Phoenix XIXth: Nervous Breakdown

Status
Not open for further replies.

OthmarAmmann

Omnishambles
Jul 7, 2010
2,761
0
NYC
Question

I have not read the agreement between Glendale and the NHL. Is it possible that the city could argue that they have fulfilled their commitment by getting to the current step in the process? Or do they have to close the deal to keep their $25 million?
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
My guess is that council is receiving a lot of flak from taxpayers.

So how is that connected to the Editorial Board of the Arizona Republic? :sarcasm:

Even if the Arizona Republic are lap-dogs for the City of Glendale, my hunch is that this is more about the GWI and its threats to bring legal action. I think they are trying to prevent a lawsuit by building public support for the deal. If so, it really looks very lame. The GWI is looking at serious allegations now, and fluffy editorials likening a Chicago hedge fund manager to a Detroit entrepreneur is sort of off topic.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
I have not read the agreement between Glendale and the NHL. Is it possible that the city could argue that they have fulfilled their commitment by getting to the current step in the process? Or do they have to close the deal to keep their $25 million?

Their agreement is to pay all of the operating losses up to $25 million this year. The obligation would terminate if the team is sold to a new owner, obviously. But unless the NHL has decided to eat the losses this year, or the new owner agrees to pay them, it is still on Glendale.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
IF the deal dies, I doubt it would be by council vote.

I think it's hard to know how they would go about this. Would they just not sign the lease? Since council has approved the lease, it seems unlikely that they could just leave it hanging open like that. I would think that they would need to reverse their approval of the lease. Perhaps they would want Hulsizer or the NHL to pull out based on delays, and then blame it on the GWI's lawsuit threat or an inability to sell the bonds at the right price.

I still don't see any tangible evidence that they will not go ahead and close the deal, and we should still remember that Hulsizer and the NHL have recently stated that things are on track. What has been a bit disquieting has been the recent public sabre-rattling initiated by the City of Glendale. No need for that if everything is on track and the GWI is no impediment.

Either way, I don't think there is anything to look for at today's council meeting. There is nothing about the lease agreement or bond sale on the agenda.
 

OthmarAmmann

Omnishambles
Jul 7, 2010
2,761
0
NYC
Their agreement is to pay all of the operating losses up to $25 million this year. The obligation would terminate if the team is sold to a new owner, obviously. But unless the NHL has decided to eat the losses this year, or the new owner agrees to pay them, it is still on Glendale.

I thought it was more nuanced than that.

I still don't see any tangible evidence that they will not go ahead and close the deal, and we should still remember that Hulsizer and the NHL have recently stated that things are on track. What has been a bit disquieting has been the recent public sabre-rattling initiated by the City of Glendale. No need for that if everything is on track and the GWI is no impediment.

Either way, I don't think there is anything to look for at today's council meeting. There is nothing about the lease agreement or bond sale on the agenda.

I agree, which is why I emphasized the "IF"
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
I thought it was more nuanced than that.



I agree, which is why I emphasized the "IF"

I think it depends on if they are sticking by the agreement, or by some subsequent understanding between parties that has not been revealed. The fact that the NHL hasn't claimed anything yet suggests that the dynamic might have changed. My theory has been that the NHL has not put in a claim yet because that might trigger the GWI into action. Or perhaps, Glendale has asked them not too until the lease is sorted out, etc.
 

OthmarAmmann

Omnishambles
Jul 7, 2010
2,761
0
NYC
I think it depends on if they are sticking by the agreement, or by some subsequent understanding between parties that has not been revealed. The fact that the NHL hasn't claimed anything yet suggests that the dynamic might have changed. My theory has been that the NHL has not put in a claim yet because that might trigger the GWI into action. Or perhaps, Glendale has asked them not too until the lease is sorted out, etc.

I agree with that too, but here's where I was going with that. Let's say for the sake of argument that Glendale has - or could reasonably argue that it has - fulfilled it's requirement under the agreement with the NHL by coming to an agreement with an owner (not closing... I didn't think that was a requirement but I could be wrong). They then would - or argue that they should - keep their $25 million. Let's just say they're confident they keep the $$$...

Their budget process is starting in March, and it could potentially be ugly. IF (emphasis once again) their budget situation over the next three years or so looks equally bad under the "Coyotes stay" scenario as it does under the "Coyotes go" scenario, then Glendale city council would actually be motivated to eighty-six the deal in a manner that appears as though fault lies with GWI.

Rather Machiavellian I admit...
 

BigBadBread

Shi Shi Shawww
Dec 4, 2006
871
10
I still remember MH saying after his lease was approved that the next step was to be approved by the BOG. This guy seriously didn't think it was that close to being finalized did he? Or was he just hoping that it would be because he's getting such a good deal and the dollar signs in his eyes clouded his vision of what was actually happening?

Here we are a month later and he is no closer and in my opinion actually further away from completing a deal. There was also the phrase "completed imminently" tossed around back in November like it was candy on Halloween. Exactly how long of a time period should something be considered "imminent" for, a week? maybe 2? Definitely not 2 months.
 

aj8000

Registered User
Jun 5, 2010
1,256
35
Does CoG have a big enough credit line to write a $170M check? If not, given the (apparent) deadlines, it would appear this story is already over.

I believe they have enough to borrow from same utility reserve they got the 25 million from.

Just going from memory.
 

goyotes

Registered User
May 4, 2007
1,811
0
Arizona
Would someone please explain what information is out there to lead posters to believe that the CoG has mere days to complete this transaction. It looks like they are moving in an orderly fashion. They are cleaning up the parking agreement (vote tonight and it will pass without any discussion). They met with the GWI in an attempt to resolve its concerns (and if nothing else see where the GWI is coming from so they can respond in court), MH has said that the timetable in his mind is still out a couple of weeks, the bond market is still in flux, it looks like the CoG is paying for the time it is spending by fronting part of the loses incurred already this year (parking fund money from Ellman) and no one, I repeat no one, has said the deal will not close. No media is reporting that (Canada or US). None of the parties are saying that. There has been no indication that the deal is off track.

Face it. The silence is killing most people who want to speculate on this transaction. So, with every passing day, the rhetoric on this board gets ramped up further. But the fans' timetable is not material to the timing of what is a very, very complicated and expensive transaction. I'm sorry relocationists, but your getting all hot and bothered over nothing.

And please do not tell me you buy into this "chooseday" nonsense. If this deal was off track, it would leak out. And holding the information back until after the ASG makes no sense. Heck, the NHL stating it was moving a team back to Canada would probably give them more press than they could handle. And for the NHL, press around the ASG is a pure bonus.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
Would someone please explain what information is out there to lead posters to believe that the CoG has mere days to complete this transaction. It looks like they are moving in an orderly fashion. They are cleaning up the parking agreement (vote tonight and it will pass without any discussion). They met with the GWI in an attempt to resolve its concerns (and if nothing else see where the GWI is coming from so they can respond in court), MH has said that the timetable in his mind is still out a couple of weeks, the bond market is still in flux, it looks like the CoG is paying for the time it is spending by fronting part of the loses incurred already this year (parking fund money from Ellman) and no one, I repeat no one, has said the deal will not close. No media is reporting that (Canada or US). None of the parties are saying that. There has been no indication that the deal is off track.

Face it. The silence is killing most people who want to speculate on this transaction. So, with every passing day, the rhetoric on this board gets ramped up further. But the fans' timetable is not material to the timing of what is a very, very complicated and expensive transaction. I'm sorry relocationists, but your getting all hot and bothered over nothing.

And please do not tell me you buy into this "chooseday" nonsense. If this deal was off track, it would leak out. And holding the information back until after the ASG makes no sense. Heck, the NHL stating it was moving a team back to Canada would probably give them more press than they could handle. And for the NHL, press around the ASG is a pure bonus.

I largely agree with this, Goyotes.

The events that have raised eyebrows for me relate to the heightened public rhetoric by the COG vs. the GWI. I sort of thought that they were a non-issue, but the COG seems all tingly about it. Not sure what to make of that, but they don't seem to be making progress in coming to an amicable agreement, as they had hoped.

Can you explain what "chooseday" means?:huh:
 

MaskedSonja

Registered User
Feb 3, 2007
6,547
86
Formerly Tinalera
I agree... I couldn't see a more opposite comparison to utilize. This quote amused me the most...


Yeah thooooose guys.. what a bunch of nuts. Who'd want them as part of your coveted team. Oooopsies. Umm they are part of the team... ole partners with deputy Hulsizer. :laugh:




Scruggs would be too late. TL and I have already claimed all the rights to this fiasco and we won't sell em cheep. We know how they do business in Glendale.


That's right-we're already on it :D I figure they'll pay a pretty penny for them movie rights...if they can pay 100 million for PARKING (for potentially their own lot), can you imagine what they'll pay for assured blockbuster movie rights?

*Cues up "We're in the money"*:D
 

Tommy Hawk

Registered User
May 27, 2006
4,223
104
Their agreement is to pay all of the operating losses up to $25 million this year. The obligation would terminate if the team is sold to a new owner, obviously. But unless the NHL has decided to eat the losses this year, or the new owner agrees to pay them, it is still on Glendale.

It is not operating losses, it is actual cash losses and there is a big difference.


Would someone please explain what information is out there to lead posters to believe that the CoG has mere days to complete this transaction. It looks like they are moving in an orderly fashion. They are cleaning up the parking agreement (vote tonight and it will pass without any discussion). They met with the GWI in an attempt to resolve its concerns (and if nothing else see where the GWI is coming from so they can respond in court), MH has said that the timetable in his mind is still out a couple of weeks, the bond market is still in flux, it looks like the CoG is paying for the time it is spending by fronting part of the loses incurred already this year (parking fund money from Ellman) and no one, I repeat no one, has said the deal will not close. No media is reporting that (Canada or US). None of the parties are saying that. There has been no indication that the deal is off track.

Face it. The silence is killing most people who want to speculate on this transaction. So, with every passing day, the rhetoric on this board gets ramped up further. But the fans' timetable is not material to the timing of what is a very, very complicated and expensive transaction. I'm sorry relocationists, but your getting all hot and bothered over nothing.

And please do not tell me you buy into this "chooseday" nonsense. If this deal was off track, it would leak out. And holding the information back until after the ASG makes no sense. Heck, the NHL stating it was moving a team back to Canada would probably give them more press than they could handle. And for the NHL, press around the ASG is a pure bonus.

I largely agree with this, Goyotes.

The events that have raised eyebrows for me relate to the heightened public rhetoric by the COG vs. the GWI. I sort of thought that they were a non-issue, but the COG seems all tingly about it. Not sure what to make of that, but they don't seem to be making progress in coming to an amicable agreement, as they had hoped.

Can you explain what "chooseday" means?:huh:

The reasoning behind these dates is that the NHL has said, IIRC, that certain dates need to be met in order to have relocation. IF you look at all the moving parts, as pointed out before, this is not something that can be done in a matter of days or even a few weeks. If they do relocate to Winnipeg then you have the MOose situation to deal with, an arena lease to put in place, marketing to put in place, infrastructure for the organization to run an NHL team instead of an AHL team, etc.

Also, the NHL would need to look at impact on and by the CBA as well as what, if anything, needs to be done with the alignment of the teams in divisions.

TBH, they may have already done a lot of this work but there is still a deadline for making a decision on where the franchise will reside in order to maximize things such as marketing, staffing, etc.
 

goyotes

Registered User
May 4, 2007
1,811
0
Arizona
Chooseday is a term going around on Twitter with posters common to the Board. It represented an obsure post for a supposedly tied-in insider to efforts to have the Jets come back to Winnipeg. Lots of very hot and bothered people on twitter who are speculating that the NHL will let TSNE choose between the Phoenix or Atlanta NHL team to purchase and relocate to Winnipeg. Supposedly, today is chooseday.:shakehead

In terms of rhetoric, the CoG has really been pretty quite. The Arizona Republic has had some op-ed pieces lately, but that is probably due to the fact that they finally figured out there is some local interest in the story. For those not aware, the AZ Republican follows and sends reporters to all the major sports, and major college, except for the Coyotes. And, KTAR which is the major sports and news station here, has contracts with the D-Back, Cards and Suns to broadcast their games. Guess who is left out in the cold? Media coverage of the Coyotes is terrible, but I suspect that has more to do with the media outlets long standing relationships with the other major and college sports than it really does with actual fan interest. For the AZ Repubican to actually spend as much time as it has recently on the Coyote situation, to me is a positive rather than a sign of desperation.
 

MaskedSonja

Registered User
Feb 3, 2007
6,547
86
Formerly Tinalera
I still remember MH saying after his lease was approved that the next step was to be approved by the BOG. This guy seriously didn't think it was that close to being finalized did he? Or was he just hoping that it would be because he's getting such a good deal and the dollar signs in his eyes clouded his vision of what was actually happening?

Here we are a month later and he is no closer and in my opinion actually further away from completing a deal. There was also the phrase "completed imminently" tossed around back in November like it was candy on Halloween. Exactly how long of a time period should something be considered "imminent" for, a week? maybe 2? Definitely not 2 months.

Actually, I believe "Imminent" was first used WAY back when IEH was in the mix for owning the franchise (yes, that long ago..."seems like yesterday" or yestermonth? Maybe yester-year?)
 

OthmarAmmann

Omnishambles
Jul 7, 2010
2,761
0
NYC
I largely agree with this, Goyotes.

Me too. I'm expecting the deal to close, but am a bit surprised at how things have progressed. I mean, the city declared a financial emergency on Dec 14th so that they could rush the bonds to market. Obviously there's been some sort of sticking point.

I also don't think this goes much past March. That would be well into budget time and this deal could be fairly painful in the first fiscal year it's in force. I don't think the city let's it stay open into the budget period. I also think the NHL would be applying serious pressure to close by that point, likely wagging the Winnipeg stick in Glendale's face.
 

goyotes

Registered User
May 4, 2007
1,811
0
Arizona
It is not operating losses, it is actual cash losses and there is a big difference.






The reasoning behind these dates is that the NHL has said, IIRC, that certain dates need to be met in order to have relocation. IF you look at all the moving parts, as pointed out before, this is not something that can be done in a matter of days or even a few weeks. If they do relocate to Winnipeg then you have the MOose situation to deal with, an arena lease to put in place, marketing to put in place, infrastructure for the organization to run an NHL team instead of an AHL team, etc.

Also, the NHL would need to look at impact on and by the CBA as well as what, if anything, needs to be done with the alignment of the teams in divisions.

TBH, they may have already done a lot of this work but there is still a deadline for making a decision on where the franchise will reside in order to maximize things such as marketing, staffing, etc.

Again, this all presumes that the NHL has concerns the deal will not close. If that were true, why hide that fact? Why not move on? The already have their loses covered by the CoG. They have done more than enough to avoid public backlash. The fact is, none of the parties to the transaction have given any indication the deal will not close. This is just rampent speculation fueled by many (not singling anyone out here) who want to believe the team will relocate for obvious reasons.
 

Jesus Christ Horburn

Registered User
Aug 22, 2008
13,942
1
The reasoning behind these dates is that the NHL has said, IIRC, that certain dates need to be met in order to have relocation. IF you look at all the moving parts, as pointed out before, this is not something that can be done in a matter of days or even a few weeks. If they do relocate to Winnipeg then you have the MOose situation to deal with, an arena lease to put in place, marketing to put in place, infrastructure for the organization to run an NHL team instead of an AHL team, etc.

Also, the NHL would need to look at impact on and by the CBA as well as what, if anything, needs to be done with the alignment of the teams in divisions.

TBH, they may have already done a lot of this work but there is still a deadline for making a decision on where the franchise will reside in order to maximize things such as marketing, staffing, etc.

I think you nailed it.

The most important deadline this saga will face (even more important than the December 31st deadline IMO) is the date by which time TNSE requires taking over ownership in order to proceed with relocating the team by next season.

I think the NHL wants to make a final decision before then, otherwise TNSE moves on to other endeavors (Thrashers?). Assuming this hypothetical deadline is sometime in February-March, it would make sense for the NHL to make a final decision on the Coyotes soon.
 

Kebekoi

Registered User
Oct 3, 2006
1,499
0
Matane, QC
Lots of very hot and bothered people on twitter who are speculating that the NHL will let TSNE choose between the Phoenix or Atlanta NHL team to purchase and relocate to Winnipeg. Supposedly, today is chooseday.:shakehead

So we (QC fans) will get the leftovers?
The date is not correct, to have an announcement we must be the 15th. ;)

I wonder what's the "point of no return" for True North to move a team for next season.
180px-Vlcsnap-2009-10-11-22h00m06s119.jpg
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,131
Chooseday is a term going around on Twitter with posters common to the Board. It represented an obsure post for a supposedly tied-in insider to efforts to have the Jets come back to Winnipeg. Lots of very hot and bothered people on twitter who are speculating that the NHL will let TSNE choose between the Phoenix or Atlanta NHL team to purchase and relocate to Winnipeg. Supposedly, today is chooseday.:shakehead

In terms of rhetoric, the CoG has really been pretty quite. The Arizona Republic has had some op-ed pieces lately, but that is probably due to the fact that they finally figured out there is some local interest in the story. For those not aware, the AZ Republican follows and sends reporters to all the major sports, and major college, except for the Coyotes. And, KTAR which is the major sports and news station here, has contracts with the D-Back, Cards and Suns to broadcast their games. Guess who is left out in the cold? Media coverage of the Coyotes is terrible, but I suspect that has more to do with the media outlets long standing relationships with the other major and college sports than it really does with actual fan interest. For the AZ Repubican to actually spend as much time as it has recently on the Coyote situation, to me is a positive rather than a sign of desperation.

Well, not exactly. They took the effort to submit a statement to the Arizona Republic just 5 days ago (see link below), which focused on countering the impression that they were not transparent. That seemed unnecessary to me, all things considered, unless they have some reason to antagonize the GWI, or perhaps are mounting a PR war in a defensive posture. Either way, it was a strange thing to do at this stage, don't you think?

http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/2011/01/20/20110120glendale-statement.html
 

Dado

Guest
The fact is, none of the parties to the transaction have given any indication the deal will not close.

That's your read of the situation. Others see numerous signs all pointing to no-deal in Glendale.

This is just rampent speculation fueled by many (not singling anyone out here) who want to believe the team will relocate for obvious reasons.

Well, some of it is fueled that way. However, you, too, are speculating just as hard as everyone else, and presumably you do *not* believe the team will relocate (for equally obvious reasons).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad