Phoenix CXIX: We're Just Not Executing

[Fairview]

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.

You have missed the point. I was responding to a quote that said that the ownership in Arizona has been and continues to be terrible. My response was that the NHL approved these guys and if they are as bad as many on here suggest, that is on the NHL. As far as , where the money is coming from to pay the bills, it is obvious that the LOC, revenue sharing and growth fund is the source. Sure IA wants the team to stay in the market, so they can continue to own an NHL team. Do they have the money to pay the continued losses when the LOC is maxed out, expansion money gone? We will see. If not, then the only way the team stays in Arizona is as I mentioned with the NHL fully paying for the operations.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

You have missed the point. I was responding to a quote that said that the ownership in Arizona has been and continues to be terrible. My response was that the NHL approved these guys and if they are as bad as many on here suggest, that is on the NHL. As far as , where the money is coming from to pay the bills, it is obvious that the LOC, revenue sharing and growth fund is the source. Sure IA wants the team to stay in the market, so they can continue to own an NHL team. Do they have the money to pay the continued losses when the LOC is maxed out, expansion money gone? We will see. If not, then the only way the team stays in Arizona is as I mentioned with the NHL fully paying for the operations.

FALSE, you need to google the Coyotes and read up on who placed them there, Fairview, that's the one question which was never resolved..... was Moyes' decision to place this franchise in to BK DEEMED 'illegal' AND that HAS set off the threads since.

Arizona has done what since 1996, when they were bought from Winnipeg WHOSE owner (Shenkarow) WANTED OUT, (long before MTSC, IA, or ASG bringing the Jets back under TNSE).

IN all honesty, it doesn't matter how the Coyotes got here since then, the fact remains, the NHL no longer operates this franchise, IA does, and how they operate is of no concern to the other 29 Governors (30, WHEN LV begins) AS to how the NHL DID WHAT IT DID, that's been paid off, and frankly does it really matter if that information is made public, as far as the NHL is concerned, IA is the designated operator of its member club in Arizona, and even Bettman has stopped answering those questions because it's IA, just as it is w/ the other owners/governors...

Where has it been stated that IA is requesting assistance in regards to its arena dispute w/ Glendale, whether it's COG,or, its designee, AEG by contract, should be the question now going forward, and leave the BK issue in the past.

 

[TheLegend]

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.

Since I'm at work I can't break this all down right at this moment but I wanted to clarify a point about who's calling the shots.

It's pretty clear (in these parts anyway) that Gary Drummond is calling the shots in regards to the on-ice portion of the franchise. But Andrew Barroway remains the majority owner so any last word on what the franchise does over and above that still resides with him. That included selecting who IA decided to partner with on the arena and it's associated site.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

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?



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.



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.

to answer your first part, K, NASCAR does its own marketing, it's just coincidental that the B's happened to be the opponent last night, but the way this Coyote team is set up there may not need to be a marketing angle, there may have been a STH perk or two as most teams do, but how far is Avondale from Glendale and the way three races are held @ PIR, the track may not have needed the exposure or benefit, but Phoenix also runs in February/March near the end of the NHL season, much the same as now, besides that NBCSN, which holds the NHL Contract WAS HYPING THE "Wednesday night Rivalry" JUST as much as the Sprint Cup race.

 

[Fairview]

FALSE, you need to google the Coyotes and read up on who placed them there, Fairview, that's the one question which was never resolved..... was Moyes' decision to place this franchise in to BK DEEMED 'illegal' AND that HAS set off the threads since.

Arizona has done what since 1996, when they were bought from Winnipeg WHOSE owner (Shenkarow) WANTED OUT, (long before MTSC, IA, or ASG bringing the Jets back under TNSE).

IN all honesty, it doesn't matter how the Coyotes got here since then, the fact remains, the NHL no longer operates this franchise, IA does, and how they operate is of no concern to the other 29 Governors (30, WHEN LV begins) AS to how the NHL DID WHAT IT DID, that's been paid off, and frankly does it really matter if that information is made public, as far as the NHL is concerned, IA is the designated operator of its member club in Arizona, and even Bettman has stopped answering those questions because it's IA, just as it is w/ the other owners/governors...

Where has it been stated that IA is requesting assistance in regards to its arena dispute w/ Glendale, whether it's COG,or, its designee, AEG by contract, should be the question now going forward, and leave the BK issue in the past.

What has been paid off? FIG loan was replaced with the NHL LOC. There is some debate as to how much money BorrowAway paid to acquire whatever % of the team that he currently owns. Remember as an American he was brought in to facilitate accessing that LOC. The phoney $300 million evaluation etc. You do realize that the team is receiving max revenue sharing, growth fund$ and likely a cut of expansion cash as well. That is the operation cash to keep the team from sinking in the red.You seem to think that the team has been paid for, that is a very big assumption on your part.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Since I'm at work I can't break this all down right at this moment but I wanted to clarify a point about who's calling the shots.

It's pretty clear (in these parts anyway) that Gary Drummond is calling the shots in regards to the on-ice portion of the franchise. But Andrew Barroway remains the majority owner so any last word on what the franchise does over and above that still resides with him. That included selecting who IA decided to partner with on the arena and it's associated site.

thanks, TL, for that clarification.

 

[Killion]

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.

Right. Texas a totally different story, thats a Nation within a Nation... But California, Los Angeles, they've had more than their share of problems despite having some depth generationally in native born & raised following the first big waves of migration from the Northeast in the 1930's. Domestic migration includes Canadians, and by 1967 when the Kings first took to the ice there were supposedly over 300,000 ex-pat Canucks living within a 3hr drive of the Fabulous Forum... However as we all know, Owner Jack Kent Cooke (himself a Canadian originally from Hamilton but raised in Toronto) facing bank upon bank of empty seats famously quipping "Now I know why all these Canadians left Canada, they hate hockey".... Well, not so much, just that having been so badly handicapped & handcuffed as the Expansion teams were & have been since at every turn whatever momentum & buzz that the birth (or relo) of a new team should just naturally create is killed, slowly whittled away as they flail away, going through re-build after no, lets go free-agent name players to re-build & back again to signing UFA's & RFA's, going broke... again & again... getting hammered by established teams, often for years & years & years. Freaking out. Cap doesnt matter... caught on a hamster wheel.... like a cat tied to a stick... a pig, locked in a cage, on antibiotics... hardly a "fitter, happier, healthier" NHL huh?... www.youtube.com/watch?v=HimvFbossU8

 

[Killion]

to answer your first part, K, NASCAR does its own marketing, it's just coincidental that the B's happened to be the opponent last night, but the way this Coyote team is set up there may not need to be a marketing angle, there may have been a STH perk or two as most teams do, but how far is Avondale from Glendale and the way three races are held @ PIR, the track may not have needed the exposure or benefit, but Phoenix also runs in February/March near the end of the NHL season, much the same as now, besides that NBCSN, which holds the NHL Contract WAS HYPING THE "Wednesday night Rivalry" JUST as much as the Sprint Cup race.

Well thats certainly helpful, that as the NBCSN was hyping the Coyotes game with a lot more eyeballs tuning in to catch news of prior to & then watching the Sprint Cup Qualifiers etc... And yes, Im aware of how NASCAR & the individual Teams operate with respect to Sponsorships & Cross Promotions, most tracks & major facilities as well and absolutely theres room to piggyback, room for the Coyotes or any other club/league to get involved event x event or throughout the entire season nationwide. Totally flexible, certainly not a closed door. Just have to knock. Opened & welcomed in provided youve got some cash, they'll listen to your proposal, mutually beneficial relationship? No problem. Bend over backwards to make it work....

There is literally just a tonne of events taking place throughout the State & locally that represent a very public way for the Coyotes to show people that they fully embrace the culture of the region, that their not just a bunch of Carpetbaggers in transit, that they care. Over a dozen long long established County Fairs (State Fair as well), "Pioneer Days" including Rodeo's, Prescott and elsewhere; things like the annual Arizona Hot Air Balloon Classic, Indian Arts Festival in Casa Grande, Blue Grass Festival in Wickenburg, Glendales Glitter & Glow Block Parties... Hell, for 64yrs now, an annual called the Great Canadian Picnic that celebrates everything Canadian (foods, traditions etc) held right in the Valley there. Doesnt cost a lot to get involved, get out there, engage the community, sponsor things that people care about and you watch how quickly they respond in kind to you. Yet with these guys? Nothing. Havent got a clue what their doing. Learning on the job. A luxury that neither they nor the league can afford let alone ever entering into. Supposed to be "Major League". Big4. Professionals. Know whats what. But no, no the people of Phoenix, State of Arizona? They got Morons on their team. Failure to execute indeed. These are just normal common sensical things that people that know what their doing would be doing.

 

[TheLegend]

What has been paid off? FIG loan was replaced with the NHL LOC. There is some debate as to how much money BorrowAway paid to acquire whatever % of the team that he currently owns. Remember as an American he was brought in to facilitate accessing that LOC. The phoney $300 million evaluation etc. You do realize that the team is receiving max revenue sharing, growth fund$ and likely a cut of expansion cash as well. That is the operation cash to keep the team from sinking in the red.You seem to think that the team has been paid for, that is a very big assumption on your part.

Even the Jets admitted they got revenue sharing. Not sure if that's a reasonable point.

However...... The NHL LOC was always there. It didn't replace the FIG loan in the literal sense. But there is room for debate on just how much of the FIG loan rolled over into the LOC. We know at least one payment was made to FIG ( courtesy of the arrangement in the original IA lease with CoG). But after that is anyone's guess.

Barroway's entry into IA was more about avoiding the stiff taxes on those loans imposed by Canada. And yes...it did allow them access to a larger credit line with the NHL (and the side benefit of the lower interest rate). But to simply say the LOC replaced the FIG loan may or may not be true.

 

[kihekah19*]

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.

Before the Blackhawks started winning cups, tix to those games were as easily had and attendance as poor as any other.

 

[Killion]

Even the Jets admitted they got revenue sharing. Not sure if that's a reasonable point.

However...... The NHL LOC was always there. It didn't replace the FIG loan in the literal sense. But there is room for debate on just how much of the FIG loan rolled over into the LOC. We know at least one payment was made to FIG ( courtesy of the arrangement in the original IA lease with CoG). But after that is anyone's guess.

Barroway's entry into IA was more about avoiding the stiff taxes on those loans imposed by Canada. And yes...it did allow them access to a larger credit line with the NHL (and the side benefit of the lower interest rate). But to simply say the LOC replaced the FIG loan may or may not be true.

... not following your logic here TL, your speculation seems flawed... why wouldnt they have retired the vig, the Shy in that Fortress loan? That was crazy juice. Over 15% if Im not mistaken, may have been over 20. IA borrows the money from The Bank of Last Resort, FIG pays the NHL's either or $100M or $110M, not sure to the exact amount to this day, FIG demanding of IA & receiving from the COG the $15M per annum Management Fee. Check, money transfer goes directly from Glendale to Fortress. Never has a direct-subsidy ever been so obvious, Goldwater, Dept of Justice or whatever authorities who shouldve been all over it like white on rice turning a blind-eye. Not even a pretense in pretending those funds were being used to manage, maintain & promote the facility. But ok, whatever.... The rest of your narrative, yes & no... The NHL secures a massive LOC with either Wells-Fargo or Citi-Bank (cant remember which), money available to any or all of the 30 clubs, the institution requiring that whatever franchise availing itself of the LOC have a minimum valuation of $300M. So overnight, Coyotes valuation conflated to $310M bux. Barroway brought in in what was more than likely a totally cashless transaction or minimum down of less than $45M (capped, no cash calls, guaranteed return with interest from the NHL), appointed Majority Owner, merely a signator with right place of birth & passport, decent enough net worth, an offer he couldnt refuse and good for the NHL as the requirement was he drop his Civil Suit vs Wang (which wouldve been ugly & tied up all manner of things including Wangs ability to grab huge $$$ for a distressed asset & in the wake of the Ballmer sale inflated franchise values further league wide) some paper shuffled, LOC immediately accessed to pay-out FIG, IA then directly collecting the $15M from Glendale, dipping into the LOC further for ongoing operational costs while receiving their fair share of Revenues from RS to Central & Broadcast etc. All of it under the watchful & audited eyes of their Puppetmasters, the NHL. Dots all connect. Cant think of one good reason to keep FIG on the books. Why would you?

 

[Fairview]

Who brought in Barroway? Then artificially increased the value of the team to $310 million? IIRC that was totally orchestrated by Gary. He introduced Barroway and made the speech about the new evaluation.Am I mistaken in my recollection? Is it standard operating procedure for the league to introduce investors for their franchises to the media? The NHL was and likely still is very involved in the finances of the team. Barroway was brought in months after the team was "sold " to IA, so much for the league being totally hands off after the sale.

 

[TheLegend]

Who brought in Barroway? Then artificially increased the value of the team to $310 million? IIRC that was totally orchestrated by Gary. He introduced Barroway and made the speech about the new evaluation.Am I mistaken in my recollection? Is it standard operating procedure for the league to introduce investors for their franchises to the media? The NHL was and likely still is very involved in the finances of the team. Barroway was brought in months after the team was "sold " to IA, so much for the league being totally hands off after the sale.

If you are to believe LeBlanc it was FIG who introduced them. Barroway already had connections to FIG and had just pulled back from acquiring the Islanders and was in the process of suing Wang over reneging on their initial agreement between them to buy the team. Whether or not Bettman played matchmaker here and asked FIG to facilitate things is open for discussion. Especially when the lawsuit got dropped soon after.

 

[TheLegend]

... not following your logic here TL, your speculation seems flawed... why wouldnt they have retired the vig, the Shy in that Fortress loan? That was crazy juice. Over 15% if Im not mistaken, may have been over 20. IA borrows the money from The Bank of Last Resort, FIG pays the NHL's either or $100M or $110M, not sure to the exact amount to this day, FIG demanding of IA & receiving from the COG the $15M per annum Management Fee. Check, money transfer goes directly from Glendale to Fortress. Never has a direct-subsidy ever been so obvious, Goldwater, Dept of Justice or whatever authorities who shouldve been all over it like white on rice turning a blind-eye. Not even a pretense in pretending those funds were being used to manage, maintain & promote the facility. But ok, whatever.... The rest of your narrative, yes & no... The NHL secures a massive LOC with either Wells-Fargo or Citi-Bank (cant remember which), money available to any or all of the 30 clubs, the institution requiring that whatever franchise availing itself of the LOC have a minimum valuation of $300M. So overnight, Coyotes valuation conflated to $310M bux. Barroway brought in in what was more than likely a totally cashless transaction or minimum down of less than $45M (capped, no cash calls, guaranteed return with interest from the NHL), appointed Majority Owner, merely a signator with right place of birth & passport, decent enough net worth, an offer he couldnt refuse and good for the NHL as the requirement was he drop his Civil Suit vs Wang (which wouldve been ugly & tied up all manner of things including Wangs ability to grab huge $$$ for a distressed asset & in the wake of the Ballmer sale inflated franchise values further league wide) some paper shuffled, LOC immediately accessed to pay-out FIG, IA then directly collecting the $15M from Glendale, dipping into the LOC further for ongoing operational costs while receiving their fair share of Revenues from RS to Central & Broadcast etc. All of it under the watchful & audited eyes of their Puppetmasters, the NHL. Dots all connect. Cant think of one good reason to keep FIG on the books. Why would you?

GWI made a statement after the sale and lease agreements were approved that they had no problem with it. Whether or not they felt they had gotten all the milage out of it they could to please their dark money supporters, or just determined there wasn't enough there to warrant filing a gift clause case is something you'd have to ask them.

AFAIK.... CoG making the AMULA payments directly to FIG was just to facilitate things. The optics of it were certainly weird but who knows?? This saga has been weird from the get go.

 

[Fairview]

If you are to believe LeBlanc it was FIG who introduced them. Barroway already had connections to FIG and had just pulled back from acquiring the Islanders and was in the process of suing Wang over reneging on their initial agreement between them to buy the team. Whether or not Bettman played matchmaker here and asked FIG to facilitate things is open for discussion. Especially when the lawsuit got dropped soon after.

Was it Gary or Tony that announced that Barroway had bought in at 50% of the new $310 million evaluation?Was there any talk previous to that new evaluation about the Coyotes suddenly increasing in value? Strange that just 6 months prior (IIRC) the team was struggling to find buyers at $170 million. Did that evaluation just appear, miraculously, so that the team could access 50% of the new value? And then that was the loan that was used to pay off Fortress if we are right in our speculation..there was also some speculation that Barroway might not have put in anywhere near the $150 million required for his 50%.
Not a very bright move by FIG ,if the above is true. They introduce Tony to the guy that then helps IA to pay off the Fortress loan and interest rate for a much more favourable rate from the NHL's bank.

