Phoenix CXXXVII - and the band plays on

[Tom ServoMST3K]

If we believed even a shred of the storyline coming from the team then this interview is news. Anything up to this interview always made it seem like there was a negotiation, setting of terms or due deligence going on. Did I believe it??? No , but if you were to believe the team storyline then this interview is a different revelation of fact compared to the usual. This interview confirms what I suspected.

I think you're way overstating what the team actually reported.

 

[Fairview]

I think you're way overstating what the team actually reported.

From an article cited earlier in this thread. " in discussion with significant investors" as per league source.
I don't think I misunderstood that quote or overstated it. I believe that there are lots of statements like the above that were made in the last year. I did not believe any of them but I did not forget or dismiss that they were made.

 

[TheLegend]

waffle,

Cohen said, and I am summarizing....Barroway doesn't want to be the sole owner any more. He wants to sell, but whether it's a sale of 100%, or a partnership, or an LP, hasn't been determined yet.

You seem to read that to say..."Someone is interested, but it's not clear how interested." Some of the rest of us, while we think you might be right, think that it more clearly reads, "Barroway wants out, but we don't know who might want to buy, or how much stake they want to buy....." And, that is the same as saying, "We don't know who is interested, so nothing is really happening..." That is where we are coming from.


Arena....

"Significant work remains to be done....." When no partner has yet been identified to negotiate with, "remains to be done...." can easily be interpreted to mean "We don't even know where we are starting yet." Of course, it may also mean, "We know we need an agreement with some tribes, but we don't know how much we can contribute, and so we really don't know where or when we might know something." Or, it might mean, "We are discussing things with a particular tribe group, but it's a difficult negotiation, and we will keep it private."

Of the 3, you would like to see the 3rd be true.

Which it is, we don't know. But Cohen's choice of words suggests that the 1st might be the most accurate.

I submit Barroway never intended to be a sole owner.

Barroway was looking to add an investor not 7 months after he bought out the original IA partners. That’s not a sign that he suddenly decided he didn’t want to own the entire franchise anymore. That’s a sign he needed to get the “clowns” (as everyone affectionately referred to them) out of the picture because in his mind they were hindering the process more than helping.

IIRC... When Barroway was seeking to buy the Isles he had minority partner(s) in his group. Same as when he was looking into the NBA.

That fact he’s looking for one or more investors now shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. If he manages to get one (or more) on board and keeps the Coyotes in AZ he’s got a huge feather in his cap in the eyes of the other owners. If another group buys him out completely and it keeps the Coyotes in AZ, same thing. He could then buy his way into any franchise he wants down the road because he’s paid the dues.

Even if the Coyotes end up leaving he still comes out of it winning.

 

[awfulwaffle]

There was nothing new in this story! The team has a lease in Glendale. Why is this thread still open?!

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

From an article cited earlier in this thread. " in discussion with significant investors" as per league source.
I don't think I misunderstood that quote or overstated it. I believe that there are lots of statements like the above that were made in the last year. I did not believe any of them but I did not forget or dismiss that they were made.

I chose to read "in discussion with significant investors," as nothing but pure PR bullcrap, and didn't give it a second thought.

Actually, I read that statement as an announcement a portion of the team was finally formally for sale

I can totally see why someone would read it differently now though.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

I submit Barroway never intended to be a sole owner.

Barroway was looking to add an investor not 7 months after he bought out the original IA partners. That’s not a sign that he suddenly decided he didn’t want to own the entire franchise anymore. That’s a sign he needed to get the “clowns” (as everyone affectionately referred to them) out of the picture because in his mind they were hindering the process more than helping.

IIRC... When Barroway was seeking to buy the Isles he had minority partner(s) in his group. Same as when he was looking into the NBA.

That fact he’s looking for one or more investors now shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. If he manages to get one (or more) on board and keeps the Coyotes in AZ he’s got a huge feather in his cap in the eyes of the other owners. If another group buys him out completely and it keeps the Coyotes in AZ, same thing. He could then buy his way into any franchise he wants down the road because he’s paid the dues.

Even if the Coyotes end up leaving he still comes out of it winning.

Also if you want to go full tinfoil for a second:

We know the NHL at times has provided financing and low-interest loans to coyotes ownership in the past.

I'm not discounting a handshake deal between Barroway and the league that means Barroway comes out nice at the end.

