Phoenix Part XXXII: Bridge over Troubled Goldwater

Status
Not open for further replies.

Captain Esoteric

Registered User
Nov 15, 2008
237
0
We are in agreement that the bond transaction to CoG wouldn't be voided. It's the transfer of payment from CoG to MH that would be voided. So the taxpayers are still on the hook one way or the other. This is what scares CoG the most if GWI wins in court. They have to pay back the bonds PLUS they still loose the hockey team. A double wammy.
GWI sounds like an organization that is really looking out for the taxpayers...
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,215
Disney didn't pay McNall anything.

No?. McNall cashed a cheque for $25M that went through the NHL admittedly but was from Disneys' $50M Expansion Fee, ergo, Disney paid the guy $25M. Tampas' $50M fee was split up amongst the full membership; as you know, Ron Joyce refused to pay the $50M & tried to lowball Hamiltons' entry into the league with a $30M offer, giving the NHL yet one more reason to pour cold water all over the Hammers aspirations to bring a franchise to Copps'... :p:

....what is the "objective" opinion on whether this sort of compromise might just fly?

Objectively goyotes, the league is not set up nor in the position to be investing in municipal bonds. The NHL is a not for profit organization with all proceeds returned to the member clubs. You might get some takers on the Bonds within the BOG's itself, but as for the league itself?. Not a chance. Better they should roll up their sleeves, negotiate a 6yr lease including a CFD & out clause with Glendale themselves, bring in some talented sales & marketing personnel & an aggressive Arena Mgr, give it every effort themselves, hope & pray for a turnaround in the economy, sell the franchise for cash money of the private kind in a few years time. I would have no problem with that & would applaud the effort. And of course if the NHL can own a team, then so too can the NHLPA. Have at er' boys.... :laugh:

Was the relocation fee only driven by Balsillie and infringing on the Leafs/Sabres territories though? Or did Baum specifically rule that the Coyotes moving was going to have a relo fee allocated to the BK estate? I have a very difficult time believing TNSE would be willing to pay $210mill + $? million relo fee.

Baum ruled that any relo fee would go to the BK'd estate. Recall Gary Bettman bragging that he could sell the franchise to Winnipeg WITH a big fat relo fee tomorrow?. That was before Baum ordered any relo fee's go to Moyes BK'd estate. Right now, the price tag on the franchise is $204M & climbing. Does the NHL charge TN another $25M and in a grand act of magnanimity then hand over a cheque for $25M to the COG & forgive the $25M they guaranteed to provide in losses over the past season?. A $50M kiss goodbye?. Sound familiar?. That'd put TN paying app. $230M. :naughty:
 

billy blaze

Registered User
May 31, 2009
1,480
0

Puckschmuck*

Guest
I'm beginning to wonder if one of the latest rumors of a transaction involving the Bank of Canada and the NHL is perhaps more realistic than we have given it credit for............
 

Donwood

Registered User
Mar 13, 2011
1,393
2
Winnipeg
I'm beginning to wonder if one of the latest rumors of a transaction involving the Bank of Canada and the NHL is perhaps more realistic than we have given it credit for............

I think anyone from Winnipeg has our fingers crossed these rumors are linked and true. But like so many rumors it's so hard to say.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Baum ruled that any relo fee would go to the BK'd estate. Recall Gary Bettman bragging that he could sell the franchise to Winnipeg WITH a big fat relo fee tomorrow?. That was before Baum ordered any relo fee's go to Moyes BK'd estate. Right now, the price tag on the franchise is $204M & climbing. Does the NHL charge TN another $25M and in a grand act of magnanimity then hand over a cheque for $25M to the COG & forgive the $25M they guaranteed to provide in losses over the past season?. A $50M kiss goodbye?. Sound familiar?. That'd put TN paying app. $230M. :naughty:

Do you have a link for that?

IIRC, the NHL's BK Purchase Offer had a clause that any net profit on the sale of the Franchise (within two years) would go to the BK estate - it did not include any relocation fee.

The precedent of Raiders II is pretty clear - and was quoted several times by Judge Baum - the rights to vacant markets are owned by the League (and are a separate asset from the franchise) and a relocation fee equal to the difference in franchise value between the old and new marked is a Relocation Fee due to the League.

Reluctantly, at the order of Judge Baum, the NHL did submit two appraisals indicating tentative Relocation Fees of $101M & $195M for a move to Hamilton. JB's studies came back with much lower numbers ($11.2M - $12.9M). These fees were separate from the offered purchase price.
 
Last edited:

CasualFan

Tortious Beadicus
Nov 27, 2009
3,215
0
Bay Area, CA
Do you have a link for that?

IIRC, the NHL's BK Purchase Offer had a clause that any net profit on the sale of the Franchise (within two years) would go to the BK estate - it did not include any relocation fee.

The precedent of Raiders II is pretty clear - and was quoted several times by Judge Baum - the rights to vacant markets are owned by the League (and are a separate asset from the franchise) and a relocation fee equal to the difference in franchise value between the old and new marked is a Relocation Fee due to the League.

Reluctantly, at the order of Judge Baum, the NHL did submit two appraisals indicating tentative Relocation Fees of $101M & $195M for a move to Hamilton. JB's studies came back with much lower numbers ($11.2M - $12.9M). These fees were separate from the offered purchase price.


NHL APA @ Definition "Net Profit"

For the avoidance of doubt, the calculation of Net Profit shall not include (x) any relocation fees or other payments made directly to the NHL or to the Member Clubs in connection with any Team Sale
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,215
IIRC, the NHL's BK Purchase Offer had a clause that any net profit on the sale of the Franchise (within two years) would go to the BK estate - it did not include any relocation fee.

A "Relocation Fee" is a "profit" is it not?. I have read opinions here & elsewhere suggesting any relocation fee would in fact go to the Moyes estate, obviously incorrect if specifically excluded in the NHL APA as CF notes.....
 

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,374
19,427
Sin City
Mod note: Please only include links/tweets from MSM or SN-type bloggers for news.

Rumor sites are not recognized as valid news sources (on the BOH).

(If the URL is obfuscated, there's probably a reason for that.)
 

Roughneck

Registered User
Oct 15, 2003
9,609
1
Calgary
Visit site
A "Relocation Fee" is a "profit" is it not?. I have read opinions here & elsewhere suggesting any relocation fee would in fact go to the Moyes estate, obviously incorrect if specifically excluded in the NHL APA as CF notes.....

I'm sure the NHL lawyers are savvy enough to have a relocation fee not be a part of the sale of the franchise. Would seem as simple as: people buy the Coyotes and take ownership, then pay the NHL in a separate transaction to relocate the team.
 

TheLegend

Megathread Gadfly
Aug 30, 2009
36,765
28,828
Buzzing BoH
That big lease really helped the Coyotes. Bankruptcy can change EVERYTHING

If that were truly the case, then the Coyotes would have been playing in Hamilton this past season.

Instead.... that big lease helped the NHL reaffirm it's right to determine where it's franchises are located.... period.
 

Ulfie

Registered User
Jan 11, 2011
49
0
If that were truly the case, then the Coyotes would have been playing in Hamilton this past season.

Instead.... that big lease helped the NHL reaffirm it's right to determine where it's franchises are located.... period.

Wasn't that another one of those rulings Judge Baum didn't have to make? He just went with the bid endorsed by the majority of creditors, which included CoG.
 

JAX

Registered User
Apr 7, 2009
891
0
Sault Ste. Marie
I've been following the story on and off for the year or so, but can someone answer my question. why is Bettman so obsessive with keeping this team in Phoenix givin the massive loses they have year after year?

To me it almost seems like madness what he is doing.
 

mikelvl

Registered User
Aug 6, 2009
5,912
2,082
Newton, MA
I've been following the story on and off for the year or so, but can someone answer my question. why is Bettman so obsessive with keeping this team in Phoenix givin the massive loses they have year after year?

To me it almost seems like madness what he is doing.

1. Growing market (5th largest metro area in America) - but not all of them hockey fans;)
2. Bettman's beloved sunbelt
3. Bettman's beloved sunbelt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad