Phoenix LXVII; Route66 - Aftermath

Status
Not open for further replies.

pfp

Registered User
Sep 4, 2007
682
10
There has been so many... lets just say STRONG opinions on the coyotes and their prospects of remaining in Arizona over these last few years. Once this saga is over, whichever way it ends up falling, I expect to see more than a few mea cupla posts here from those who turned out to be flat wrong.
 

Stanley Cup

Bettman's ice bucket
Jul 15, 2010
3,858
883
Québec
So umm...3 days until the new council is in? It's probably been asked already but can the new mayor/councillors cancel the contract?
 

TheLegend

Hardly Deactivated
Aug 30, 2009
37,055
29,518
Buzzing BoH
At least MH put $25MM in escrow to show he was halfway serious! What has GJ done to show how serious his intentions are? Absolutely nothing!

There is no proof either way that any monies are in escrow.

Your post is just more speculation based upon what you hope it will be.
 

TheLegend

Hardly Deactivated
Aug 30, 2009
37,055
29,518
Buzzing BoH
instead of an elaborate, coordinated and cunning effort of dozens of people, i prefer to think there are just a lot of really really stupid folks who have either stumbled or been dragged into this mess and have actually come to convince themselves that they are behaving responsibly and being effective. it really is an extraordinary story.

That's a difficult theory to refute... :laugh:


Even I agree!!!! :nod:
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,219
I would be more impressed with it if he wasn't posting articles from last August as "Breaking News" on how he was prepared to move forward with the purchase of the Coyotes....

Its pathetic. Thankyou for that update from the comfort of your barcalounger Mr. Hindsight. :GWC:
 

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
ok, so he's not acting ... but do you think he is taking orders and/or special insight from nhl HQ re: his actions in phoenix?

a) do you think jamison and bettman/daly/etc. have regular conversations about this?
b) if so, do you think those conversation involve strategy for extracting money from glendale?
c) do you think jamison has informed bettman/daly/etc. who his potential investors are?
d) do you think jamision was informed by bettman/daly/etc. about the league's intentions/strategies/actions during the lockout, specifically in recent weeks and as it related to the timing of purchasing the coyotes?

there is an old distinction i used to use in class ... corporatism and instrumentalism. one is the state working in the interest of capital, the other is at its behest. both results are the same, but the motivation is different.

while jamsion may not be acting at the behest of the nhl, is he working in its interest (strategically with respect to glendale or tickets sales this year, for example)?

I would say receiving some guidance more than taking orders but maybe that's semantics.

a. yes
b. yes; to the extent that Jamison works with a cooperative council that the league cultivated
c. yes
d. seems logical

But none of that would suggest Jamison only exists as an act directed by the NHL. If Jamison failed to close but the NHL still compelled the new Glendale council to perform on the subsidy with the league as the beneficiary, then I could see the "it's all a ruse" angle. We'll see what happens but that doesn't sound very probable. Anyway, I was just curious to hear what the perceived payoff was for the JIG effort to be nothing but an act.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,078
33,140
It might be interesting to recall what Jamison said to Mayor Scruggs during a somewhat heated exchange at the city council meeting at the end of November 27, 2012.

"When it's time to present the money and close the deal, we will do so. We have not had the opportunity yet to do that." In this regard, he was indicating that they didn't have a lease.

This was in the context of Scruggs challenging Jamison with the information that COG officials had repeatedly sent Scruggs messages indicating that Jamison had the money and was ready to close the deal.

That makes it seem a bit curious that we are now hearing that Jamison is still looking for investors.

He was also disingenuous in his answers to city council in that he made it sound as though he could not pursue discussions with the NHL until he could present them with the elements of the lease agreement. I am pretty sure that the NHL knew exactly what was going into the lease long before it was formally approved at city council, and could have been working with Jamison on their purchase agreement in parallel.

As some of us noted at the time, he didn't give off a particularly confident or forthright vibe at the fateful November council meeting.

If he is not able to conclude the deal this month, he has a lot to answer for.
 

GuelphStormer

Registered User
Mar 20, 2012
3,811
499
Guelph, ON
I would say receiving some guidance more than taking orders but maybe that's semantics.

a. yes
b. yes; to the extent that Jamison works with a cooperative council that the league cultivated
c. yes
d. seems logical

But none of that would suggest Jamison only exists as an act directed by the NHL. If Jamison failed to close but the NHL still compelled the new Glendale council to perform on the subsidy with the league as the beneficiary, then I could see the "it's all a ruse" angle. We'll see what happens but that doesn't sound very probable. Anyway, I was just curious to hear what the perceived payoff was for the JIG effort to be nothing but an act.

well, presumably it's to collect a marker to be cashed in at a later date.

ive always been under the impression that the coyotes are but one piece in a much larger puzzle. and that puzzle involves centralized management of: television contracts; overall league/teams revenues and losses; other markets, existing and potential; relationships with other local/state/provincial government bodies, existing and potential; and up till last week, the dynamic negotiations of the league's relationship with players themselves via the CBA.

ONLY the league has any significant interest in how the coyotes fit into the big puzzle. jamison (supposedly), reinsdorf, hulzi, the clowns, even glendale council are primarily interested in the well-being of the coyotes in the phoenix market ... and I really think that is only a small part of the big picture. so, given that only the league is concerned about the big picture, any party working in close cooperation with the league (ie., jamison) within the phoenix market must be doing so in direct adherence to the league's big picture plan.

in other words, jamison is taking direct orders from bettman. keep in mind, bettman it sure would seem is doing nothing to facilitate a sale to any party other than jamison. and more importantly, bettman sure does not seem to have ever really cared about making this franchise a success in this market while he has owned it. he has put zero effort into it and has had the auto-pilot switch on for two years now, which in my mind clearly indicates that success in phoenix is not his goal ... its what best to do with the team within the larger picture that is his goal.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,078
33,140
well, presumably it's to collect a marker to be cashed in at a later date.

ive always been under the impression that the coyotes are but one piece in a much larger puzzle. and that puzzle involves centralized management of: television contracts; overall league/teams revenues and losses; other markets, existing and potential; relationships with other local/state/provincial government bodies, existing and potential; and up till last week, the dynamic negotiations of the league's relationship with players themselves via the CBA.

ONLY the league has any significant interest in how the coyotes fit into the big puzzle. jamison (supposedly), reinsdorf, hulzi, the clowns, even glendale council are primarily interested in the well-being of the coyotes in the phoenix market ... and I really think that is only a small part of the big picture. so, given that only the league is concerned about the big picture, any party working in close cooperation with the league (ie., jamison) within the phoenix market must be doing so in direct adherence to the league's big picture plan.

in other words, jamison is taking direct orders from bettman. keep in mind, bettman it sure would seem is doing nothing to facilitate a sale to any party other than jamison. and more importantly, bettman sure does not seem to have ever really cared about making this franchise a success in this market while he has owned it. he has put zero effort into it and has had the auto-pilot switch on for two years now, which in my mind clearly indicates that success in phoenix is not his goal ... its what best to do with the team within the larger picture that is his goal.

How can we know this? I think it is more plausible that Bettman has scoured high and low for credible potential owners, and the only option he has left is Jamison. Heck, Bettman even gave the Ice Edge guys a chance for several months. If another serious ownership contender came forward with cash tomorrow, I expect that Bettman would jump on the opportunity, facilitate a meeting with Glendale, and hope things work out.

Bettman wants things to work out in Glendale, but he is constrained by the paucity of potential owners willing to make a large investment in a franchise that is required by the COG to make a long-term commitment there.
 

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,837
47,220
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
So what does the changing of the guard in the city council actually look like? Is there a special meeting in which the new members are seated? Is it made official privately and separately?

Basically, I'm wondering when the new council will actually be the new council, and in what manner that transition occurs.