I wouldn't argue for it, but I wouldn't argue against it, if you know what I'm saying

But again, this is the EXACT same shit we were talking about last summer.

 

[TheLegend]

Also if you want to go full tinfoil for a second:

We know the NHL at times has provided financing and low-interest loans to coyotes ownership in the past.

I'm not discounting a handshake deal between Barroway and the league that means Barroway comes out nice at the end.

I wouldn't argue for it, but I wouldn't argue against it, if you know what I'm saying

But again, this is the EXACT same **** we were talking about last summer.

Yep... people spreading the same manure.... new pasture.

I floated the tin foil a long time ago that Barroway was cleaning house as a favor to the league for the OG IA boys mucking the lease they lobbied so hard to get.

 

[Fairview]

I chose to read "in discussion with significant investors," as nothing but pure PR bullcrap, and didn't give it a second thought.

Actually, I read that statement as an announcement a portion of the team was finally formally for sale

I can totally see why someone would read it differently now though.

I agree with your assessment I just like it when the team talking heads make a pronouncement and it ends up fizzling out. Contrary to popular belief, nothing has really changed from the Ice Clowns to this Borrowaway guy. Tony just made promises that he could never keep.. AB makes no tangible statements and still manages to accomplish as much as the Clowns. Absolutely nothing

 

[mesamonster]

the reason is:

why does there need to be something done...

Arizona has the lease in place and as long as AEG/AMG, AS it will soon be known as, this isn't a point of contention....

Hutch, AEG/AMG are simply leasing GRA to the Coyotes and AB. Sure they would be perfectly happy to lease to AB for an eternity. The problem that you fail to acknowledge is that their primary tenant has all but said he is broke, needs new capital ASAP! Imagine if you are the COG and AEG, your meal ticket is sending up the white flag. How is that good for them? That basically implies that w/o new capital the team either folds or moves elsewhere. Otherwise, the scenario unfolds that once agin the league takes possession. Unfortunately, this time around the league will possess a team that is buried in debt and operating in an economic environment that is significantly more expensive than eight years ago (see the 19-20 salary cap figures). Just because they have commitments means absolutely nothing, they are in dire need of an owner willing top overpay for a poor asset. never mind the leagues assertion that teams are now worth $650MM! They aren't, look at the latest Forbes valuations, plenty of teams with far superior operating metrics than the Coyotes are valued at well less than the present asking rate.

 

[gstommylee]

Hutch, AEG/AMG are simply leasing GRA to the Coyotes and AB. Sure they would be perfectly happy to lease to AB for an eternity. The problem that you fail to acknowledge is that their primary tenant has all but said he is broke, needs new capital ASAP! Imagine if you are the COG and AEG, your meal ticket is sending up the white flag. How is that good for them? That basically implies that w/o new capital the team either folds or moves elsewhere. Otherwise, the scenario unfolds that once agin the league takes possession. Unfortunately, this time around the league will possess a team that is buried in debt and operating in an economic environment that is significantly more expensive than eight years ago (see the 19-20 salary cap figures). Just because they have commitments means absolutely nothing, they are in dire need of an owner willing top overpay for a poor asset. never mind the leagues assertion that teams are now worth $650MM! They aren't, look at the latest Forbes valuations, plenty of teams with far superior operating metrics than the Coyotes are valued at well less than the present asking rate.

Curious who is the right mind will pay full variation of 650 for the coyotes and build a new arena in Arizona for them.

 

[objectiveposter]

Curious who is the right mind will pay full variation of 650 for the coyotes and build a new arena in Arizona for them.

No one. I dont know what other schemes the league/ownership can come up with considering the debt the team already has. Seattle expansion money will maybe help the bleeding for 1 season... only other thing on the horizon is a new US national tv deal. Maybe they are banking on a monster deal that will either help the team cover yearly losses or raise franchise values significantly so when its flipped to another city ownership/league can cash in with maybe a $800 million total price tag for relocation.

This team simply cant generate enough of its own revenue. Since bankruptcy they have been relying on a cheap original purchase price (140 million out of bankruptcy), new cba, new canadian tv deal, increased revenue sharing, bailouts by glendale at 25 million a year, league financing at cheaper interest rates, favourable lease with glendale, expansion money and a low payroll and yet the team is still looking for new investors and bleeding money. Has there been a bigger money pit in the history of sports? I cant think of another franchise which has lost as much money and relied on as much aid as the coyotes have over the last decade..... and yet here we are after all these years without a resolution.

 

[gstommylee]

No one. I dont know what other schemes the league/ownership can come up with considering the debt the team already has. Seattle expansion money will maybe help the bleeding for 1 season... only other thing on the horizon is a new US national tv deal. Maybe they are banking on a monster deal that will either help the team cover yearly losses or raise franchise values significantly so when its flipped to another city ownership/league can cash in with maybe a $800 million total price tag for relocation.

This team simply cant generate enough of its own revenue. Since bankruptcy they have been relying on a cheap original purchase price (140 million out of bankruptcy), new cba, new canadian tv deal, increased revenue sharing, bailouts by glendale at 25 million a year, league financing at cheaper interest rates, favourable lease with glendale, expansion money and a low payroll and yet the team is still looking for new investors and bleeding money. Has there been a bigger money pit in the history of sports? I cant think of another franchise which has lost as much money and relied on as much aid as the coyotes have over the last decade..... and yet here we are after all these years without a resolution.

What makes you think anyone wants to pay 800m for that disaster just to move it?

 

[objectiveposter]

What makes you think anyone wants to pay 800m for that disaster just to move it?

if the next US tv deal is very lucrative it is going to increase all franchise values significantly. If Seattle was paying 650 the cost for a franchise could easily shoot up to 700-800 million.
The fact that its a disaster in Arizona is irrelevant if the team is in a new market.

 

[gstommylee]

if the next US tv deal is very lucrative it is going to increase all franchise values significantly. If Seattle was paying 650 the cost for a franchise could easily shoot up to 700-800 million.
The fact that its a disaster in Arizona is irrelevant if the team is in a new market.

I doubt the Rockets owner would be willing to pay 800m. He balked at 650m. With that kind of price the NHL basically priced out ALL potential markets including Houston. The coyotes are never going to be worth 800m just to move them yet alone 650m. If the coyotes move to Houston, that's cause the league caved in the price for the team.

I'll be surprised if the NHL continues allowing the team to remain a mess in Glendale once the new TV deal goes into effect.

 

[TheLegend]

There's currently no "mess" in Glendale..... the franchise is chugging along reasonably well in Glendale under the circumstances (sold out game versus the Leafs tonight, thanks to homeboy Auston Matthews)

And absolutely nobody would ever pay $650 million for an expansion franchise, and then build an ($800 million) arena on top of that...... right??

 

[Fenway]

Of course, there is another possible way this could play out.

Barroway moves the team to Houston and brokers a lease with the Rockets similar to what the Celtics have with the Bruins. This way no price is put on the Coyotes but it gets the NHL into the Houston market and the lucrative Texas RSN market which is far more appealing than Arizona.

Then once Houston is up and running you can put a value on the franchise.

Arizona's ONLY hope is that the Suns and Coyotes work together for a new building and use the blueprint of the United Center in Chicago where both teams own 50% of the building.

2 years ago Bettman said the following

March 08, 2017
BOCA RATON, Fla. (AP) NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said the league is committed to keep the Coyotes in Arizona, while stressing that the team doesn't have a future in its current arena in Glendale.

''We have not given up on that market,'' Bettman said Wednesday on the final day of GM meetings. ''But we wanted to make clear that the long-term future and viability of that team, the Coyotes, isn't going to be in Glendale.''

 

[GuelphStormer]

There's currently no "mess" in Glendale..... the franchise is chugging along reasonably well in Glendale under the circumstances (sold out game versus the Leafs tonight, thanks to homeboy Auston Matthews)

And absolutely nobody would ever pay $650 million for an expansion franchise, and then build an ($800 million) arena on top of that...... right??

what does one have to do with the other?

 

[Mightygoose]

Arizona's ONLY hope is that the Suns and Coyotes work together for a new building and use the blueprint of the United Center in Chicago where both teams own 50% of the building.

If that's the franchise's only hope then CoP's vote last month to renovate TRSA has sealed the Coyote's fate.

As far as Barroway getting a Boston-type lease at Toyota Center, why would Fertitta give him a sweetheart deal for what would essentially be a competitor? Barroway doesn't have the resources to build a second arena in Houston, nevermind a 3rd in the Phoenix area. He's better off waiting for the price to drop for the Coyotes.

