemieux aren't or shouldn't be the owners in those markets and the NHL seems to have no issues w/ PIT/BUF or IA, and the NHL will tell IA if they've violated any league rules....

now, imho, the issue as to where the Coyotes play past this season, whether or not it's Glendale or elsewhere, is between solely IA and AEG if there is a continuation or extension at GRA, the NHL is not involved in any arena discussions..... How do I know this:

The AHL isn't/doesn't get involved in any legal dispute between a franchise and its arena partners/operators over lease extension/negotiation.... same likely goes for the NHL..... BECAUSE IT HAPPENED in the midst of a renovation of Cross Insurance Arena and the lease expired in 2013 after Phase 1 of a 3 phase renovation, and the franchise here in Portland dealt w/ not just the renovation of said arena, but the County commission that oversees the arena, so it's sometimes not just who the arena manager is, just as the Coyotes dealt w/ COG prior to their exit and summarily replaced by AEG by contract.... at the time, the Coyote prospects were caught in the middle of said arena dispute, and hence why a 1 yr lease was worked out in Lewiston, until said CIA Renovation was complete, and 2 years before the Coyotes PDC elected to not be renewed, the subsequent move to Springfield, and then, the move by Arizona/IA to buy that franchise and shift it to Tucson, which cost Portland its franchise as a result of said decision.

IA has been consistent with its commitment to Arizona, since they were introduced by FSAZ IN 2010-11, THEY KNEW they had to show faith to the league, to avert any relocation of the Coyotes despite all evidence to the contrary, even when the NHL operated the Coyotes, they were under the same mandate or capped as to how much the League was willing to pay in regards to operation, day to day/year to year, and former GM Don Maloney was instrumental in calming all in and or outside the Coyotes organization, something which seems to be overlooked since IA took control...

to me, the inference that the NHL needs to retake day to day control of the Coyotes as you suggest is not warranted, unless any member owner of IA is in legal issues, the NHL will deal w/ that in due course as it always has.

 

[Fairview]

The NHL approved this ownership group, so that is on them. As has been mentioned by some posters previously, a better solution would be for the league to step up regain total ownership of the team and build up the market and team properly. As long as the NHL is paying the bills and they are consistent in helping any other franchise if need be, then I think that is fair.

This goes back to the question MNN answered earlier, who is actually paying the bills? I don`t for a minute believe it is IA! If they were it would suggest that they have plenty of money to burn and should appropriate some of that cash on the payroll in order to give this team and its faithful fans something to cheer about. Last nights on ice payroll was somewhere in the mid $30MM range due to the absence of Hanzal and Smith. Imagine trying to compete with that!

MNN, I share your disdain for the fleecing of Glendale by GB! The idea that this ownership group may be going back to the public coffers to rescue their future is their choice, lets hope the public officials involved on their side recognize what history should have taught them while attempting to do business with this group. IF IA is what they seem to say they are then let them show all of us the money, only after that will I believe anything more coming from this group.

My guess is that the bills are being paid through a combination of NHL LOC, revenue sharing and growth fund. They must be getting close to their limit and that is one of the reasons for the low payroll and layaway contracts like Doan. The use of ELCs on this roster fits in nicely because fans are told it is for the future and that is good but it also helps with keeping costs down. Not all the young guys are ready for prime time it would seem, however, and the lack of any quality vets is starting to show.
I agree with you about what happened in Glendale and can only hope that any government entity looking to go into business with the NHL, takes a good long look at the way IA and the NHL do their business. I would think that at this time, Gary and Tony are trying to get a mole in place with their prospective partnerships, much like Tyndal, they need an insider to reject reality and substitute their own.

 

[MNNumbers]

....snip

to me, the inference that the NHL needs to retake day to day control of the Coyotes as you suggest is not warranted, unless any member owner of IA is in legal issues, the NHL will deal w/ that in due course as it always has.

HUTCH,

I would agree entirely with your post, except for one thing that continues to give me pause.

What has become public of the ownership investment in this case is:

1- Originally, the majority of the $$ was a loan from FIG. And, an operating loan for 85M for 5 years from NHL itself.
2- That loan was retired when Barroway came on the scene. He was necessary because of Canadian tax law and the NHL's line of credit with CitiBank
3- Since rumor has it that one the Canadian owners is now calling the shots, Barroway's involvement is (reasonably in my opinion) questioable.
4- Even at that, the ownership is balanced between the NHL's LOC with Citi, and the operating loan from the NHL in the first place.

These things, taken together, give the feeling of an unusual ownership/league relationship.

That leads a reasonable person to the question (and there is no way to answer this because the franchise agreement and the terms of sale to IA in the first place are a private matter): Just what clauses were included in those deals? Does the NHL have a right to call its loans at some point? Why was there a 5-year out-clause in the beginning? Why a 5-year operating loan? Is that a suggestion that NHL was giving IA 5 years to figure this out? etc.

Note, I am NOT saying that NHL has those rights. I am merely saying that any confidence I might have in IA's rights as the owner in the eyes of the league is somewhat eroded by the way they came to own the team.

Questions. Questions. No answers.

 

[Killion]

There was also a major NASCAR race tonight a few miles to the south too.

Yeah. One of two major NASCAR weekends hosted out at the Phoenix Speedway in Avondale; Sprint Series in town and thats a huge deal. Major "event". Overshadows everything else going on, capturing the more casual sports fans attention & dollars. A demographic shared with NHL hockey in fact... which leads me to ask... did IA get together with Phoenix Speedway & NASCAR, creating mutually beneficial cross-promotional platforms including Coyote/NASCAR tickets & licensed apparel giveaways etc etc etc? Like really seriously spending the money on doing things like this, total no brainer, things like this that they should have been doing since 2013 when they were supposedly all set to hit the ground running? Did you see any Sprint cars parked around GRA? Signage? Anything on the airwaves? In the newspapers? On-line?

... I found out how NHL was taking advantage of COG and holding them hostage over the threat of moving the team, and I have been upset with Bettman, et al, ever since.

Indeed. No doubt some empathy as well having lived through the loss of the North Stars. Since 1917, a league thats been moderately successful despite themselves.

That, however, speaks more to Arizona being like an extended stay hotel rather than a real home for so many of its residents than anything else.

Transient population base. Thats a huge problem. Same thing with Vegas. Just another Way Station, Stagecoach Stop on lifes road for millions who come & go. Impermanence. Stepping stone.... lots of part-time residents as well. All kinds of elements of a resort town about it, all kinds of infrastructure built to accommodate & cater to precisely that. Arizona State Tourist Authority with its "sports destination" platform... serious struggle.