I just think this moment will be another opportunity for the next insane curveball in this saga.
 

yotesreign

Registered User
Jan 26, 2009
1,570
0
Goldwater Blvd
So what does the changing of the guard in the city council actually look like? Is there a special meeting in which the new members are seated? Is it made official privately and separately?

Basically, I'm wondering when the new council will actually be the new council, and in what manner that transition occurs.

I just think this moment will be another opportunity for the next insane curveball in this saga.


GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
2013 INSTALLATION CEREMONY
Council Chambers, 5850 West Glendale Avenue
January 15, 2013
7:00 p.m.


The swearing in ceremony and ceremonial city council photograph are the only agenda; there will be no discussions or public comments taken, no old business or new business conducted.

So if it is streamed online, will more Canadians watch it online than residents of Glendale?



http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/011513.pdf


From what I've heard, the new council will not do anything to stop this from happening. On the other hand, if January 31, 2013 comes and goes and the NHL still owns the team, and this deal ceases to exist at the end of that day, I don't think the new council will be as agreeable as the old one was. From what I've heard, the new council is not opposed to the team playing here but they might not be as willing to pay as much as the old council was to facilitate that. In other words, on this Thursday, what has been an apocryphal period of time up to now ("two weeks") might actually have some veracity it until now has lacked.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,078
33,140
GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
2013 INSTALLATION CEREMONY
Council Chambers, 5850 West Glendale Avenue
January 15, 2013
7:00 p.m.


The swearing in ceremony and ceremonial city council photograph are the only agenda; there will be no discussions or public comments taken, no old business or new business conducted.

So if it is streamed online, will more Canadians watch it online than residents of Glendale?



http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/011513.pdf


From what I've heard, the new council will not do anything to stop this from happening. On the other hand, if January 31, 2013 comes and goes and the NHL still owns the team, and this deal ceases to exist at the end of that day, I don't think the new council will be as agreeable as the old one was. From what I've heard, the new council is not opposed to the team playing here but they might not be as willing to pay as much as the old council was to facilitate that. In other words, on this Thursday, what has been an apocryphal period of time up to now ("two weeks") might actually have some veracity it until now has lacked.

I speculate that this saga will not end definitively one way or the other on January 31, 2013. Here's why.

1) I am having increasing doubts that Jamison will have completed the purchase agreement with the NHL by then.

2) If the NHL still owns the team, they will not want the fan support to plummet, so they will have a strong motivation to keep fans thinking that there is still hope for a local sale. So the NHL will be unlikely to do anything definitive until late in the season.

3) Even if the majority of the new city council is against the deal, they might not be highly motivated to take action to force the team towards relocation. If they were, I think we would have heard rumblings of that by now. Meanwhile, there really isn't that much financial motivation in the short term. Without signing the lease with Jamison they can just let the NHL continue to bear the costs of managing the Jobing.com without the financial burden on the COG to pay an AMF. It would save them some much needed cash in the short term.

So, I think that we are more likely to reach "Thread C" than we are to having a definitive resolution within 2 weeks.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,219
I speculate that this saga will not end definitively one way or the other on January 31, 2013.

Ya, thats the rub right there isnt it? I mean, despite the supposed January 31st Drop Dead Date, on a few levels it really doesnt make much sense to finalize the sale on that date as youve lost all momentum from last springs deep playoff run, an abbreviated season on the heels of the Lockout, a steep climb coming out of it.... Then theres the new Mayor & Council itself. Assuming for a moment that Jamison is still unable to close by the 31st, whats to stop the COG from extending the Deadline be it 30, 60, 90 or 120 days? The newly elected posturing with; "though we dont like the agreement, we've decided to extend it and in the interim will be reviewing this matter, getting up to speed" and so on & so forth. Maybe the NHL collects a pro-rated portion of the already budgeted $17M in AMF's allocated last spring. I dont know, but I expect we'll find many more twists & turns in the road ahead.
 

CGG

Registered User
Jan 6, 2005
4,136
55
416
I speculate that this saga will not end definitively one way or the other on January 31, 2013. Here's why.

1) I am having increasing doubts that Jamison will have completed the purchase agreement with the NHL by then.

2) If the NHL still owns the team, they will not want the fan support to plummet, so they will have a strong motivation to keep fans thinking that there is still hope for a local sale. So the NHL will be unlikely to do anything definitive until late in the season.

3) Even if the majority of the new city council is against the deal, they might not be highly motivated to take action to force the team towards relocation. If they were, I think we would have heard rumblings of that by now. Meanwhile, there really isn't that much financial motivation in the short term. Without signing the lease with Jamison they can just let the NHL continue to bear the costs of managing the Jobing.com without the financial burden on the COG to pay an AMF. It would save them some much needed cash in the short term.

So, I think that we are more likely to reach "Thread C" than we are to having a definitive resolution within 2 weeks.

At some point you'd have to expect the COG to allow the amount budgeted for the current year's AMF to go to the NHL as more "insurance" before the almost-imminent closing of the deal to Jamison. I'm sure that's been discussed, if not publically. The NHL will want that AMF if they're stuck with the team for the whole season.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,219
We were all learning a new song to play on our banjos (you do know all real Coyotes fans have banjos, right?)...

Here I thought I was the only one! :)

Ya, see, thats a problem right there. Didnt anyone tell you guys that in the rankings of "Least Respected Musicians" Banjo Players are like, right near the bottom? Mebbe one notch above Accordionists (which btw enjoys much popularity in the Winnipeg region)... never mind the stigmas & stereotypes surrounding that whole Deliverance dealeo. Honestly, pickup a Mandolin, a Guitar, Hell, scare your friends and neighbours with a rusty old saw and a bow, a wash basin & broom pole bass, but leave off that ****** Banjo already will ya? You'll never get any respect messing around with that thing. ;)
 
Last edited:

GuelphStormer

Registered User
Mar 20, 2012
3,811
499
Guelph, ON
Ya, thats the rub right there isnt it? I mean, despite the supposed January 31st Drop Dead Date, on a few levels it really doesnt make much sense to finalize the sale on that date as youve lost all momentum from last springs deep playoff run, an abbreviated season on the heels of the Lockout, a steep climb coming out of it.... Then theres the new Mayor & Council itself. Assuming for a moment that Jamison is still unable to close by the 31st, whats to stop the COG from extending the Deadline be it 30, 60, 90 or 120 days? The newly elected posturing with; "though we dont like the agreement, we've decided to extend it and in the interim will be reviewing this matter, getting up to speed" and so on & so forth. Maybe the NHL collects a pro-rated portion of the already budgeted $17M in AMF's allocated last spring. I dont know, but I expect we'll find many more twists & turns in the road ahead.
i can think of 324,000,000 reasons ...

the new council loses and any all leverage in this situation if it agrees unconditionally to extend the deadline. the new mayor would be an absolute fool to do so.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,078
33,140
i can think of 324,000,000 reasons ...

the new council loses and any all leverage in this situation if it agrees unconditionally to extend the deadline. the new mayor would be an absolute fool to do so.

I think it's "touch and go". It will depend on political calculations, since the mayor and council members are politicians and none of the AMF comes out of their pockets. They've probably seen that Glendale residents don't care that much about the situation, so why rock the boat? They can always blame the previous council if there is flak.

It will be interesting to see whether the NHL will try to twist Glendale's arm for subsidy support this year if Jamison doesn't come through. I think Glendale city council might well rebuff that sort of proposal, since it could end up being a political liability (if they pay millions and the Coyotes leave anyway). If Jamison doesn't close the sale, I think that the NHL will be on the hook for losses this year. That will make a local sale even more difficult, if it affects the future sale price. The NHL would probably just try to recoup the losses through a high-priced sale of relocation fee from a new owner in another city.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad