Phoenix XL - Rich Man's World

[roccerfeller]

If recent events are anything to go by, silence is indeed the best indicator of what is really going on behind the scenes. Chipman found out fast that it pays to shut the hell up and let the league do the dirty work.

Don't get impulsive and emotional now XX, come on man. If the number on this thread is anything to go by, we know anything can happen. Silence can be both good and bad. Your point also works in your favour as much as it does against; Chipman was silent and the NHL respected that. These parties could simply not be seeking their twitter fame as IEH was, and thus, are going about their due-dilligence in silence.

In the meantime, enjoy the Yotes! Stop worrying about something that you have no power over, and that might not have the undesirable (for you) outcome you're predicting. Simple. If they leave, they leave. It will be what it will be. But they might also stay. Look at this as positive instead of negative, and your brain will thank you.

(for the record, Chipman works like that as a business man - always has - its his modus operandi, he didn't do that to appease the NHL. Jets fans are exceptionally lucky to have him as a co-owner, he's a very down to earth classy guy)

 

[cbcwpg]

If it was me I wouldn't go for anything longer than 5 years but you are probably right.

If it was me, I wouldn't touch the Coyotes with a 10 foot hockey stick, at any price; unless the NHL promised me ( in writing ) that I could move them or sell them to whomever and where ever I wanted after 5 years.

Of course I would agree to make an honest effort ( this to be negotiated with the NHL and the CoG as to what exactly "an honest effort" is ) to run the team to maximize profits.

Speaking of negotiating, IMO the reason for the delay in the sale has nothing to do with the price being paid for the team. That's the easy part. The negotiations are to see who pays the freight going forward, and how do "the buyer" get out of it when / if it doesn't work out.

 

[goyotes]

Most recent out of Phoenix (but not reported by any credible news source so take this with a grain of salt) is that Daly was in Glendale on Tuesday to meet with the CoG, who was also in executive session to consider both bids. Also, supposedly the Jamison group was/is in Phoenix this week.

If any of that is true, one would hope to see something on the city's agenda for next week's meeting. The agenda should be posted late Friday evening. I suspect they will not go the route of a MOU, but will have a lease drafted and ready for council approval.

I can't see the CoG not giving an out clause, and some healthy arena management fee since they are on the hook regardless for arena operation costs. Perhaps the areas of negotation have been 1) the number of years and terms under which the out clause is triggered (something between 3 - 10 years), and 2) ther arena management fee amount and how it will be calculated ala what they wanted to do with MH. I don't think the purchase price will be an issue with the NHL. I doubt an insider like Jamison would invest the time, money and energy without knowing he can reach a deal with the NHL. And we know JR was hand picked by the NHL previously, so if he is involved as reported, he must know he can reach a deal with the NHL.

I'm not sure how the GWI's opposition might play into any of this, but I have to believe the out clause is triggered if the GWI is able to get a judgment rescinding the arena management fee. I also wouldn't be surprised if the deal is presented as a done deal with just a rubber stamp of the city council necessary, so the GWI doesn't have time to pick the deal apart. Meaning, the only play will be for the GWI to sue to rescind the deal if they choose to do so.

 

[htpwn]

A frequent excuse for the lackluster attendance in Phoenix has been the uncertainty. Does that change if a new ownership group has an outclause?

 

[kdb209]

Most recent out of Phoenix (but not reported by any credible news source so take this with a grain of salt) is that Daly was in Glendale on Tuesday to meet with the CoG, who was also in executive session to consider both bids. Also, supposedly the Jamison group was/is in Phoenix this week.

If any of that is true, one would hope to see something on the city's agenda for next week's meeting. The agenda should be posted late Friday evening. I suspect they will not go the route of a MOU, but will have a lease drafted and ready for council approval.

I see that the Executive Session arena boilerplate was back in this weeks Council Workshop agenda.

2. LEGAL MATTERS - PROPERTY & CONTRACTS

A. Discussion and consultation with the City Attorney and City Manager to receive an update, consider its position and provide instruction and direction to the City Attorney and City Manager regarding Glendale's position in connection with agreements associated with the Arena and the Hockey team, which are the subject of negotiations (A.R.S. S 38-431.03(A)(3)(4)(7)).

I wouldn't read to much into this. This has been on every workshop agenda since 6/21. Before then, it was on the agenda less than half of the time.

 

[Scottrocks58*]

A frequent excuse for the lackluster attendance in Phoenix has been the uncertainty. Does that change if a new ownership group has an outclause?

Of course. 5 or 7 years is a long enough span for people to invest themselves in the team. Even in hockey mad Winnipeg the attendance went down when people realized that the team would be leaving. This where people were already fully invested in the hockey team. Lacluster attendance shows that Phoenix has not become emotionally invested in the team, and won't until ownership is settled. After that, it's anyone's bet.

I believe that, in the heart, if the team you love may be leaving, you stick with the team to the bitter end, but if a team has not yet captured your heart you won't decide to invest yourself in the team given the possiblity that it might be torn away from you right after you start to follow them.

 

[Killion]

How did those 3 vote on the $25 million handouts? That could make a difference. I'm also getting the impression from this thread that there won't be any more handouts, even if the entire city council remains unchanged.

Mayor Scruggs of course voted in favor. Lieberman made sure one & all heard him decry how voting in favor of the $25M payments went against ever moral fiber of his sanctimonious being, apoplectic remonstrations of how "outrageous, egregious, unsavory, unseemly, repugnant, despicable" it was for Glendale to be coughing up millions for billionaires yet, he voted in favor of the subsidies as well. For this performance alone, I'm likin Cap'n Phil. Such bare faced hypocrisy from politicians is always amusing no?. The other guy Im not sure about, and yes, I agree, a more moderate "Arena Management Fee" will simply have to be tabled if this things gonna get done.

A frequent excuse for the lackluster attendance in Phoenix has been the uncertainty. Does that change if a new ownership group has an outclause?

I believe so. Reverse onus. Its no longer on the NHL & the new owners to insure the success of the franchise, short of GJ/JR making sure their putting together a competitive team, marketing, promotions, filling the docket with concerts & events at the job. The barrel will be pointed squarely at the ticket buying public. Put up or were' gone. It certainly wont be framed that way, however, that'd be pretty much your bottom-line.

 

[Scottrocks58*]

I believe so. Reverse onus. Its no longer on the NHL & the new owners to insure the success of the franchise, short of GJ/JR making sure their putting together a competitive team, marketing, promotions, filling the docket with concerts & events at the job. The barrel will be pointed squarely at the ticket buying public. Put up or were' gone. It certainly wont be framed that way, however, that'd be pretty much your bottom-line.

This comment is

It is always up to the owners of a for profit company to make a profit, rather than to sit back and just expect that they will be paid just for being in existance. If a company closes down, its because they failed in the market. Sure fans of a team will be hurt if the team loses. No one blames old Jets and Nordique fans for the loss of the teams, even though they clearly weren't "supporting" the teams with enough money to make the teams viable.

The onus isn't on a market to support a company. It's on a company to grow and develop its market, thus becoming a financial success. Can it be done? We will have to see if and when good ownership takes over the team.

 

[goyotes]

I see that the Executive Session arena boilerplate was back in this weeks Council Workshop agenda.


I wouldn't read to much into this. This has been on every workshop agenda since 6/21. Before then, it was on the agenda less than half of the time.

I understand the arena is always part of executive sessions as of late. The "news" was that the discussion was on selection of an ownership group's lease proposal. The inference being the NHL has blessed either group's proposal.

You are right to take this with a grain of salt. It was new information to me, so I thought I would pass it along on the BoH.

 

[Killion]

This comment is

Just this one?.
What about the other 5,799 that preceded it?.
Dont they too deserve your compliments?...

 

[TheLegend]

Mayor Scruggs of course voted in favor. Lieberman made sure one & all heard him decry how voting in favor of the $25M payments went against ever moral fiber of his sanctimonious being, apoplectic remonstrations of how "outrageous, egregious, unsavory, unseemly, repugnant, despicable" it was for Glendale to be coughing up millions for billionaires yet, he voted in favor of the subsidies as well. For this performance alone, I'm likin Cap'n Phil. Such bare faced hypocrisy from politicians is always amusing no?. The other guy Im not sure about, and yes, I agree, a more moderate "Arena Management Fee" will simply have to be tabled if this things gonna get done.

In the first $25M vote two years ago.... Lieberman was quoted in the AZ Republic saying he was voting for it, then came out a day later voting against it when he knew it would pass.

Lieberman is like a sheet blowing in the wind. And he's providing the wind.

 

[XX]

Look at this as positive instead of negative, and your brain will thank you.

It's not a negative, for me, personally. I may be moving out of the state within the next 6 months. I see a potential move to a city ready to embrace the team as a positive. It will be terrible not having local NHL hockey to go to, but the organization would be better off for it. At this point, Coyote fans are the walking dead. Sure, on the outside we might profess to hope for the best. But by now everyone has come to terms with the very real possibility of the team leaving. The length of this nonsense is what is really hard on people and what I think will end up doing the most damage to the NHL brand in Phoenix.

 

[Fugu]

... As for the rest; 3 words - Canadian Equalization Payments. The NHL is a collective, a "hive". Whether its Revenue Sharing or Jeremy Jacobs supplying Dixie Cups & hot dogs in Nashville for the next 35yrs from the inside out this is generally a group that protects itself from the vagaries & fluctuations in the US Greenback or Canadian Loonie

It's more refined today, thanks to the development of some financial instruments that weren't available in older times. Nor perhaps did anyone foresee the need to hedge, and by the time they did, it was too late. You can't find something that will protect from a 40% deficit once you're in the thick of it.

This comment is

It is always up to the owners of a for profit company to make a profit, rather than to sit back and just expect that they will be paid just for being in existance. If a company closes down, its because they failed in the market. Sure fans of a team will be hurt if the team loses. No one blames old Jets and Nordique fans for the loss of the teams, even though they clearly weren't "supporting" the teams with enough money to make the teams viable.

The onus isn't on a market to support a company. It's on a company to grow and develop its market, thus becoming a financial success. Can it be done? We will have to see if and when good ownership takes over the team.

Just being nitpicky, but owning NHL franchises was never truly about annual profits. I think the game was to try to make enough to avoid serious losses to the point that these could never be recouped through a sale of the franchise. If franchise values appreciate, a few losses here and there aren't so bad.

Moyes was already faced with never getting the money he paid to buy the team, and then facing the annual losses to add to that column. It's not unlike what the NHL is facing, having dished out ~$140 million, with $25 million of losses not otherwise covered which they want to add to the selling price. Well, if the franchise value is already lower than the price they paid, and/or is in further decline.... their losses in 4-5 yrs could add up to as much as the team is worth.

 

[Scottrocks58*]

Just being nitpicky, but owning NHL franchises was never truly about annual profits. I think the game was to try to make enough to avoid serious losses to the point that these could never be recouped through a sale of the franchise. If franchise values appreciate, a few losses here and there aren't so bad.

Please explain to me how a for-profit business which doesn't make a profit can routinely gain in value year over year. Is it valued as a nonprofit or as simply a loss leader in a larger entity?

 

[XX]

Please explain to me how a for-profit business which doesn't make a profit can routinely gain in value year over year. Is it valued as a nonprofit or as simply a loss leader in a larger entity?

The latter. A team is only as valuable as the league it plays in. It's more or less why some NFL owners could care less about the product on the field. They've made so much off of appreciation of the franchise value itself there's no incentive to be competitive. Hockey doesn't really have that luxury, but with revenue sharing and the like, franchise values are more intertwined. A team like the Leafs or Habs that is rolling in history and cash ala the Yankees is going to have a higher value, sure, but that doesn't mean you necessarily have to make money on a yearly basis to make money in the long run for teams like the Coyotes or Preds.

Think of the NHL as a brand, and the franchises as 30 outlets of that brand. An overall improvement in the brand is far more powerful than any astronomical leap (or fall) in 1 outlet value.

A good rule, though, is that people own teams as part of their ego and not their portfolio. People who turn things around drastically like Jerry Jones are the exception, not the rule.

 

[Killion]

It's more refined today, thanks to the development of some financial instruments that weren't available in older times. Nor perhaps did anyone foresee the need to hedge, and by the time they did, it was too late. You can't find something that will protect from a 40% deficit once you're in the thick of it.

Well, money trading & speculating or "hedging" has been around for a long long time Fugu as you know. Why, just since the early 19th century alone the 1st Baron Nathan Mayer de Rothschilds built upon the families wealth & attracted many of the worlds super rich in doing just that. Then in the 40's you had Edward the VIII & the Dastardly Count Marie Alfred Fouqereauxde Marigny trading British Pounds Sterling & Yankee Greenbacks for German Reichsmarks from the lap of luxury in Nassau. Traitorous, criminal, deservedly losing their bets & most of their money on the outcome of WWII ... Its a Rich Mans World alrighty.

