Jesus Christ Horburn
Registered User
- Aug 22, 2008
- 13,942
- 1
This has also perplexed the GWI. They themselves are trying to connect the dots to see if this is constitutional or not. Brighter minds, like Casual Fan, seem to believe that the parking rights scheme is constructed well enough to stand challenge.
Possibly but they didn't specify WHICH Friday.Weren't they supposed to start selling them on Friday?
Section 3.3 is where the meat of our discussion is.
Possibly but they didn't specify WHICH Friday.
yeah seriously....i couldnt sleep at all last night in anticipation of bond day....like ed grimley on christmas eve....
however, if we back the truck up for a moment here, its the "assumption" that I made (along with many others) that the Parking Rights were included in the AMULA with Moyes' that was extended under an Interim Agreement with the NHL. Not some separate agreement & file altogether. It puts' a whole new spin on things.
Absolutely ABD. I dont discount CF's, GSC's or anyone elses' opinion that its' doable & believe it to be so myself as you know & I believe agree, however, if we back the truck up for a moment here, its the "assumption" that I made (along with many others) that the Parking Rights were included in the AMULA with Moyes' that was extended under an Interim Agreement with the NHL. Not some separate agreement & file altogether. It puts' a whole new spin on things.
And as I read it, the assignment of the various rights applies explicitly "during the Agreement Term". Is that how you read articles under Section 3.3?
Of course. What the....?
Put another way, if the City of Glendale has to buy these perpetual rights back, when did they sell them in the first place, and to whom?
I'm so tired of this. It's up there with the Black Eyed Peas Superbowl performance.
Sooooooooooo, is Glendale going to sell the Bonds or what?
I call your pair of AMULA's and raise you a development agreement (which I have, but cannot upload due to size) and, the prize (and solution of much of this) the Easement agreement:
I call your pair of AMULA's and raise you a development agreement (which I have, but cannot upload due to size) and, the prize (and solution of much of this) the Easement agreement:
Glad I'm back, boys and girls??
The NHL didn't "purchase" or assume the remaining years of the original 30 year AMULA. The new owner [MH] would be doing so.
The parking rights only have that monetization value over a long term AMULA.
I call your pair of AMULA's and raise you a development agreement (which I have, but cannot upload due to size) and, the prize (and solution of much of this) the Easement agreement:
Seems like you're the one enjoying it most.
@Everyone else. Isn't this a point that GWI said they were exploring--- who owns the parking rights and why COG would need to purchase them from MH.
That does imply that somebody, somewhere (Moyes & Elman) actually paid for them, whether that was money or some other element in their agreement with Glendale.
It cannot be that hard to find by simply following the money trail. One of Moyes LLC's was the Arena Manager (we have the agreement in that massive collection of files from the trials)-- actually was something like <Moyes ranch something or other> Arena Mgt LLC.
And as I read it, the assignment of the various rights applies explicitly "during the Agreement Term". Is that how you read articles under Section 3.3?
Section 3.3 is where the meat of our discussion is.
I call your pair of AMULA's and raise you a development agreement (which I have, but cannot upload due to size) and, the prize (and solution of much of this) the Easement agreement:
Seems like you're the one enjoying it most.
@Everyone else. Isn't this a point that GWI said they were exploring--- who owns the parking rights and why COG would need to purchase them from MH.
That does imply that somebody, somewhere (Moyes & Elman) actually paid for them, whether that was money or some other element in their agreement with Glendale.
It cannot be that hard to find by simply following the money trail. One of Moyes LLC's was the Arena Manager (we have the agreement in that massive collection of files from the trials)-- actually was something like <Moyes ranch something or other> Arena Mgt LLC.
Methinks quite a few people will see this as a decent hand. Right on par with "$100 million for parking rights for next 3 decades is sound business decision" or "TBD on where we find $97 million for 5.5 years of Arena Management fees."Anyone holding "City owned the Parking Rights" or "This is not equitable consideration" should fold.
Dewey Ranch.
Goldwater is on a fools errand if they choose to pursue the parking rights conveyance and payment.
I am not arguing that Moyes did not have the parking rights under these agreements. My contention is that these agreements are all null and void because of the BK and only extended for short periods of time to facilitate the sale of the Coyotes. The extensions end when the new lease is signed; therefore, if you want the parking rights you do not include them in the new lease.
Moyes is an utter moron for not selling the gold he owned in those rights to COG.
I am not arguing that Moyes did not have the parking rights under these agreements. My contention is that these agreements are all null and void because of the BK and only extended for short periods of time to facilitate the sale of the Coyotes. The extensions end when the new lease is signed; therefore, if you want the parking rights you do not include them in the new lease.
??????
What did I leave out?
Who "owns" the rights? Who is allowed to charge for parking RIGHT now? MH has to acquire the right from somebody, and that somebody had to pay someone along the way. These rights didn't just sprout out of nowhere.
Seemingly the NHL, who acquired the rights through the BK along with the team if were to understand the notion that its' a completely separate issue, just part of the detritus they picked up when Moyes went down, and worth a sizeable chunk of change over & above the team itself & the payments dished out to the creditors. How is it possible that the COG wasnt paying attention to this and allowed it to happen when they themselves were claiming close to a half a billion in losses if the team were to amscray?. Secondly, if it is correct, and the NHL does indeed own these rights for 30yrs or in perpetuity, why the charade of concealing this in a lead assumption made by many that these rights are controlled by Glendale but invested in the Lease & or Arena Mgmnt agrmnts; assigned, then purchased back from the prospective new owner of team/mgr of the arena?. I mean really, its all slight of hand & wont affect the outcome one way or another should a deal be completed, however, if its not, what then?.
Moyes is an utter moron for not selling the gold he owned in those rights to COG.