Phoenix XXII: It's Now or Never

[NHLfan4life]

YA!

All you cynics can go home now, clearly the senility of a grocery store patron is the true indicator of support for the Coyotes in Arizona and supersedes all other opinions or facts shared on this board (like attendance or the past 3 years).

Did you catch her name? Perhaps her and Logan can combine to battle the Tea Partyers and GWI

You missed my point. The issue is very much public and not flying under the RADAR, at least in Glendale where it counts. For anyone who doesn't actually live here to believe differently is pure nonsense. People are talking about it, and other things concerning Glendale. I have only spoken to one person that had a negative opinion on it and his reasoning was purely self motivated (he admitted it up front). There is support for the Coyotes all over and it appears to be gaining momentum in a positive direction...for Arizona anyway.

 

[RAgIn]

You missed my point. The issue is very much public and not flying under the RADAR, at least in Glendale where it counts. For anyone who doesn't actually live here to believe differently is pure nonsense. People are talking about it, and other things concerning Glendale. I have only spoken to one person that had a negative opinion on it and his reasoning was purely self motivated (he admitted it up front). There is support for the Coyotes all over and it appears to be gaining momentum in a positive direction...for Arizona anyway.

Did you tell her that Glendale is giving a Chicago millionaire $ 197 million to own and operate the Coyotes?

 

[RAgIn]

http://www.superfans.ca/content/view/378/

From CJOB's Greg Mackling

It is my understanding (from sources close to the NHL BoG), that the group led by Chicago businessman, Matthew Hulsizer, and the afore mentioned City of Glendale, AZ, have until March 1st, 2011 to finalize the purchase agreement which has been an agreement in principle since December 14th, 2010.

It's a long shot, but perhaps Mackling is correct. For instance, the Kings have a deadline in place for March 1, 2011, in finding a solution towards relocation to (Anaheim, likely). I know this is the NBA, but both the NHL and NBA seasons are as in-sync as any other leagues. But also, keep in mind that the NHL has most certainly already given Glendale an extension.

It appears that March 1 might be newsworthy for two leagues.

Edit: However, I know their Constitutions are quite different. The March 1 deadline is quite amusing though.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/allstar2011/news/story?id=6140807

 

[Ciao]

Yes, I see the ominous signs of the GWI setting up the PR strategy to justify going after this deal. Some have suggested that the GWI won't challenge the deal because they will look like the "bad guys", in which case some strong and public opposition to the deal would help them in public relations. If opposition to the deal gains steam, as I think it might, then the GWI might see this as the impetus to challenge.

I would note that the GWI has been very much on the ball with the PR on this. They have put forward cogent public releases at key times, and have been quick to counter the PR salvos from the City of Glendale.

I have noted previously that I think the political dimension of this deal would emerge if the deal didn't close soon, and this might be the first signs of that.

I think Whileee has sized it up correctly. I would not be at all surprised to see Goldwater initiate legal action soon.

 

[Fugu]

Alright, so I guess MH can't complain he can't make money, since he got it all upfront.

The lease agreement was amended to remove the "out clause" for MH, was it not? I thought that was one of the tweaks in the last couple of weeks. I'm losing my grip on this story.

That fits perfect with the GWI's mission statement.

Probably best if someone from Arizona answers that one. They vary a bit from state-state in terms' of activism/import within the farther right reaches of the Republican Party if not complete independence from them. Az does indeed have a significant membership, one that is very well organized & vocal in comparison to many other states. I really have to wonder how Barry Goldwater himself might feel about "his" institute aligning itself with & or pandering to what can be & often is construed as being the radicalization of right wing ideogues', the Republican Party & government itself, from municipal to federal levels; and indeed the heirs to his estate did in fact threaten to withdraw the Goldwater name from the Institute for its stridently right wing'ish approach to things.

I think I'm old enough to remember Barry Goldwater and fiscally conservative Republicans, kind what the party was way back in the day.

I wouldn't compare Tea Party members to the old Republicans whatsoever. There is an area of overlap in interests, and fiscal conservancy may be the only point (and a constitutional point or two). Tea Party has it's own agenda that goes well beyond what Barry Goldwater espoused, at least that's the way I remember it.

 

[Killion]

Nobody takes them seriously because they've been infiltrated by crazies and people with an obvious Conservative agenda politically.

and beyond.... Creationists & survivalists, 2012'ers' & all the rest for sure, but also a pretty broad swath of regular people who are just plain upset, the whole whole kit n' kaboodle, and as they've shown far from being complacent or polite.

The issue is very much public and not flying under the RADAR, at least in Glendale where it counts. There is support for the Coyotes all over and it appears to be gaining momentum in a positive direction.

I hope so, and I hope the support starts showing up where it really counts; the box office. I also agree that the process is so far down the road that even if challenged, its a little late in the day, a Mosquito trying to feast on a Mummy, though why the COG/MH/NHL didnt slam the door completely shut & get this thing done between December 14th & the 31st is still a wonder to me, a flaw in execution that could still prove fatal.

 

[kdb209]

I wouldn't compare Tea Party members to the old Republicans whatsoever. There is an area of overlap in interests, and fiscal conservancy may be the only point (and a constitutional point or two). Tea Party has it's own agenda that goes well beyond what Barry Goldwater espoused, at least that's the way I remember it.

Of course, the Goldwater Institute also goes well beyond what Barry Goldwater espoused - to the point where Barry had considering yanking his affiliation and use of his name. Barry's widow Susan has been a very vocal critic of GWI.

Goldwater himself was looking to sever his ties with GWI before he had his stroke.

He had lent his name because he envisioned a non partisan academic think tank, not a partisan advocacy organization.

GWI has advocated positions, such as completely unfettered charter schools, that are in direct opposition to Barry Goldwater's public positions - he was a staunch supporter of public education.

 

[JetFan4Ever]

I think at the end of the day no matter how you identify yourself, people need to get a control on government spending. I am truly worried the US will spend itself in bankruptcy. Glendale is a good example of governments spending too much on the wrong types of things.

 

[davemac1313]

and beyond.... Creationists & survivalists, 2012'ers' & all the rest for sure, but also a pretty broad swath of regular people who are just plain upset, the whole whole kit n' kaboodle, and as they've shown far from being complacent or polite.

Where do us Relocationists fit in??

 

[Fugu]

Of course, the Goldwater Institute also goes well beyond what Barry Goldwater espoused - to the point where Barry had considering yanking his affiliation and use of his name. Barry's widow Susan has been a very vocal critic of GWI.

Goldwater himself was looking to sever his ties with GWI before he had his stroke.

He had lent his name because he envisioned a non partisan academic think tank, not a partisan advocacy organization.

GWI has advocated positions, such as completely unfettered charter schools, that are in direct opposition to Barry Goldwater's public positions - he was a staunch supporter of public education.

True, but if you think GWI is a step removed from Barry Goldwater, where on this spectrum do you place the Tea Partiers? The role of that government "should" have in people's lives seems like one discerning point, which seems to get beyond purely who pays for what.

 

[Killion]

The lease agreement was amended to remove the "out clause" for MH, was it not? I thought that was one of the tweaks in the last couple of weeks. I'm losing my grip on this story....I think I'm old enough to remember Barry Goldwater and fiscally conservative Republicans, kind of what the party was way back in the day.....I wouldn't compare Tea Party members to the old Republicans whatsoever. There is an area of overlap in interests, and fiscal conservancy may be the only point (and a constitutional point or two). Tea Party has it's own agenda that goes well beyond what Barry Goldwater espoused, at least that's the way I remember it.

The Lease Agreement was quite some time ago; the Arena Management Agreement not so much Fugu. If the COG is late or messes around with the annual payments in anyway it will invoke a shotgun clause that permits relocation of the team. So Beasley lied; he told the COG Council that the deal wouldnt cost the taxpayers a dime (which it could very well wind up doing) and he told them their wasnt an "out" clause.... And ya, Barry Goldwaters' heirs' are no longer happy with the Institute that bears his name as they often drink from the same cup as the Tea Party, a peculiar blend of leaves from..... (uh oh, better stop now me thinks).

 

[Killion]

Where do us Relocationists fit in??

Down Under, with your HAIRY friends; www.bigfooty.com

 

[AllByDesign]

The lease agreement was amended to remove the "out clause" for MH, was it not? .

They replaced the old "out" clause with a new one. Miss a payment and we skip town. Makes the American Express collections department seem like angels.

and beyond.... Creationists & survivalists, 2012'ers' & all the rest for sure, but also a pretty broad swath of regular people who are just plain upset, the whole whole kit n' kaboodle, and as they've shown far from being complacent or polite.

I won't argue the point that they may have crazies involved in their organization, but any group that can get Bristol Palin to the finals of Dancing with the Stars must have some pull somewhere.

 

[GSC2k2*]

However, they are referring to one week on the planet Mercury.

Did you tell her that Glendale is giving a Chicago millionaire $ 197 million to own and operate the Coyotes?

That is a pretty significant mischaracterization of the proposed transaction, so I doubt the poster would say that.

The lease agreement was amended to remove the "out clause" for MH, was it not? I thought that was one of the tweaks in the last couple of weeks. I'm losing my grip on this story.

No, there was no "out clause" to remove.

They replaced the old "out" clause with a new one. Miss a payment and we skip town. Makes the American Express collections department seem like angels.

I cannot fathom why anyone would characterize a default clause as an "out clause". Such a characterization would not fit within any reasonable understanding of that phrase. By the way, it is not "miss a payment and skip town", either - not by a long shot.

 

[OthmarAmmann]

YA!

All you cynics can go home now, clearly the senility of a grocery store patron is the true indicator of support for the Coyotes in Arizona and supersedes all other opinions or facts shared on this board (like attendance or the past 3 years).

Did you catch her name? Perhaps her and Logan can combine to battle the Tea Partyers and GWI

Maybe that could be the next Stan Lee thing after the NHL...

I have only spoken to one person that had a negative opinion on it and his reasoning was purely self motivated (he admitted it up front).

I'm curious to know what his motivation was.

 

[Fugu]

No, there was no "out clause" to remove.

I cannot fathom why anyone would characterize a default clause as an "out clause". Such a characterization would not fit within any reasonable understanding of that phrase. By the way, it is not "miss a payment and skip town", either - not by a long shot.

Because we're not lawyers who dissect the language down to a pulp designed to either clarify or obfuscate?


So if COG fails to make their payments on time, MH can move the team and face ZERO penalties, fees, commitments, etc., to stay and he doesn't have to give any of the money back either, right?


Couldn't you just have said that instead?

 

[Killion]

I cannot fathom why anyone would characterize a default clause as an "out clause".

How then would you characterize the clause in the Arena Management Contract that contemplates just such an eventuality?.

 

[crazycanuck900]

You missed my point. The issue is very much public and not flying under the RADAR, at least in Glendale where it counts. For anyone who doesn't actually live here to believe differently is pure nonsense. People are talking about it, and other things concerning Glendale. I have only spoken to one person that had a negative opinion on it and his reasoning was purely self motivated (he admitted it up front). There is support for the Coyotes all over and it appears to be gaining momentum in a positive direction...for Arizona anyway.

Maybe you could tell them to go to a game!

 

[GSC2k2*]

Because we're not lawyers who dissect the language down to a pulp designed to either clarify or obfuscate?


So if COG fails to make their payments on time, MH can move the team and face ZERO penalties, fees, commitments, etc., to stay and he doesn't have to give any of the money back either, right?


Couldn't you just have said that instead?

Obfuscate? You have a grossly incorrect view of what corporate lawyers do. One hundred and eighty degrees to the opposite, strangely enough. I am not sure where you would get your mistaken views.

In fact, suggesting that an ordinary default clause is an "out clause" within the commonly understood meaning of the term is obfuscation of a very high order. An out clause is a provision which permits a party to exit an agreement (whether with or without penalty) where a circumstance has arisen which is through no fault of the other party but has rendered the deal unworkable. For example, the provisions that Craig Leipold had for NASH related to hockey attendance would be an "out clause". Another example is a condition precedent of financing that one would see in the vast majority of real estate transactions and many M&A deals.

Calling a provision whereby a party can terminate an agreement because of a non-payment of amounts owing is not an "out clause".

How then would you characterize the clause in the Arena Management Contract that contemplates just such an eventuality?.

It is a default clause, same as every other contract. There are default rights in the event of a default by the team or arena manager as well.

Incidentally, as is the case with any sophisticated agreement, there are "cure rights" - thirty days after receipt of a notice of non-payment within which to cure the default by paying, for example.

 

[ps241]

Barry Goldwater was an impressive man that happened to be a politician. i was fortunate enough to read the book "conscience of a conservative" which was his story and it was hard to not like "the man" despite how you felt about his political beliefs

he was a fiscal conservative who believes primarily in liberty and freedom.....he viewed government with a sceptical eye and felt "too much government" or big government was inherently against what the founders had in mind and flew in the face of freedom and liberty. He strongly believed in the separation of church and state and wasn't above verbally putting any religious figures in their place who tried to bring religious values into politics. he was extremely hawkish and had a hatred and almost paranoia of "the red menace" or the then soviet Union as a state run country stood for everything he was against. he felt the way your dealt with Russia was from a position of strength and although he was painted effectively as a war monger that would lead america to nuclear disaster with some of the first great negative political attack adds ever done by LBJ. that led to Barry getting blown out in the 64 presidential election....however years later Dutch followed a similar path against Russia that proved effective

i first read the book because i always wondered why a guy that got creamed in a presidential election was so admired by his fellow conservatives??.....it turned out that Barry's principle's redefined the party and a young Ronald Reagan picked up the torch that Barry had lit and the rest is history

what i liked most about Barry was although he had very strong views and he fought tough political fights many of his political enemies were close friends....he never made it personal. he was extremely close with JFK and in fact before John's assassination Barry was talking to JFK about piloting his plane and the two of them would fly together from city to city and would get out together and have a town hall style presidential debates on the issues "conservative vs Liberal" and may the best man win....then they would hop into the plane and the two friends would fly to the next town to do it again.

recently i saw one of the "really old" gentleman from 60 minutes who is as liberal as they come doing a recap of his career and he was going through all the amazing people and stories he had covered and when he had to settle on his top person he said without hesitation "Barry Goldwater" he went on to say he absolutely disagreed with him politically but couldn't help but love the man....if i remember correctly the guy came pretty hard at Barry in the interview and when it was done Barry sent him a personal letter saying he enjoyed the debate and it was nice to meet him (type letter)....the guy was really impressed and they remained friends until Barry passed....kind of sums up how Barry rolled


Barry was absolutely devastated when his good friend and political foe JFK was killed......back when the book was written his son JFK junior did the forward in Barry's book

he was a one of a kind proud Arizonian and a stand up guy from what i read.....a breath of fresh air compared to the hate filled negative politics we get today in allot of countries

it is my best guess that although Barry didn't like taxes and big government he probably wouldn't be much of a fan of GWI

RIP BG

 

[Killion]

Calling a provision whereby a party can terminate an agreement because of a non-payment of amounts owing is not an "out clause".
It is a default clause, same as every other contract. There are default rights in the event of a default by the team or arena manager as well. Incidentally, as is the case with any sophisticated agreement, there are "cure rights" - thirty days after receipt of a notice of non-payment within which to cure the default by paying, for example.

Yes yes of course GSC, and it rather beggars belief to think that if something should go awry on either side that a "cure" would not be found & administered. I assume you have perused the Arena Management Contract, and would be interested in hearing your thoughts on its content & import for its been the topic of much debate here & elsewhere as you know. Should it have been put out & open for tender as some have suggested?. Are the annual payments, IYO, egregious or of "market value"?. Do you absolutely disagree with and repudiate the assertions by many that their are in fact provisions within the Agreement that do (perhaps cynically) indeed open the doors to a possible relocation?. Stuff like dat..... And only if ya'll feel so inclined...

 

[AllByDesign]

I cannot fathom why anyone would characterize a default clause as an "out clause". Such a characterization would not fit within any reasonable understanding of that phrase. By the way, it is not "miss a payment and skip town", either - not by a long shot.

You'll have to forgive my simplification... I almost feel like saying "commander Data, check your memory banks under the heading 'comedy'". I was using the scenario for a chuckle.

Yes there are distinct differences between an out clause and a default clause, but both can have similar remedies which is a termination of the deal. It is this like remedy which cause us lay folk to call the different definitions "splitting hairs". Us lay people are not correct, but it doesn't mean we don't grasp the ramifications of the results.

 

[Tommy Hawk]

So in a nutshell, and in a roundabout way, the Parking Rights will return to Ellman should a deal not close & the team be relo'd upon expiration of the interim lease. Thanks for the clarification. If hypothetically that were to happen and we apply logic and an ArenaMgmnt firms' hired by the COG, they in turn would again be able to offer parking revenues either directly by including the Right to Charge or indirectly through another, albeit much lower volume of bond offerings. By rote, if said ArenaMgmnt firm secure an AHL or Arena Football League Team, whatever that could be considered an anchor tenant, similar arrangements made in any number of ways as per business as usual. Crystal...

Now. The Arena Management Agreement. Ya'll had a look at that Doozy of late?....

Love the smilie!! I need to use it more often.....

The optimist in me says no, the cynic says' yes he can & likely will unless there's a dramatic turnaround in the economy & at the gate with both the franchise & non-hockey related bookings at the job. Really, he's just a conduit through which that $100M flows directly into the NHL's coffers. He wont even realize a minutes worth of interest on it, and then has to top up the tank with another $70M+ down, up-front. He does have the Arena Management Contract in-hand moving forward, however, that particular stop-loss portion of the dealeo' is problematical in terms of getting done without alteration, & though overly generous, wont negate the requirement for cash calls through 2011-12 & beyond.... And what of Glendale?. Real hire-wire act with its revenue projections pursuant to the parking & naming/advertising rights to the lots. If they fall short, and there bound to do so, the taxpayers will in fact wind up funding the debt servicing on the bonds with either cutbacks or losses in services & or the COG taking vacations from paying into municipal employee's pension funds. Could go Kaboom.

Now what happens if the impossible happens? Stadium is packed, 200 events a year, $25 per car parking making 3 times the estimate yet the yotes still lose money? Will MH cry "I need a piece of the parking"?

I cannot fathom why anyone would characterize a default clause as an "out clause". Such a characterization would not fit within any reasonable understanding of that phrase. By the way, it is not "miss a payment and skip town", either - not by a long shot.

Because if there is a default they can terminate (get out of) the remaining term of the contract with remediation as provided in the contract, hence out.

This me that the CoG is like Dave Matthew's bus driver and the sightseeing boat is the taxpayers.

 

[Jeffrey93]

I would not want to be in the room when someone tried to explain to you how Michael Jackson got paid any time a Beatles song was played.

If the Beatles songs are the parking lot....Michael Jackson (his estate) owns the parking lot. So he can charge for people to park in it/play the songs.

He OWNS them.

Who OWN da parking lot? Owwwwnnnnss, Owwwnnnssss.

If Moyes had the parking rights when he put the team into bankruptcy wouldn't those rights go back to the Owner to reach an agreement with somebody else to purchase those rights for a specific period of time??

 

[RR]

If the Beatles songs are the parking lot....Michael Jackson (his estate) owns the parking lot. So he can charge for people to park in it/play the songs.

He OWNS them.

Who OWN da parking lot? Owwwwnnnnss, Owwwnnnssss.

If Moyes had the parking rights when he put the team into bankruptcy wouldn't those rights go back to the Owner to reach an agreement with somebody else to purchase those rights for a specific period of time??

Actually, the NHL acquired those rights when it purchased the Team out of bankruptcy.

It appears to me that while Moyes did file bankruptcy, he possessed some assets of significant value he overlooked in his haste to go all-in with Rodier and Balsillie.