Phoenix CXVI: Soft Deadlines (or ~ As Soon As Practicable)

[kihekah19*]

Putting a team back in Quebec City makes as much sense as putting a team back in Minnesota, two places the NHL should have never left in the first place!

How ya been Andy?

Welcome to the land of politically correct snoozeVille!

 

[Hutz]

Quickly,

Last summer: Glendale found a legal way to cancel the prior lease. If you remember, they were paying 15M/yr and getting some ancillary monies back from IA. It seems to have turned out that IA were not easy to work with. The legal reason had to do with IA hiring two prior employees of Glendale who had worked on the contract for the Arena Management.

Late last summer: An amendment to the prior AM contract was signed. It left the parties with this situation... For 2015-16, IA would manage the arena for a flat 6.5M, with no ancillary monies flowing back to Glendale. For 16-17, the same, EXCEPT that Glendale had the right to change arena managers. If they did do, the Coyotes were obligated yet to play at GRA in 16-17, and simply pay 500K rent.

More recently, like at the end of April: Glendale has signed with AEG to manage their arena, beginning (I think) on Aug 1 of this year. That leaves IA paying to play at GRA, a situation which would seem to multiply their losses.

Since Glendale voted on the AEG contract: Anthony LeBlanc has gone more public with his ideas about a new arena somewhere in the Valley. He has given himself a date at which to announce something more than once, and each time he really has nothing to announce. The latest such date is June 24. Meanwhile, the possible partners, with the exception of the mayor of Phoenix, all seem silent on the matter. The mayor of Phoenix is talking a great game about how it would be super to have a new arena that would house both the Suns and Yotes, but nothing of substance seems to be happening at city hall, perhaps because the Suns have a very favorable lease in the current building, and no need for a new arena for at least 5 years.

Last two weeks: Silence on the part of everyone.

Very good summary, this is exactly what I was looking for, thanks and sorry for the continuing woes.

 

[Whileee]

The big announcement will be that one of the potential venues being discussed is out.

Y'all can have a field day with that for a spell.

Nah. Pretty sure Leblanc will say some mumbo jumbo about how super incredibly progressed talks are, and that he actually saw the Phoenix mayor walking on water. This will all be done with beads of sweat growing above his upper lip, while he avoids eye contact with everyone in the room. Standard stuff for him.

 

[Ciao]

I don't understand. What's in it for him to string this out any longer if an arena deal really isn't in the works.

There certainly is no evidence of a bun in the oven on this.

If the new-arena caper were a foil for a pending relo while last season played out, the Coyotes season ended long ago. If there were an imminent relo it would be better to use this valuable time in the new market.

There really doesn't seem to be any evidence of an imminent relo either.

So, what is their likely strategy? Surely it can't be to tilt at windmills as they appear to be doing on the arena front?

Are they just indecisive, or slow learners?

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

 

[cbcwpg]

I don't understand. What's in it for him to string this out any longer if an arena deal really isn't in the works.

There certainly is no evidence of a bun in the oven on this.

If the new-arena caper were a foil for a pending relo while last season played out, the Coyotes season ended long ago. If there were an imminent relo it would be better to use this valuable time in the new market.

There really doesn't seem to be any evidence of an imminent relo either.

So, what is their likely strategy? Surely it can't be to tilt at windmills as they appear to be doing on the arena front?

Are they just indecisive, or slow learners?

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

Are we sure they have a strategy?

Who knows what IA is thinking. Highly unlikely, but all this pointing at piles of dirt and saying there will be new arenas built henceforth, could also be IAs attempt to get the CoG to reverse the errors of their ways, come back to IA and give them whatever they want, pretend none of this happened, shake on it, and continue to play in Glendale forever....

Pointing at piles of dirt and saying to the CoG ... "see... see that pile o' dirt... we really mean it... we are going to move to that pile.... really... " could be part of the gamesmanship. Who knows.

What's more likely? Someone is willing to build a new arena for hundreds of millions of dollars then hand the revenues, or a large share of, over to the hockey team, because they feel...what?...generous?.... this is a ploy to get the CoG to change their minds.... or the team will be eventually relocating out of state?

 

[berklon]

It's a game of chicken that apparently IA seems to be playing by themselves.

 

[ducks2010]

I don't understand. What's in it for him to string this out any longer if an arena deal really isn't in the works.

There certainly is no evidence of a bun in the oven on this.

If the new-arena caper were a foil for a pending relo while last season played out, the Coyotes season ended long ago. If there were an imminent relo it would be better to use this valuable time in the new market.

There really doesn't seem to be any evidence of an imminent relo either.

So, what is their likely strategy? Surely it can't be to tilt at windmills as they appear to be doing on the arena front?

Are they just indecisive, or slow learners?

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

I agree that things don't seem to add up on the surface. My take on it is that you need to go back to summer 2013 when the team was purchased from the league with a $15 million a year Glendale subsidy and a 5 year out with apparently 'no money down'. Ice Arizona was adamant about the 5 year out clause being needed to do the deal. There must have been some incentive with some sort of potential windfall for Ice Arizona provided by the league after 5 years to bother buying the team with slim chances of turning the ship around on the ice or operationally. My take on this is Ice Arizona is focused on "keeping the lights on in Arizona until summer 2018" when their "5 year out" timeline/agreement with the league kicks in and the windfall is achieved. Ice Arizona since 2013 has promised new spending on the team but when you look back, even when they were receiving $15 mil per year from Glendale... it is all about cost cutting... keep the charade going while cutting costs... nothing about any significant new investment in the team. For the next two seasons, until summer 2018, I expect we will see Ice Arizona continue to spend the bare minimum to keep the team geographically in Arizona a per the presumed agreement with the NHL. As long as they don't default on any other league commitments, it will be business as usual for Leblanc... delay and deceive... as Ice Arizona continues to inch forward to their summer 2018 finish line with the league and they receive their pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. ... Just my opinion!

 

[JimAnchower]

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

Fairview's theory on the previous page, that are trying to get a special tax district somewhere and the arena announcement by June 24 will start the public phase of that process, is very plausible. Karsten Golf Course by ASU has been reported to be a candidate. They have already tried this and had difficulty finding a sponsor at the state legislature, but perhaps they think publicizing this will help them. Maybe ASU would be involved somehow, maybe another suburb (Mesa or Scottsdale), maybe they go it alone. Of course, this would be a long process. They would have to get approval from the state, there may be a public vote (not sure of this or not), there probably will be lawsuits (either from groups against the location of district, environmental/noise/traffic groups, other special tax districts, etc), developers to develop the area, people to buy and work with the land around the arena (retail, restaurants, housing), and several other hurdles. So best case scenario is this would be a while for shovels to hit the ground, if they ever do.

Of course, it could all be a ruse to force others (AEG/Glendale) to give them better terms to stay at GRA.

 

[Ciao]

^^ The one decisive thing IA seems to have done is slam the door on Glendale. I suppose they could always change their mind, but there's no real purpose in burning that bridge if that's part of the plan.

The five-year finish-line theory fits in with the NHL putting the QC bid on hold. However, just making it to 2018 for the purpose of earning some contractual financial incentives with the NHL doesn't fit that we'll with the Roadrunner purchase, which seems to have gone pretty smoothly and which I take as the most tangible sign of goodwill and commitment to Arizona on the part of IA to date.

I do know that AHL franchises are movable and all that, but it seems like a lot of time and effort to put a team in Tucson if the Coyotes are goners anyway.

If there really is a new arena in the works, that's going to be a lot of "works" that will take years to complete no matter how it's done. If that really is the plan, then seriously the best of luck to them. My hope that they would succeed is tempered by my feelings over how badly they've treated Glendale throughout this saga, but such is life.

 

[GuelphStormer]

I agree that things don't seem to add up on the surface. My take on it is that you need to go back to summer 2013 when the team was purchased from the league with a $15 million a year Glendale subsidy and a 5 year out with apparently 'no money down'. Ice Arizona was adamant about the 5 year out clause being needed to do the deal. There must have been some incentive with some sort of potential windfall for Ice Arizona provided by the league after 5 years to bother buying the team with slim chances of turning the ship around on the ice or operationally. My take on this is Ice Arizona is focused on "keeping the lights on in Arizona until summer 2018" when their "5 year out" timeline/agreement with the league kicks in and the windfall is achieved. Ice Arizona since 2013 has promised new spending on the team but when you look back, even when they were receiving $15 mil per year from Glendale... it is all about cost cutting... keep the charade going while cutting costs... nothing about any significant new investment in the team. For the next two seasons, until summer 2018, I expect we will see Ice Arizona continue to spend the bare minimum to keep the team geographically in Arizona a per the presumed agreement with the NHL. As long as they don't default on any other league commitments, it will be business as usual for Leblanc... delay and deceive... as Ice Arizona continues to inch forward to their summer 2018 finish line with the league and they receive their pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. ... Just my opinion!

what windfall? what pot of gold? mounting operational losses easily surpass any false increase in franchise valuation. i'd guess there is close to zero equity in this franchise. there is likely more borrowed to purchase and operationally finance it than it is "worth".

 

[Frank the Tank]

Or....as a subtitle..... "The Revolving Two Weeks Syndrome"

A Fortnight from Fruition

 

[gifted88]

Just read an article that said Carolina may move to Vegas. [ MOD: just give the original source, Murphy ]

Does that mean that the Coyotes will be stuck in Arizona for the foreseeable future?

 

[ducks2010]

^^ The one decisive thing IA seems to have done is slam the door on Glendale. I suppose they could always change their mind, but there's no real purpose in burning that bridge if that's part of the plan.

Five Year Finish Line Theory.... Going back to the 2013 purchase. The league "sells" the team to IceArizona. Why would the league sell the team to a group that has no money to buy it? Why would a group with no money to buy a NHL team buy the Coyotes? There must have been mutual benefit to both to enter into such an agreement. The league was in a tough spot... 1. the league "publicly" owned the team which causes all sorts of problems with the appearance of fairness between all the other teams... 2. nobody was interested in buying the team as the business outlook in Glendale was and continues to be extremely bleak and 3. most importantly, the NHL's "racket" is getting municipalities to build them arenas on the tax payers back. The benefit to the league is that after 5 years they can continue to say "the NHL doesn't run out on cities... IceArizona tried to make a go of it in Glendale for 5 years and it isn't working". Burning the bridge with Glendale right now rather than in 2018 is opportunistic as the NHL feels the "they kicked us out of the arena" narrative/lie is strong enough on its own right now, and if IA were to default right now or anytime soon with the NHL, could provide enough immediate cover for pulling the team out of Arizona whenever needed without tainting future arena deals substantially.

The five-year finish-line theory fits in with the NHL putting the QC bid on hold. However, just making it to 2018 for the purpose of earning some contractual financial incentives with the NHL doesn't fit that we'll with the Roadrunner purchase, which seems to have gone pretty smoothly and which I take as the most tangible sign of goodwill and commitment to Arizona on the part of IA to date. I do know that AHL franchises are movable and all that, but it seems like a lot of time and effort to put a team in Tucson if the Coyotes are goners anyway.

Five Year Finish Line Theory... Remember Anthony Leblanc has "a dream of giving back to the Thunder Bay community and bringing professional hockey back to Thunder Bay".

http://www.thunderbaybusiness.ca/article/thunder-bay-supporters-plan-to-bring-professional-hockey-to-thunder-bay-311.asp

Leblanc et al don't have the money to buy or own an NHL team. Don't kid yourself... they don't "own" the Coyotes today as payment has not yet been made to the league. After the 5-year windfall/payout in summer 2018, Leblanc et al will still not have enough to "own" a team in any other real market. 5-year windfall/payout will result in Leblanc's exit from NHL ownership. Owning a Thunder Bay professional team might be right in Leblanc's snack bracket starting fall 2018.... Thunder Bay Roadrunners

 

[MNNumbers]

Considering that 5-year out clause in the original AMF with Glendale:

It was IA and NHL who required it. It was not a free out. It came with requirements that IA restore to CoG enough money so that the effective AMF was 6.5M/yr (Or close to it. Let's not argue the details of that again.) Why 5 years, not 4 or 6? Well, we don't why 5 years specifically was used. We don't know the negotiations that led to that. What we do know is that the team (IA) was adamant that CoG NOT have their own out clause.

It would seem that the presence of such a clause would represent the possibility of a better deal somewhere. A few options:

1- A new arena elsewhere in Phoenix Valley (this is still a possibility, although slim, and seems to be what LeBlanc is angling for presently).

2- A different market. Where could that be? Where would they have had in mind at the time? Seattle seems a strong possibility. Quebec? I doubt they were angling toward Quebec, although it certainly is now a possibility. But, I don't think it is what NHL/IA were looking for at the time. It was available then, if they wanted it. I don't know of other places.

So, we are left with the following thoughts:

NHL won't leave any market on their own. They need to be kicked out. Glendale has effectively kicked them out (or at least, given them lots of room to spin it that way). However, they could have relocated in 2013, too, and blamed anyone but themselves. So, we can't really take any firm information from this.

Seattle was apparently the preferred choice in 2013 had Glendale not signed the 15yr AMF. Reportedly, that came with a 3-yr window for a new arena. Seattle still has no arena, and none very far in the works.

What's available in 2018? Nothing we can see, except Quebec.

The only thing that makes sense is that they are just delaying, and waiting for a perfect solution....

 

[PCSPounder]

I don't understand. What's in it for him to string this out any longer if an arena deal really isn't in the works.

There certainly is no evidence of a bun in the oven on this.

If the new-arena caper were a foil for a pending relo while last season played out, the Coyotes season ended long ago. If there were an imminent relo it would be better to use this valuable time in the new market.

There really doesn't seem to be any evidence of an imminent relo either.

So, what is their likely strategy? Surely it can't be to tilt at windmills as they appear to be doing on the arena front?

Are they just indecisive, or slow learners?

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

The first rule is "whatever you do, don't act like you're moving and lose ticket sales if you end up staying." IOW, NHL owners want Vegas expansion money and are less inclined to get it in a relocation. IA has to work around that. If anything, they may end up waiting out past the end of the expansion process to see if a Phoenix-Vegas rivalry grows any legs. (Don't hold your breath there.)

Not that I'm not skeptical... Coyotes to Vegas may be the smarter thing to do to keep everyone's share of TV money. It may not be that big a contract, however.

 

[JimAnchower]

Regarding a special tax zone for a proposed new Coyotes arena, here is a good article on it.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2016/04/13/arizona-coyotes-ask-lawmakers-create-special-tax-district-new-arena/82952510/

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Does that mean that the Coyotes will be stuck in Arizona for the foreseeable future?

This report simply quotes a tweet from a freelance journalist who passed along hearsay from two unnamed "executives," and when confronted about it on Twitter he backpedaled pretty ferociously.

 

[mesamonster]

I agree that things don't seem to add up on the surface. My take on it is that you need to go back to summer 2013 when the team was purchased from the league with a $15 million a year Glendale subsidy and a 5 year out with apparently 'no money down'. Ice Arizona was adamant about the 5 year out clause being needed to do the deal. There must have been some incentive with some sort of potential windfall for Ice Arizona provided by the league after 5 years to bother buying the team with slim chances of turning the ship around on the ice or operationally. My take on this is Ice Arizona is focused on "keeping the lights on in Arizona until summer 2018" when their "5 year out" timeline/agreement with the league kicks in and the windfall is achieved. Ice Arizona since 2013 has promised new spending on the team but when you look back, even when they were receiving $15 mil per year from Glendale... it is all about cost cutting... keep the charade going while cutting costs... nothing about any significant new investment in the team. For the next two seasons, until summer 2018, I expect we will see Ice Arizona continue to spend the bare minimum to keep the team geographically in Arizona a per the presumed agreement with the NHL. As long as they don't default on any other league commitments, it will be business as usual for Leblanc... delay and deceive... as Ice Arizona continues to inch forward to their summer 2018 finish line with the league and they receive their pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. ... Just my opinion!

This line of thinking is the only possible conclusion to be drawn from the seemingly imbecile quotes and non-action on the part of IA and their juvenile spokesman Tony the tiger. Taking this thought process one step further, the out card is the NHL, either buying or reimbursing the clowns for their superficial charade. The losers are the fans who have stood by this team and bought into the lies perpetrated by this group. The idea that an arena will materialize in the next 6-8 months is wishful thinking, as many of the posters have postulated, there really is nothing to see other than Tony`s deceptions.


I am with the camp that come the 24th, Tony will stand in front of the fawning media and proclaim that the "heavily progressed' talks are so far along that they need to be kept secret due to the sensitive nature of the subject matter. This lie will continue for as long as they can convince some second party to go along with the arena charade.


The idea of Carolina moving to LV presents a new problem for the league, what to do with the Coyotes after the lame duck? My guess is that the Carolina mess somewhat surprised GB and ruined his plans to bail out IA with a relocation to LV. Stay tuned for the Tony show soon to be aired locally with all of the bluster and lies that Tony has become known for.

 

[mesamonster]

Considering that 5-year out clause in the original AMF with Glendale:

It was IA and NHL who required it. It was not a free out. It came with requirements that IA restore to CoG enough money so that the effective AMF was 6.5M/yr (Or close to it. Let's not argue the details of that again.) Why 5 years, not 4 or 6? Well, we don't why 5 years specifically was used. We don't know the negotiations that led to that. What we do know is that the team (IA) was adamant that CoG NOT have their own out clause.

It would seem that the presence of such a clause would represent the possibility of a better deal somewhere. A few options:

1- A new arena elsewhere in Phoenix Valley (this is still a possibility, although slim, and seems to be what LeBlanc is angling for presently).

2- A different market. Where could that be? Where would they have had in mind at the time? Seattle seems a strong possibility. Quebec? I doubt they were angling toward Quebec, although it certainly is now a possibility. But, I don't think it is what NHL/IA were looking for at the time. It was available then, if they wanted it. I don't know of other places.

So, we are left with the following thoughts:

NHL won't leave any market on their own. They need to be kicked out. Glendale has effectively kicked them out (or at least, given them lots of room to spin it that way). However, they could have relocated in 2013, too, and blamed anyone but themselves. So, we can't really take any firm information from this.

Seattle was apparently the preferred choice in 2013 had Glendale not signed the 15yr AMF. Reportedly, that came with a 3-yr window for a new arena. Seattle still has no arena, and none very far in the works.

What's available in 2018? Nothing we can see, except Quebec.

The only thing that makes sense is that they are just delaying, and waiting for a perfect solution....

And while they wait the cost of failed ownership continues to go up with each and every day, month and year. The cost to remain at GRA for another year has to be crippling, particularly for a group without a deep pocketed investor who is able to consume losses against other profitable enterprises he/she may own.

 

[GuelphStormer]

And while they wait the cost of failed ownership continues to go up with each and every day, month and year. The cost to remain at GRA for another year has to be crippling, particularly for a group without a deep pocketed investor who is able to consume losses against other profitable enterprises he/she may own.

im curious about how they are actually paying their bills. surely the various LoC's have been tapped out by now, non?

and realistically, how much equity can the clowns have in this dog? zero? less than zero?

 

[MNNumbers]

Again, with the Coyotes,

I keep going back to the negotiations for the AMF in 2013. There are a few parts, and I am trying to put it all together, and motive is important.

Why the out clause? It must be that IA and the NHL saw the possibility of major losses, and of a move to a different part of the market, or a different market, as a possibility.

Why the insistence that CoG have no out clause? Control, I suppose. Perhaps also FIG investments.

How does that relate to now? I don't know.

My opinion on this has been, for a long time, the following:

1- IA and NHL were totally taking advantage of the Glendale tax payer. Whatever happens now, at least Glendale is not on the hook. Good for Glendale.

2- After that, I really don't care, but I am full of guesses.

3- First guess: Too many losses, so they are awaiting an opportunity to move the team and blame Glendale instead of blaming the market or accepting blame themselves. This is still possible, but it looks right now as if it might be wrong.

Second guess: For reasons I do not understand, NHL really is committed to the market. I have no idea why this would be, but it seems a possibility. It is possible that the whole game in the last 4 years has actually been geared toward a move downtown, which NHL is convinced will solve the problem. In that case, this is a waiting game until it becomes clear that there won't a Coyoto-centric arena.

Third guess: No guess.

 

[RandR]

I don't understand. What's in it for him to string this out any longer if an arena deal really isn't in the works.

There certainly is no evidence of a bun in the oven on this.

If the new-arena caper were a foil for a pending relo while last season played out, the Coyotes season ended long ago. If there were an imminent relo it would be better to use this valuable time in the new market.

There really doesn't seem to be any evidence of an imminent relo either.

So, what is their likely strategy? Surely it can't be to tilt at windmills as they appear to be doing on the arena front?

Are they just indecisive, or slow learners?

Is it possible they are working on something constructive out of public view?

I suspect the following:
- For relatively little of his own money Leblanc is an NHL governor with some equity in an NHL team.
- He (and the other investors) are losing money on an annual basis, but the NHL funds annual losses beyond a certain point for an agreed number of years so those losses are capped.
- Whatever Leblanc et al is now losing will be recovered whenever IA sells the team with enough from that sale to still make a profit after all is said and done.
- Whatever the league has been losing since IA "bought" the team is easily surpassed by the huge difference between the $500m expansion fee Vegas is about to pay and any cut the league would have tried to grab from a relocation sale.
- Leblanc still won't sell this year because a) he's living in the limelight and would want to string that out as long as he possibly can, b) the league wants to keep the team in Arizona until there is absolutely no alternative, and c) the league couldn't justify Foley paying $500m for an expansion team now if a relocated team is available for perhaps 50-60% of that price at the same time.
- In as little as one year from now, if Leblanc has absolutely exhausted all possible more sustainable future in Arizona, then he will be allowed to sell for relocation, he and IA still turn a profit, and the league still tries to grab a "relocation fee" of least what they would have gotten if the team had relocated before then. And if the league is really lucky then maybe Seattle or another desired market becomes a potential relocation candidate by that time.

 

[mesamonster]

I suspect the following:
- For relatively little of his own money Leblanc is an NHL governor with some equity in an NHL team.
- He (and the other investors) are losing money on an annual basis, but the NHL funds annual losses beyond a certain point for an agreed number of years so those losses are capped.
- Whatever Leblanc et al is now losing will be recovered whenever IA sells the team with enough from that sale to still make a profit after all is said and done.
- Whatever the league has been losing since IA "bought" the team is easily surpassed by the huge difference between the $500m expansion fee Vegas is about to pay and any cut the league would have tried to grab from a relocation sale.
- Leblanc still won't sell this year because a) he's living in the limelight and would want to string that out as long as he possibly can, b) the league wants to keep the team in Arona until there is absolutely no alternative, and c) the league couldn't justify Foley paying $500m for an expansion team now if a relocated team is available for perhaps 50-60% of that price at the same time.
- In as little as one year from now, if Leblanc has absolutely exhausted all possible more sustainable future in Arizona, then he will be allowed to sell for relocation, he and IA still turn a profit, and the league still tries to grab a "relocation fee" of least what they would have gotten if the team had relocated before then. And if the league is really lucky then maybe Seattle or another desired market becomes a potential relocation candidate by that time.

The question is if the team was sold in a relocation move, how much real equity would be left after potentially 4-5 years of losses? The LOC needs to be repaid, as well as the money owed to the league owners for the $85MM revolver that was gifted to the clowns in year one. The totality of the losses is sure to exceed $50MM and looks more like $100MM. Supposedly, the initial equity infusion made by IA was in the neighborhood of $45MM. Add it all up and a number well into the $300MM range would be necessary to enable the clowns to come out of it whole. No way this franchise is worth that, it wasn`t in 2011-12, in fact it could have been argued that the real value at that time was well less than $100MM given the fact that the franchise had never made a profit since its inception.


The numbers have never added up and still do not. The only explanation is that GB has promised that when all is said and done the league will make up for any losses suffered by IA. In the meantime, Tony, who has almost no equity, is likely taking down a high six figure or low seven figure salary, more than making up for his paltry entrance fee.

 

[Confucius]

The question is if the team was sold in a relocation move, how much real equity would be left after potentially 4-5 years of losses? The LOC needs to be repaid, as well as the money owed to the league owners for the $85MM revolver that was gifted to the clowns in year one. The totality of the losses is sure to exceed $50MM and looks more like $100MM. Supposedly, the initial equity infusion made by IA was in the neighborhood of $45MM. Add it all up and a number well into the $300MM range would be necessary to enable the clowns to come out of it whole. No way this franchise is worth that, it wasn`t in 2011-12, in fact it could have been argued that the real value at that time was well less than $100MM given the fact that the franchise had never made a profit since its inception.


The numbers have never added up and still do not. The only explanation is that GB has promised that when all is said and done the league will make up for any losses suffered by IA. In the meantime, Tony, who has almost no equity, is likely taking down a high six figure or low seven figure salary, more than making up for his paltry entrance fee.

I've said that all along, invest a half million get a job paying double that for 3 or 4 years. He's laughing. Plus, aren't his buds still involved? They may well be making 500 grand doing something or other.

 

[Llama19]

Another payment of $24,565.02 was made (posting date 05/10/16) to Beacon Sports for having AEG selected as the new arena manager, bringing the grand total to $181,650.18.

Source: http://www.glendaleaz.com/FollowYourMoney/Dept.cfm?Type=5&DeptID=221&DivID=11351&Account=518200

Just a little over a fortnight away from LeBlanc's 'pile of dirt' announcement...