Other than that, it depends on working out something with a tribe. This appears not be viable with Barroway as sole owner. Hence the swarch for new investor(s)

 

[MNNumbers]

I think that it more works like this:

Bettman and BOG have promised all Arizona owners that they will not end up losing anything for their trouble. If this were not true, there is NO way Barroway would have bought in in the first place.

Still, temporary owners must use their own money. They are only made whole when they sell.

That means that Barroway is now out of cash, and needs the franchise needs new investors to continue.

If the franchise needs a new arena in connection with the tribes, then the franchise will have to invest in said arena. If Barroway is out of usable cash, then new investors are needed to contribute that that effort. This is true both in the theory of an arena, or in practice where a partner has been found, but said partner does not want to build it all with their own cash.

If there is no arena discussion happening, and Barroway is seeking investors (partners), then that means he is out of usable money, and the franchise needs to change hands to continue.

What happens next is really an open question. I am not advocating relocation, not contraction, at all. I'm simply trying to analyze what's happening here.

 

[TheLegend]

what does one have to do with the other?

Nothing...... that was the point.

Everyone is covering old ground again.

 

[JimAnchower]

From an article cited earlier in this thread. " in discussion with significant investors" as per league source.
I don't think I misunderstood that quote or overstated it. I believe that there are lots of statements like the above that were made in the last year. I did not believe any of them but I did not forget or dismiss that they were made.

That Pagnotta article was so vague that anyone can read it and come to whatever conclusion they want. 538 write an article on when to trust anonymous sources that applies.

When To Trust A Story That Uses Unnamed Sources

 

[Fairview]

That Pagnotta article was so vague that anyone can read it and come to whatever conclusion they want. 538 write an article on when to trust anonymous sources that applies.

When To Trust A Story That Uses Unnamed Sources

The league and their members are very controlling with the way they tell their story. There is a strong suspicion that if the media were to ask any tough questions, that they would lose access to the team. There have also been comments from members on this site about the poor quality of media coverage in various markets. There is no question in my mind that what we read in the media is generally what the league would want us to believe, but not necessarily an actual statement of fact. What I found interesting about Cohon’s interview, is the general commentary that nothing concrete is happening in the ownership front or the arena front. The NHL is usually more vague in its commentary than that or in some cases even more optimistic. I did not see any of that in Cohon’s comments. In my interpretation, that is different for sure.

 

[Major4Boarding]

Of course, there is another possible way this could play out.

Barroway moves the team to Houston and brokers a lease with the Rockets similar to what the Celtics have with the Bruins. This way no price is put on the Coyotes but it gets the NHL into the Houston market and the lucrative Texas RSN market which is far more appealing than Arizona.

Then once Houston is up and running you can put a value on the franchise.

Arizona's ONLY hope is that the Suns and Coyotes work together for a new building and use the blueprint of the United Center in Chicago where both teams own 50% of the building.

2 years ago Bettman said the following

March 08, 2017
BOCA RATON, Fla. (AP) NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said the league is committed to keep the Coyotes in Arizona, while stressing that the team doesn't have a future in its current arena in Glendale.

''We have not given up on that market,'' Bettman said Wednesday on the final day of GM meetings. ''But we wanted to make clear that the long-term future and viability of that team, the Coyotes, isn't going to be in Glendale.''

I agree. I'm probably going to catch hell for this but, I can see this playing out.

IF what I think is going to play itself out and the kite string pops.

I'm short on showing my work but will later. I can see Barroway and the NHL Exec Comm. pushing and prodding until about this time next year to find any opening at all into TSRA. As 'Goose pointed out above, last month's vote does seem fateful. IMO though, until all the final tallies are in and the measure has concluded (signed sealed delivered) there could still be a window of negotiation still. Slim. Faint. But until "It's dead, Jim".

While that's running in the background, the last options outside of Glendale will be pursued. As in Tribal Land options. If these two have completely exhausted themselves, the focus returns to Glendale. Dare I say that eyeing 2020/2021 for a "favorable" council to yet negotiate another round creative financing may be in the minds of the NHL's Executive Committee? Another subsidy attempt? I know AEG has the contract to manage the Arena but Phelps said it himself. Glendale is receptive, providing there's a long-term commitment. Faced with relocation, as we've seen before, stranger things have (ahem) "materialized" in this saga.

It's damn sure easy for Bettman or Daly to walk back the "...isn't going to be in Glendale" rant when the team is staying, Glendale miraculously finds about $9M-$11M annually in "incentives" and still be paying AEG's $6.5M to manage the Arena and so on. What the $9M-$11M will look like is anyone's guess. Past history leaves that window WIDE open.

So all that said, the lack of investors and stagnant progress in my opinion could be they're waiting for Glendale when the panic sets in.

I just hope for Coyotes fans there isn't some already done-deal like where Fenway's scenario skips "GO" and head's right to "Free Parking".

 

[MNNumbers]

Everyone speculating points out what has been said here many times....

Namely....as far as we know today, the franchise in its present location loses enough money every year that whoever owns it for awhile gets to the place where they don't want to own it any more. (There are many reasons for this, and some are historical and can only be blamed on, for example, the way that a lease with Minneapolis fell through when the Jets were leaving Winnipeg.)

There is ample reason to believe that, in the big-picture sense, the NHL itself is still calling the shots (For example, when Glendale cancelled the lease, or threatened to do so, it was reportedly the league which gave IA room to negotiate out of market - the league. Also, Bettman was quoted at that time as saying "We have an agreement with Glendale...." Note the use of 'we'. ) As I say, ample reason....NOT proof positive.

The many possible futures expressed here simply underscore the reality that if the first two paragraphs are true, then the NHL doesn't have a good answer for this situation.

Not having a good answer plays into Glendale's hands. Glendale right now has what they want: NHL hockey in their arena, at no extra cost to the city. As other options disappear, Glendale's hand gets stronger, not weaker. If Glendale hasn't negotiated a subsidy with the Yotes in the last few years, when there is potential competition for the team, it makes little sense that they would later, when the competition is less.

As far as how it harms the NHL right now: Having a team playing in the Phoenix market is not a problem. The crowds look better there than a few other places. So, for optics, relocating is NOT necessary. It's the financials which MAY be the problem (note the use of 'MAY').

If the losses become untenable, then what? Again, there is no good answer. The best financial answer, if it is determined one is necessary, is Houston. If Fertitta doesn't want to pay the price, then the best financial answer is Quebec. But, for other reasons, the NHL doesn't want to do that.

So, in the end, the franchise may stay right where it is, losing money which the BOG is responsible for, for a long time.

 

[gstommylee]

Everyone speculating points out what has been said here many times....

Namely....as far as we know today, the franchise in its present location loses enough money every year that whoever owns it for awhile gets to the place where they don't want to own it any more. (There are many reasons for this, and some are historical and can only be blamed on, for example, the way that a lease with Minneapolis fell through when the Jets were leaving Winnipeg.)

There is ample reason to believe that, in the big-picture sense, the NHL itself is still calling the shots (For example, when Glendale cancelled the lease, or threatened to do so, it was reportedly the league which gave IA room to negotiate out of market - the league. Also, Bettman was quoted at that time as saying "We have an agreement with Glendale...." Note the use of 'we'. ) As I say, ample reason....NOT proof positive.

The many possible futures expressed here simply underscore the reality that if the first two paragraphs are true, then the NHL doesn't have a good answer for this situation.

Not having a good answer plays into Glendale's hands. Glendale right now has what they want: NHL hockey in their arena, at no extra cost to the city. As other options disappear, Glendale's hand gets stronger, not weaker. If Glendale hasn't negotiated a subsidy with the Yotes in the last few years, when there is potential competition for the team, it makes little sense that they would later, when the competition is less.

As far as how it harms the NHL right now: Having a team playing in the Phoenix market is not a problem. The crowds look better there than a few other places. So, for optics, relocating is NOT necessary. It's the financials which MAY be the problem (note the use of 'MAY').

If the losses become untenable, then what? Again, there is no good answer. The best financial answer, if it is determined one is necessary, is Houston. If Fertitta doesn't want to pay the price, then the best financial answer is Quebec. But, for other reasons, the NHL doesn't want to do that.

So, in the end, the franchise may stay right where it is, losing money which the BOG is responsible for, for a long time.

You think Quebec is suddenly gonna pay 800m US dollars for a relocated team? I doubt that.