 

[RR]

I've been a Coyotes season ticket holder since 2003. Is Phoenix a viable hockey market? Fair question. Don't know. But are there tens of thousands of locals who attend Coyotes games only when their favorite local team is here? Absolutely. I've met some of them. I even seek them out to speak with them. Nine out of 10 say they'd attend more games if the Coyotes didn't suck. Talk is cheap. Three out of 10 is a more realistic number. Maybe that's even too high.

But to be clear, when you see 60/40 attendance for the opponent the vast majority of that 60% is locals.

Unless IA can figure out a way to get those local Bruins, Wings, Hawks, Habs, Leafs, Rangers, Hawks, Caps, and Flyers fans to more games this market will always have problems. Fatal? Perhaps. At least for now it's obvious they're not willing to buy in.

 

[Fugu]

Was it Gary or Tony that announced that Barroway had bought in at 50% of the new $310 million evaluation?Was there any talk previous to that new evaluation about the Coyotes suddenly increasing in value? Strange that just 6 months prior (IIRC) the team was struggling to find buyers at $170 million. Did that evaluation just appear, miraculously, so that the team could access 50% of the new value? And then that was the loan that was used to pay off Fortress if we are right in our speculation..there was also some speculation that Barroway might not have put in anywhere near the $150 million required for his 50%.
Not a very bright move by FIG ,if the above is true. They introduce Tony to the guy that then helps IA to pay off the Fortress loan and interest rate for a much more favourable rate from the NHL's bank.

I believe the new valuations were based on the NBA Clippers selling for $2 billion. Whether you wish to accept these is a different matter, but Bettman did allude to that figure.

 

[Killion]

I believe the new valuations were based on the NBA Clippers selling for $2 billion. Whether you wish to accept these is a different matter, but Bettman did allude to that figure.

Thats right. On the heels of that sale Charles Wang immediately reneged on the so called "exclusive negotiating contract" with Andrew Barroway who was offering far less than the reported $485M Wang did eventually receive. Of course the Islanders came with considerable pedigree, full roster & farm, were talking about NYC, not some market short on hockey history; immediate close-by rivals; lucrative local broadcasting contract and an arena deal in Brooklyn to die for.... Given whats transpired, isnt all of that worth a lot more than the $500M Expansion Fee where your starting from scratch, ground zero? Whole ding dang shootin match, price structure, totally out of whack with this league. Crazy.

 

[mesamonster]

Just curious, I know the posters on the Coyotes team thread are having a rough go of the fact that the Coyotes now possess the worst won-loss record in the league. At what point do the on-ice struggles begin to impact the drive for a new a stadium and more importantly the overall profitability of this franchise? We ca n talk about youth and the future but at what point does that talk become dull when your team is just bad? I think this plays into the entire narrative of how IA is going to extricate themselves from this situation involving GRA and a potential new arena. To say that a fifth straight year of local futility is meaningless would be underestimating the desire for your average fan to want to support this team in its dire moments, which i feel they are in right now!

 

[MNNumbers]

GWI made a statement after the sale and lease agreements were approved that they had no problem with it. Whether or not they felt they had gotten all the milage out of it they could to please their dark money supporters, or just determined there wasn't enough there to warrant filing a gift clause case is something you'd have to ask them.

AFAIK.... CoG making the AMULA payments directly to FIG was just to facilitate things. The optics of it were certainly weird but who knows?? This saga has been weird from the get go.

Idk Legend,

What I remember from the get-go was this:
1- It was reported to be a 125M loan to IA from FIG.
2- The reported interest was 9%
3- A 125M loan over 15 years, amortized at 9% requires (can you believe this?) exactly a 15M year payment.
The natural conclusion was that IA needed the 125M from FIG, and FIG realized that the team itself had little value in its present location, so the only thing that IA had of any value as collateral was the AMF. Thus, FIG required 15M/yr guaranteed. And, that's why IA had COG pay directly to FIG's account.

Separate from the 125M from FIG was an 85M loan from NHL, with no interest and no payments for 5 years.
The natural conclusion on that one was that this was an operating loan. Coupled with the 5-year out-clause that was required for IA of COG, and looks like this was intended as a 5-year trial of this ownership.

Obviously, that's reading between the lines to some extent. However, I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch. And, those number match well enough that I am satisfied it was exactly that - a 5 year trial.

Then, CoG cancelled the contract. I suppose that put lots of things up in the air. For one, FIG no longer had their guaranteed 15M/yr on the loan. So, now, what does IA do? They have no source of $$ to make up the gap. They could borrow through the NHL on the league's LOC with CitiBank, but their owners are all Canadian, and Canada tax law makes that onerous. So, in comes Barroway, supposedly as new 'majority' stake holder in IA. With a team evaluation of 305M, just enough to make everything work with the new Citi loan. This transaction had to be, somehow, because I am pretty sure that FIG would have been demanding ownership of the team to liquidate get their $$ back. In other words, somehow the loss of the 15M/yr would have been material breach of contract, and left FOG with legal cause to step in. IA and NHL could not have allowed that. That is why I think NHL stepped in and brought in Barroway - it clearly was as a 'savior'. Without someone American in that role, the Canadians could have kept the matter out of court, and retired the FIG loan, but at great cost to themselves.

That is how NHL has been involved in the ownership since IA supposedly 'took over.' It was on the league to find a savior of the FIG situation after the AMF fell through.

Far more than a benign "facilitation", Legend.

At least, as far as I can fit the pieces together.

 

[Fairview]

Idk Legend,

What I remember from the get-go was this:
1- It was reported to be a 125M loan to IA from FIG.
2- The reported interest was 9%
3- A 125M loan over 15 years, amortized at 9% requires (can you believe this?) exactly a 15M year payment.
The natural conclusion was that IA needed the 125M from FIG, and FIG realized that the team itself had little value in its present location, so the only thing that IA had of any value as collateral was the AMF. Thus, FIG required 15M/yr guaranteed. And, that's why IA had COG pay directly to FIG's account.

Separate from the 125M from FIG was an 85M loan from NHL, with no interest and no payments for 5 years.
The natural conclusion on that one was that this was an operating loan. Coupled with the 5-year out-clause that was required for IA of COG, and looks like this was intended as a 5-year trial of this ownership.

Obviously, that's reading between the lines to some extent. However, I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch. And, those number match well enough that I am satisfied it was exactly that - a 5 year trial.

Then, CoG cancelled the contract. I suppose that put lots of things up in the air. For one, FIG no longer had their guaranteed 15M/yr on the loan. So, now, what does IA do? They have no source of $$ to make up the gap. They could borrow through the NHL on the league's LOC with CitiBank, but their owners are all Canadian, and Canada tax law makes that onerous. So, in comes Barroway, supposedly as new 'majority' stake holder in IA. With a team evaluation of 305M, just enough to make everything work with the new Citi loan. This transaction had to be, somehow, because I am pretty sure that FIG would have been demanding ownership of the team to liquidate get their $$ back. In other words, somehow the loss of the 15M/yr would have been material breach of contract, and left FOG with legal cause to step in. IA and NHL could not have allowed that. That is why I think NHL stepped in and brought in Barroway - it clearly was as a 'savior'. Without someone American in that role, the Canadians could have kept the matter out of court, and retired the FIG loan, but at great cost to themselves.

That is how NHL has been involved in the ownership since IA supposedly 'took over.' It was on the league to find a savior of the FIG situation after the AMF fell through.



Far more than a benign "facilitation", Legend.

At least, as far as I can fit the pieces together.

IIRC . Borroway came in at least 6 months prior to the COG cancelling the $15 million subsidy. The FIG Loan was retired and replaced by the low interest loan from CitiBank. That may have been the genesis of COG wanting out of the lease. The introduction of Barroway and the low interest loan had council thinking that they were being ripped off and that the subsidy was no longer required. COG asked for IA to renegotiate to a more reasonable amount , Tony said no way...and COG kicked him where the sun don't shine. And here we are today..

 

[MNNumbers]

IIRC . Borroway came in at least 6 months prior to the COG cancelling the $15 million subsidy. The FIG Loan was retired and replaced by the low interest loan from CitiBank. That may have been the genesis of COG wanting out of the lease. The introduction of Barroway and the low interest loan had council thinking that they were being ripped off and that the subsidy was no longer required. COG asked for IA to renegotiate to a more reasonable amount , Tony said no way...and COG kicked him where the sun don't shine. And here we are today..

Can you document that?

EDIT: I mean, I think there is a dated document floating around here somewhere, which CF may have dug up, with dates the retirement of the FIG loan.

We know that Cog voted to cancel the lease in about mid-June of 15

 

[Fairview]

Can you document that?

EDIT: I mean, I think there is a dated document floating around here somewhere, which CF may have dug up, with dates the retirement of the FIG loan.

We know that Cog voted to cancel the lease in about mid-June of 15

I just googled it. Borroway was approved as majority owner by the NHL board on Dec 31 2014. I am on my IPhone and can't provide a link sorry. I just Googled Borroway as Coyotes owner and that was what popped up.

I kind of remember Borroway showing up around Xmas...more Coyote drama was a good Xmas present that year

 

[Tawnos]

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.

For me, in cities with large transplant populations, you need two things.

First, you need competent management on both the business side and the hockey side. Two of our best examples of non-traditional markets in terms of business success are Tampa and Nashville. Both have large transplant populations, Tampa from the NE and Nashville from the midwest, Detroit and Indianapolis in particular. Both have been competently managed on both sides. Nashville, in particular, is a stark contrast of what it looks like when business management is not competent vs when it is.

The second element is a second generation of fans. You're going to get some natives. But you're also going to get the kids of those transplants. If a kid born in 2005 in Nashville to Detroit-born parents, he/she is going to have a soft spot for the Red Wings, but will be a Predators fan.

The second one doesn't do you any good unless the first one is in place.

Point is, it's impossible to know if Phoenix is a viable hockey market or not, since they haven't really had enough of element #1 to make that kind of judgment.

 

[TheLegend]

IIRC . Borroway came in at least 6 months prior to the COG cancelling the $15 million subsidy. The FIG Loan was retired and replaced by the low interest loan from CitiBank. That may have been the genesis of COG wanting out of the lease. The introduction of Barroway and the low interest loan had council thinking that they were being ripped off and that the subsidy was no longer required. COG asked for IA to renegotiate to a more reasonable amount , Tony said no way...and COG kicked him where the sun don't shine. And here we are today..

Can you document that?

EDIT: I mean, I think there is a dated document floating around here somewhere, which CF may have dug up, with dates the retirement of the FIG loan.

We know that Cog voted to cancel the lease in about mid-June of 15

MNN....

Fairview's accounting is the same as mine. And yes.... CF has posted the link to the document that showed the payments from CoG to FIG stopped a couple of times. Can't remember the date that happened but I'm still looking. Might actually be on the city's website somewhere.

The Fortress loan was reported to be around $85 million at the time Barroway bought the majority interest in IA on the last day of 2014. The buy in was based on a valuation of $305 million for the franchise, reportedly set by the NHL. So figure he put in roughly $155 million (when all was said and done, given his percentage of ownership is supposed to be at around 54%.)

It was thought that Barroway's influx of money/assets would cancel out the FIG loan but nobody could confirm it. So YMMV.

In November of 2014, Mike Sunnucks had reported the Coyotes had been talking to CoG about amending the original lease agreement. The story was Spectracor (IA's manager) wanted Glendale approval for a second tier of lower ticket surcharges for certain non-hockey events to allow them more flexibility in attracting more events to GRA. The story came and went without much fanfare (we discussed it here briefly).

So if you put this all together......

1). You have OA negotiating with CoG on amending the arena lease in Fall/Winter 2014.

2). About that time..... Andrew Barroway suddenly comes into play and buys a majority stake in IA.

3). Barroway's buy-in facilitates the sun-setting of the FIG loan (and CoG's annual $15 million direct payments to it not long afterwards.)

If you are Glendale (or Mayor Weiers and Ian Hugh to be more precise)..... how does this look to you???


Of course I left out all the media drama that took place at the same time.... (ie Mayor Weiers complaining he can't get a meeting with Barroway.... Glendale complaining IA was slow responding to filing their arena reports.... the subsequent audit.... etc... ) Those all played a part in it, but those three key items I list above cuts to the chase of it all.


EDIT: Think this is the note ending the payments to FIG and directing all future payments to IA.

https://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/Contracts/8554-1.pdf