Phoenix L; AllByDesign?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nordskull

WAITING FOR NORDS
Sep 29, 2011
2,268
44
Saguenay, Qc
Daly: “The process continues to move forward and there don't appear to be any roadblocks that would derail it.†#


Of course,

Somebody serious thought he would say

"The process is not getting forward and major roadblocks ahead could very well make it derail"
 

RAgIn

Registered User
Oct 21, 2010
900
0
Sudbury, Ont
RaGin,

Nothing in those 2 quotes in post 947 makes it clear he is talking about Jamison. I could easily read it like this:

No problems in our negotiations with Peladeau. Nothing to hinder it from closing....


Was there more to the tweet? Maybe that's why the mods don't like tweets.

No more, no less. Maybe it's about PKP, but I doubt it. Halverstadt asked Daly about the progress to the Coyotes deal and that was his message. You could read it any way you want, however.
 

Cryogenic Man

Registered User
Mar 6, 2012
445
0
It would be interesting to me, also, because someone wrote on this thread yesterday exactly that - if the NHL doesn't renew tomorrow, then the year-to-year AMUL is finished.

However, it was also written that the rights the NHL has under the AMUL do not include automatically receiving $25M from CoG.

I wrote - so, if NHL doesn't renew by Thursday, then we know that either they are selling to GJ, and GJ is looking for that $17M, or they are selling for relo, most likely to PKP.

The response was something to the effect "That's not much more than we already know..."


The agreement period officially ended 5 days after the team's season was over, so in this case the agreement ended on May 28th.

They are now into what is called the ''Extension period'' of the AMUL which is the real cut off date.

June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,658
2,536
The agreement period officially ended 5 days after the team's season was over, so in this case the agreement ended on May 28th.

They are now into what is called the ''Extension period'' of the AMUL which is the real cut off date.

June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST

Would you mind giving us more details as to what the NHL's rights are at present - during this 'extension period.' And, also, whether the expiration of the 'agreement period' has granted to CoG more leverage than they had before?

Thanks.
 

gifted88

Dante the poet
Feb 12, 2010
7,303
239
Guelph, ON
The agreement period officially ended 5 days after the team's season was over, so in this case the agreement ended on May 28th.

They are now into what is called the ''Extension period'' of the AMUL which is the real cut off date.

June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST

That makes the July 1st "deadline" seem more legit.
 

CBJ goalie

Registered User
May 19, 2005
6,905
3,734
London, Ontario
Does that make anyone else's blood boil, when Daly uses the term '"the process"?
"The process is on-going."
"The process is on track."
"We are working through the process."

He must be a charm to be married to.
"Honey, is dinner processed?"
"Taxes are due, I'll process them tonight."
"What say we do 'the process' tonight?"


So, I'll simply nominate the next thread title as Phoenix LI: The Process.
 

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
The agreement period officially ended 5 days after the team's season was over, so in this case the agreement ended on May 28th.

They are now into what is called the ''Extension period'' of the AMUL which is the real cut off date.

June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST

I do not read the AMUL the same way.

I read the "Extension Period" to be a period ending on or before June 30, 2021. Further, such an "Extension Period" only exists should the NHL, in their sole discretion, exercise the option to extend the AMUL.

I read five days after the End of the Coyotes Season to mean today, May 30, 2012.

I read that written notice of intent to extend the AMUL was required on May 25, 2012.

I find no significance in the AMUL for the date/time of June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST
 

Confucius

There is no try, Just do
Feb 8, 2009
22,232
7,183
Toronto
I do not read the AMUL the same way.

I read the "Extension Period" to be a period ending on or before June 30, 2021. Further, such an "Extension Period" only exists should the NHL, in their sole discretion, exercise the option to extend the AMUL.

I read five days after the End of the Coyotes Season to mean today, May 30, 2012.

I read that written notice of intent to extend the AMUL was required on May 25, 2012.

I find no significance in the AMUL for the date/time of June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST
What you say makes sense.......again. The league more than likely put in the extension for the last year, in case the team was still playing in June.
 

Cryogenic Man

Registered User
Mar 6, 2012
445
0
I do not read the AMUL the same way.

I read the "Extension Period" to be a period ending on or before June 30, 2021. Further, such an "Extension Period" only exists should the NHL, in their sole discretion, exercise the option to extend the AMUL.

I read five days after the End of the Coyotes Season to mean today, May 30, 2012.

I read that written notice of intent to extend the AMUL was required on May 25, 2012.

I find no significance in the AMUL for the date/time of June 30th 2012 11:59 PM PST

Right, but doesn't that include the 10 years (2021) that the NHL reserve the right to extend at their own discretion?

If so, it would mean that right to extend would be June 30th 11:59PM of every year.

Wouldn't that make it so for 2012?

Correct me if i'm wrong.
 

yotesreign

Registered User
Jan 26, 2009
1,570
0
Goldwater Blvd
Hey Legend, I agree here, it's true that if a someone really wanted to make a go of it in Glendale it would be hard but maybe not impossible to make it work.

For the bolded part, i think it's a misconception that Jamison turned the sharks franchise around, I believe they were already mildly succesful and Jamison just kept it going. The other thing is, when he left the franchise he was taking it in a direction the Sharks org were not comfortable with and he might have been outed from his post. I posted the article on that story here somewhere.

I do have a question, it's recently been reported that the AZ Cardinals are not happy with the parking arrangements made by Glendale and that they still have not respected the agreement. The lawsuit seems to be still alive. What do you think happens if a lawsuit for $67 million is underway? or do you not think those 2 issues, a sale of the Coyotes,an AMF and the lawsuit can be related?

I don't think they are related at all. The Cards threat (notice of claim; no lawsuit has been filed as of yet) is related to the Tanger Outlet mall being approved for a portion of Westgate that gobbles up several thousand uncovered parking spots that are reserved for use on Cardinals game days by Cardinals ticket holders. Whether the Coyotes play here in 2012-2013 or play in Canada or Seattle - has nothing to do with the Cardinals issue - there's no connection there. The claim the Cards are making seems to be the City, by approving development of the outlet mall, deprives them of the surface parking the city agreed to provide, and they are in disagreement with the city on how deadlines for notification of how the city will replace those lost spots are met (and seems Cards are not happy some of the spots are not within Westgate property). The $67 million number bandied about, is actually the Cardinals claim that Glendale needs to provide them with parking garages! at a cost of $66.7 million, to replace the surface parking spots.

Not having seen the agreement in dispute; but in general skeptical of the savvy of those with the city drafting these kinds of agreements, I would be flabbergasted if there was a clause in that agreement that said 'if we deprive you of any of these parking spots at Westgate, we'll owe you $66.7 million worth of parking garages at Westgate." But we'll see... I'm old enough that nothing surprises me anymore.

On the other hand... it seems there was a plan in the past that would include additional parking garages in the future... iirc, Ellman set aside some $25 million or so towards that end, and last year or therabouts, that money was divvied up between Ellman & the City.

The plan for Westgate was for more build out and additional parking garages, as development gobbled up land that was vacant or in use as surface parking. So it may indeed be that as Westgate grows, some surface parking will need to be converted to parking garages. Again, whether the NHL team stays or leaves, if further development commences in the future.

I would not think 10-14 days a year of use would require $66.7 million of garages be built, but in time, some garages will need to be built. Whether they'll cost that much, or whether the Cards will be forced to build them and sue Glendale to recover the costs... I dunno. But while it might be a distraction for some, it's a separate issue from the hockey team. Be interesting to see if the Goldwater Institute would interfere with Glendale spending $66.7 million on parking garages that would only be needed for 10-12 dates a year for the next 20 years. If not, it might make spending $300 million for 43-52 dates a year for 20 years seem, on a 'per day' basis, roughly equivalent. I mean, if GWI has a problem with the $300 million over 20 years for 900+ dates (not even including other events the Arena manager would book) - they ought to have a problem with paying $66.7 million for 200-220 dates.

Of course, it's also possible GWI loves football and hates hockey.

I wonder what GWI would think is a reasonable parking garage management fee per year for a $66.7 million parking garage?
 
Last edited:

Vanier Park

Registered User
Jun 8, 2010
177
0
This tweet isn't to do with the Coyotes. He's implying Lidstrom could make a retirement announcement during the cup finals cause the league didn't mind makign a relocation annoucnement last season during the finals.

Ouch.... sorry about that. Guess I was too quick to post.
 

Cryogenic Man

Registered User
Mar 6, 2012
445
0
I don't think they are related at all. The Cards threat (notice of claim; no lawsuit has been filed as of yet) is related to the Tanger Outlet mall being approved for a portion of Westgate that gobbles up several thousand uncovered parking spots that are reserved for use on Cardinals game days by Cardinals ticket holders. Whether the Coyotes play here in 2012-2013 or play in Canada or Seattle - has nothing to do with the Cardinals issue - there's no connection there.

The reason I ask this was because in the letter that the Arizona Cardinals sent the City of Glendale, they make reference to the 6000 shared Coyotes parking spaces, and more importantly, they accuse the City of Glendale of taking the $25 million, that they were going to use last year for the building of the parking garage, and giving half to Ellman and the other half of sliding into their general fund.

And what was used to pay the AMF to the NHL? the general fund.

There's the connection I was reffering to. I think the AZ Cardinals know full well where their money was going and they're not happy about it.

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/cardinals-letter-glendale.pdf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad