Phoenix XLV: You can't YANDLE the truth!

[KLu]

You believe that? I have some beachfront property to sell you down here.

Not that believe it or not, for me it's as credible as this Boston Pizza man rumour... as believable as all the rumours of an imminent sell for the past 3 years.

 

[CasualFan]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

 

[Nordskull]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

.... and the strategy is giving results.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

Good point. Never thought of that.

 

[MaskedSonja]

*puts on tinfoil cap*

Okay, so if someone can help me out, be appreciated. Am I so consipracy minded to think that this "deal", whatever it is, is just another ploy to convince CoG to pay another 25 million-then if/when deal falls apart, isn't accepted-well NHL still gets their money and ANOTHER year to "find an owner"? The CoG still needs to approve an AMULA, and if the arena is being sold a public vote has to be done-not to mention GWI probably waiting in the wings here-getting a "deal done" really ISNT getting it done.

Don't get me wrong, I would be very happy to see Yotes fans keep the franchise-but not at the expense of just one more year to "kick the can down the road".

 

[Slashers98]

So anyone knows who is the Coyotes mystery second buyer?
Anyone has a link to the financial profile of Greg Jamison?

 

[Whileee]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

Well, if past is prologue, then there are elements of this that are akin to the TNSE "bona fide offer" to purchase the Coyotes that was used by the NHL to extract the first $25 million subsidy. So it shouldn't be a surprise if the NHL tries to leverage the QC interest into extracting a similar concession from the COG for next season. However, to do that, they would need to show the COG a local buyer with high potential, which might be where local bidders come into play.

The concern that I had with Hulsizer and others is that because they were so keen to remain in the NHL's good books, they were never inclined to push the NHL in negotiations on the price. Perhaps that is why the NHL has been able to maintain with a straight face that "price has never been an issue".

Imagine a scenario where a buyer had worked out a deal with the COG for a lease that included a generous "arena management fee", and then they presented an offer of $110 million to the NHL to purchase the Coyotes. That would be at least fair market value for the team in Phoenix, based on recent franchise sales. In that case, the NHL would either have to accept the purchase offer, or refuse it and instead relocate the franchise. That would be very uncomfortable for the NHL, I would think, and cast them as the true villain in the saga. Even if it didn't ultimately work, it would certainly create a different dynamic, and from a political perspective, it would focus unwanted negative attention away from the COG to the NHL as the culprits. But as long as the NHL only deals with favored potential buyers, they will never put the NHL in such an awkward position. Kinda stinks if you are the COG or a Coyotes fan.

 

[Killion]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

I dont know that I neccessarily find it suspicious in the case of GJ & BP CF. Jamison was apparently forced out in San Jose', is well connected, experienced, background & religiousity seeming to me to be somewhat anathema to a duplicitous charade of the nature intimated.

Boston Pizza / Treliving's name has popped up before, from Vancouver to Hamilton, Nashville to Dallas etc. He has expansionist ambitions for his franchising empire, and I think its a good bet that if he could acquire this franchise, give it a whirl and hope for the best but plan for the worst with a relo to God only Knows Where in a few years he'd be going for it. Serious hockey genomes in that family which filters down throughout the BP empire.

As far as Conspiracy Theories go, and certainly in light of the runaway train in Seattle that appeared to be a semi credible tire iron in terms of providing leverage for the league as an option to QC, I dont see one with these players.

We have seen some unusual activities, Westjet rumored at one time to be interested in sponsoring the Parking Lots around the arena etc, so yes, pretty hard not to be cynical about known associates making plays for the team.

 

[rj]

I find it somewhat alarming that the potential owners being discussed in the media are all existing business associates of the league with direct ties to the NHL.

There's an Italian saying that "if you don't have a conflict of interest why do you have an interest?"

Of course that does not make them ineligible to express interest in purchasing the team. However, it introduces the potential that their interest in the team is not genuine but rather designed by the league to increase the NHL's leverage in other negotiations.

The cartel's good at being a cartel. When municipalities are castrated and the police do nothing to look into it, the NHL will gladly **** you up the ass.

Some random earlier posts on this looking up my posting history:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=27697982&highlight=#post27697982

September 8th, 2010:

Originally Posted by Fidel Astro
Does anyone else get the impression nothing will be decided until the last possible minute?

Of course. It's in the league's and buyer's interest to squeeze every dime they can out of the city of Glendale and screw its businesses and taxpayers to ensure they can maximize any potential return on this investment.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=27815811&highlight=#post27815811

September 17th, 2010:

Originally Posted by Whileee
I haven't seen anything to that effect, but would it be safe to assume that this will become an issue regardless since it will presumably take some time to close a sale? At some point, Glendale will need to either insist that the new owner will replenish whatever funds are expended on operating losses this year, or decide to spend the money themselves. Whether it happens on Sept. 15 or Oct. 15 or Nov. 15 is probably immaterial in the overall scenario.

Well considering beggars can't be choosers, I don't see why any prospective buyer on the horizon would refund Glendale the $25 million. What else would Glendale do? Go find another buyer?

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=27987866&highlight=#post27987866

September 28th, 2010:

Originally Posted by GHOSTofMAROONSroad
Bettman's comment earlier today:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opi...103889409.html

This underscores what others have said above: it appears it's mainly up to the COG now to find an owner suitable and approriate to the NHL.

the balls of the Glendale city council are locked in a mason jar under a kitchen sink; oh well, it's what you get for playing with the cartel; at least hopefully when this is done the political career of everyone involved will be over

April 14th, 2011:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=32363967&highlight=#post32363967

Originally Posted by Killion
You ever been to Winnipeg rj?. Smallish-Medium Sized Market where hockey, music & the arts are all religions?. TNSE would, could & will very likely drop whatever it takes to get it done, and believe me, $225M isnt even close to the ceiling in terms of what they'd gladly pay without batting an eyelash. Im sure they'd like a dealeo', a discount, however, if the purely artificial average franchise value is indeed $200M, whats an extra $25, $50 or even $75M?. Maybe the pay $170M for the team, $35-45M for the Jets name & copywrite including a relo fee all-in?. Many ways the deal can be made obviously.

I'm not discounting Winnipeg with the statement, but it does show why this team can't find an owner. Take the NHL's stance on owning this franchise and "we're not going to lose money on it", that's why the team is by all accounts likely going to move. If they didn't want to lose money on it they should've never bought it. But what they did was they bought the team, said "this is what we paid, so this is what someone else will pay", and no one in the area can buy the team for that price because it doesn't make any business sense, hence why Glendale had to be involved. If the NHL said the team went to best offer that would stay in Phoenix, this situation would've been resolved two years ago, but that'd require the average franchise value in the league to go down and the owners to recognize a loss.

The NHL here are no different than the people that bought homes for $200k in 2007 and two years later refused to accept that they were now worth half that trying to sell (a lot of those kinds of people live in the Phoenix area and Arizona by the way). Unlike homes though, franchises are a closed shop and can be moved to where they're more valuable since the primary concern of the owners that bought this team is franchise value.

In one industry I follow there are what are called "money marks". In other words, everything is a financial loser with no chance of profit or breaking even but the owner keeps it going and so people plod along taking money from the idiot that thinks someday it'll magically get better when it never does.

The money mark here is the City of Glendale. The franchise still loses lots of money. The NHL won't move off their price that would facilitate a local buyer. The City of Glendale are getting even more forced into an eventual bankruptcy once this group of politicians and city management retire so they can escape the blame. Councilman Lieberman was on the radio detailing all the services that have been cut to pay the arena management fee. Their citizens are going to be screwed for years. The NHL's latest swing for the fences and the city manager they've bought is to bring in the failure of the developments at Westgate and the arena and the individual that buys the team will buy those at firesale prices and the city gets screwed even more by selling their few assets at a major loss for what they built them for.

 

[Killion]

Kinda stinks if you are the COG or a Coyotes fan.

Sure does, but as for the theory you propose?... I dont know about that Whileee. Using cold hard Vulcanian Logic the league could simply state that unfortunately though a lease agreement & AMF had been agreed to the offer didnt cover its investments & losses. Sorry, no deal.

For every one person decrying the inhumanity of the leagues purely monetary considerations there would be more agreeing with their position on the matter. Why should they take a bath on a local sale when they can recoup the lot through relo?. They could easily have facilitated a sale long ago locally if they were inclined to do so.

 

[barneyg]

Doing stuff behind the league's back is obviously a no-no. A better idea... PKP approaches Gary Bettman (or visa versa) with the following deal... PKP pays the NHL $170 million, and Glendale $50 million, in return for Glendale agreeing not to sue the NHL. The benefits...

• politicos in Glendale can claim they didn't lose any money on the "arena management" deal
• GWI has one less item to sue over
• the NHL mitigates their bad PR
  [*]the NHL avoids a potential lawsuit from COG
• PKP has a hockey team

That's not worth 50 million to the league. IMO the "bad PR" is limited to people in the Phoenix metro and hardcore members of the BOH board. And what's the COG's case for suing anyway?

 

[Material Defender]

http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/2012/04/09/20120409coyotes-deal-could-come-within-month.html

(...) Glendale's chief negotiator (Ed Beasley) said at least one deal from potential Phoenix Coyotes owners should go public by the end of this month. (...)

(...) Glendale's role is to negotiate a lease at the city-owned arena, while the NHL approves the actual sale. (...)

I always thought Glendale would have to negotiate the arena lease with the "NHL approved" owner... Not with any potential ones! How can that be since there are no known owner?

 

[AllByDesign]

When municipalities are castrated and the police do nothing to look into it, the NHL will gladly **** you up the ass.

The money mark here is the City of Glendale. The franchise still loses lots of money. The NHL won't move off their price that would facilitate a local buyer. The City of Glendale are getting even more forced into an eventual bankruptcy once this group of politicians and city management retire so they can escape the blame. Councilman Lieberman was on the radio detailing all the services that have been cut to pay the arena management fee. Their citizens are going to be screwed for years. The NHL's latest swing for the fences and the city manager they've bought is to bring in the failure of the developments at Westgate and the arena and the individual that buys the team will buy those at firesale prices and the city gets screwed even more by selling their few assets at a major loss for what they built them for.

I also hear that the NHL kills puppies too.

Let's be fair folks. The NHL represents a series of 29 owners. At the end of the day the priority is for the league to operate in the best interest of the group. While I agree the purchase price of the team as a stationary asset was unattainable, I cannot question the NHL's decision. The agenda was to try and keep the team in Glendale without costing the other owners.

The Municipality had a choice. They could have not paid the losses via the arena management fee, and started dealing with that reality. Instead they chose to spend the money in hopes of finalizing a deal. Choices were made and subsequent consequences are going to be felt.

Some may rebut.... "Well Daly said a deal was never closer". What does that mean? How close were other deals? As mentioned before, this team would have to be purchased with an un-marketable price. The only way a deal could be reached would be if the municipality found a way to offset the inflated price. We have all witnessed the great efforts made to accomplish this. Great creativity was utilized. The problem is that an archaic state law, exploited by an right winged activist group got in the way.

I'm sorry, I just can't see the NHL being the bad guy. Their agenda has always been crystal clear in my eyes. Sell the team locally as long as the other owners don't lose money on the transaction.

 

[Material Defender]

(...) The money mark here is the City of Glendale. The franchise still loses lots of money. The NHL won't move off their price that would facilitate a local buyer. (...)

Since Quebecor seem to be willing to offer up to 230M$ (170M$ for the team and 60M$ for the relocation fees), I can't see why the league would make such a move...

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1160551

 

[Whileee]

Sure does, but as for the theory you propose?... I dont know about that Whileee. Using cold hard Vulcanian Logic the league could simply state that unfortunately though a lease agreement & AMF had been agreed to the offer didnt cover its investments & losses. Sorry, no deal.

For every one person decrying the inhumanity of the leagues purely monetary considerations there would be more agreeing with their position on the matter. Why should they take a bath on a local sale when they can recoup the lot through relo?. They could easily have facilitated a sale long ago locally if they were inclined to do so.

Brrrr... that's cold.

The NHL stepped into the BK auction and paid more than market value to defend its own economic interests. They enlisted Glendale's support of their bid, with the understanding that they would line up a local sale. Glendale has done all they can and more on the lease front to facilitate that. The NHL has jacked up the price to cover their own losses, and remains intransigent.

If the NHL sells for relocation, what did Glendale get for their support of the NHL in their battle with Balsillie? Loss of the $50 million on the table from Balsillie and another $50 million through direct subsidy to the NHL.

Perhaps someone will step forward and agree to pay $170 million in a local sale, but I think that would only happen at the high cost and risk of the COG. But the NHL has the COG so spooked that nobody has wanted to raise an objection, until Scruggs' recent rants.

 

[Slashers98]

Beasley confirmed that Greg Jamison was in town yesterday working on Coyotes deal. Any truth to that?

 

[cutchemist42]

Brrrr... that's cold.

The NHL stepped into the BK auction and paid more than market value to defend its own economic interests. They enlisted Glendale's support of their bid, with the understanding that they would line up a local sale. Glendale has done all they can and more on the lease front to facilitate that. The NHL has jacked up the price to cover their own losses, and remains intransigent.

If the NHL sells for relocation, what did Glendale get for their support of the NHL in their battle with Balsillie? Loss of the $50 million on the table from Balsillie and another $50 million through direct subsidy to the NHL.

Perhaps someone will step forward and agree to pay $170 million in a local sale, but I think that would only happen at the high cost and risk of the COG. But the NHL has the COG so spooked that nobody has wanted to raise an objection, until Scruggs' recent rants.

So did the CoG ever truly have the option in the BK auction to support Balsillie instead? I thought the NHL proved all 29 owners would block Balsillie from owning the team? How could the CoG have thrown their support behind Balsillie in the auction?

I've heard it said Judge Baum did tell the CoG the Balsillie bid was the better choice.

(Just trying to remember)

 

[Whileee]

I also hear that the NHL kills puppies too.

Let's be fair folks. The NHL represents a series of 29 owners. At the end of the day the priority is for the league to operate in the best interest of the group. While I agree the purchase price of the team as a stationary asset was unattainable, I cannot question the NHL's decision. The agenda was to try and keep the team in Glendale without costing the other owners.

The Municipality had a choice. They could have not paid the losses via the arena management fee, and started dealing with that reality. Instead they chose to spend the money in hopes of finalizing a deal. Choices were made and subsequent consequences are going to be felt.

Some may rebut.... "Well Daly said a deal was never closer". What does that mean? How close were other deals? As mentioned before, this team would have to be purchased with an un-marketable price. The only way a deal could be reached would be if the municipality found a way to offset the inflated price. We have all witnessed the great efforts made to accomplish this. Great creativity was utilized. The problem is that an archaic state law, exploited by an right winged activist group got in the way.

I'm sorry, I just can't see the NHL being the bad guy. Their agenda has always been crystal clear in my eyes. Sell the team locally as long as the other owners don't lose money on the transaction.

The NHL purchased the team to protect its own financial interests. They would never have gotten involved by purchasing the franchise if they had not been fending off Balsillie to protect their rights to select owners and control markets. It is obviously worth something to the NHL that Glendale supported their bid, even though it has turned out to be financially disastrous for Glendale.

I am not so sure that the NHL and its owners don't care about the PR. They didn't have much choice in Atlanta, but they do in Phoenix. They could break even just by applying the relocation fee from the Thrasher deal to cover the deficit.

In any case, if the NHL and BOG are willing to abandon the Phoenix market over $60 million, then it sort of blunts the argument of those who have claimed that the NHL would do far better financially by keeping teams in large southern US markets than by having them relocate to smaller Canadian markets.

 

[Whileee]

So did the CoG ever truly have the option in the BK auction to support Balsillie instead? I thought the NHL proved all 29 owners would block Balsillie from owning the team? How could the CoG have thrown their support behind Balsillie in the auction?

(Just trying to remember)

Other members will certainly know better than me. As I understand it, the COG was asked directly by the judge about which offer they supported, and I thought that was a relevant consideration.

 

[Nordskull]

In any case, if the NHL and BOG are willing to abandon the Phoenix market over $60 million, then it sort of blunts the argument of those who have claimed that the NHL would do far better financially by keeping teams in large southern US markets than by having them relocate to smaller Canadian markets.

What if the arena would be in Scottsdale instead of Glendale?

I don't agree entirely with you. Anaheim, SJ, Dallas, Nashville, they all works. OK, some have the flu, but they do works.

Getting the team to Glendale was a false start with a bad driver, and the 2008 financial crisis was the flat tire.

 

[RandR]

So anyone knows who is the Coyotes mystery second buyer?

The Globe & Mail ran another update on the Coyotes situation today (along with the Devils predicament) and they have an answer for you:

Back in Glendale, city manager Ed Beasley, who like Scruggs is on his way out the door, is singing a familiar song to the Arizona Republic. Yep, there’s yet another deal for the Coyotes in sight, this time with either a group led by former San Jose Sharks president Greg Jamison or the mystery second party that’s been touted by Beasley and Bettman for the last few months. Just don’t ask who it is.

If Toronto Maple Leafs’ fans think general manager Brian Burke is guilty of peddling the same worn-out line for far too long, he has nothing on the principals in the Coyotes mess.

Wondering about the fate of the Phoenix Coyotes another NHL rite of spring

 

[AllByDesign]

The NHL purchased the team to protect its own financial interests. They would never have gotten involved by purchasing the franchise if they had not been fending off Balsillie to protect their rights to select owners and control markets. It is obviously worth something to the NHL that Glendale supported their bid, even though it has turned out to be financially disastrous for Glendale.

I am not so sure that the NHL and its owners don't care about the PR. They didn't have much choice in Atlanta, but they do in Phoenix. They could break even just by applying the relocation fee from the Thrasher deal to cover the deficit.

In any case, if the NHL and BOG are willing to abandon the Phoenix market over $60 million, then it sort of blunts the argument of those who have claimed that the NHL would do far better financially by keeping teams in large southern US markets than by having them relocate to smaller Canadian markets.

I agree. I really think that if it ever comes down to the team relocating, proceeds would go to reimberse the 50 million to the city.

My point is directed to the anger directed at the NHL. I really don't feel it is warranted, regardless of Glendales efforts at the bankruptcy proceedings.

 

[Killion]

Brrrr... that's cold.

Ya, it surely is.... business as usual for the NHL. If they arent screwing over a municipality or fanbase somewhere, taking down unions, stealing food from the mouths of the widows & orphans of the games greats by denying them their pension benefits, blocking the sun from shining on their nefarious plots & triangulations, then their not doing their jobs properly.

 

[AllByDesign]

Ya, it surely is.... business as usual for the NHL. If they arent screwing over a municipality or fanbase somewhere, taking down unions, stealing food from the mouths of the widows & orphans of the games greats by denying them their pension benefits, blocking the sun from shining on their nefarious plots & triangulations, then their not doing their jobs properly.

Don't forget killing puppies.

 

[Scottrocks58*]

So did the CoG ever truly have the option in the BK auction to support Balsillie instead? I thought the NHL proved all 29 owners would block Balsillie from owning the team? How could the CoG have thrown their support behind Balsillie in the auction?

I've heard it said Judge Baum did tell the CoG the Balsillie bid was the better choice.

(Just trying to remember)

Yes. They could have informed the Judge that they would not object to Balsillie moving the team. Also they could have fought to insist that the original AMULA remain intact. Instead, they chose to go along with the NHL's position.

I recall Judge Baum questioning the City's attorney with an "Are you sure you want to do this?" question when they gave up their right to fight for the AMULA. I do not recall the Judge telling the City that Balsillie was the better choice..

As it were, Judge Baum decided the case on the issue of protection of the NHL's rights, so telling the City that Balsillie had a better position would have been at cross purposes for him.