 

[AllByDesign]

Just imagine the conversation we'd be having, if the Coyotes played in Greece. Just a thought... things could be worse.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Just imagine the conversation we'd be having, if the Coyotes played in Greece. Just a thought... things could be worse.

Yes. The bailout would be coming from the EU and IMF instead of the City Of Glendale.

 

[Fugu]

Yes. The bailout would be coming from the EU and IMF instead of the City Of Glendale.

You know, we all laugh at this rather insightful comment, but everyone is living too big, as they say. Who doesn't need a bailout these days?







(China.)

 

[danishh]

You know, we all laugh at this rather insightful comment, but everyone is living too big, as they say. Who doesn't need a bailout these days?







(China.)

Let's not forget India...

and taiwan, korea, japan, singapore, indonesia, etc.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

You know, we all laugh at this rather insightful comment, but everyone is living too big, as they say. Who doesn't need a bailout these days?
(China.)

You know who else doesn't...

CANADA !!!!!!



To my country's credit, of all the "advanced" countries in the world, we came thru this recession/depression the most unscathed.

Banks are GREAT. Gold and oil are thru the roof. Unemployment is at 7.1%. We "MADE IT 7". Soon to "MAKE IT 8".

We are the little country that could.



Now if the country of my ancestors (Ireland) would just get its act together... Right Killion?

 

[Mungman]

You know who else doesn't...

CANADA !!!!!!



To my country's credit, of all the "advanced" countries in the world, we came thru it the most unscathed.

Banks are GREAT. Gold and oil are thru the roof. Unemployment is at 7.1%. We "MADE IT 7". Soon to "MAKE IT 8".

We are the little country that could.



Now if the country of my ancestors (Ireland) would just get its act together... Right Killion.

I was waiting for someone to post this, you are correct that the Canadian economy weathered the storm the best of the developed countries.

The counterpoint is that the govenment did bail out some industries, the most notable being the auto industry in Canada (by the feds and Ont). The counter-counterpoint is the reason this was done was to keep the portion of the industry the country has. If the US had bailed out the industry alone they would have (justifiably or not) called for all production to be moved into the US.

I have not checked the numbers, but I think in the end the governments will come out of the auto bailout smelling like a rose as they got a good chunk of stock in exchange for the support. I think (again not at all sure) the the Canadian governments still hold a portion of the stock they received and plan to sell for a profit at some point.

 

[RandR]

Please explain to me how a for-profit business which doesn't make a profit can routinely gain in value year over year. Is it valued as a nonprofit or as simply a loss leader in a larger entity?

The latter. A team is only as valuable as the league it plays in. It's more or less why some NFL owners could care less about the product on the field. They've made so much off of appreciation of the franchise value itself there's no incentive to be competitive. Hockey doesn't really have that luxury, but with revenue sharing and the like, franchise values are more intertwined. A team like the Leafs or Habs that is rolling in history and cash ala the Yankees is going to have a higher value, sure, but that doesn't mean you necessarily have to make money on a yearly basis to make money in the long run for teams like the Coyotes or Preds.

Think of the NHL as a brand, and the franchises as 30 outlets of that brand. An overall improvement in the brand is far more powerful than any astronomical leap (or fall) in 1 outlet value.

Yes, and I am sure there are many stats available to show how franchise values have increased over the years in various sports.

In the non-sports world much better examples exist. For example, during the dot-com boom of the 90s countless companies routinely lost millions of dollars annually but their share prices soared partly because their revenues were increasing and they were seen as grabbing (or holding) market share of an exploding market. Of course, the high tech investment boom led to a crash in the same market space, but some companies like Amazon, which lost many millions annually during those tech boom and bust years, eventually made a fortune once internet commerce became established to become what it is today.

 

[doaner]

oil are thru the roof.

that is not a good thing. Typically means gas is up

 

[Killion]

Now if the country of my ancestors (Ireland) would just get its act together... Right Killion?

the Irish?. We wont eat meat on Fridays',
but we'll drink Jamesons for Breakfast.

See things not for the way they are,
but for how they will never be...

and is able to tell someone to got to Hell so they'll actually look forward to the trip.

Announced crowd of 7.1k at last nights game vs L.A..

I suspect attendance is going to be pretty erratic over the season. Consummation of a sale wont cause an immediate cessation of the bleeding but it'd be a start. No question this is going to be a very steep hill to climb..