Whether you like them or not, Goldwater IS providing a public service. I'm FAR from a right winger, but I wish we had the equivalent here in BC.
You do. You have the Fraser Institute. Not as active in the courtroom as GW, but similar goals and philosophies. We also have the Canadian Taxpayers Federation on a national level.
That's not the league's call. As part of the support league management gives to every one of its teams, it backs whatever deals they try to negotiate. COG and MH agreed to this deal, so the league backs it, however they can.
You are correct it isn't the leagues responsibility to be concerned with what is good for the taxpayers. I must state that Bettman's view on the deal and his opinion of the impact of those taxpayers is one-sided.
But, Bettman wants Winnipeg to have a team so should Glendale fail to come through, it will. It is just sad that he won't get any credit for it. We'll see how many people give credit where it is due when the time comes, but the behavior here, this attitude that because Bettman tries to help a currently existing franchise, it means he hates Canada or other BS, it doesn't bode well for that.
You might be surprised.
I think you're starting to get the point now. It appears once again I must remind people that membership in the NHL is not a god-given right, not for a city or any of the fans in said city. For the league's members, Winnipeg doesn't do squat. It's too small a market to significantly impact CBC deals, will do nothing but reduce US TV deals, its short term bump will raise costs for everyone else, and the fact it already failed once makes it a leery chance in the future should the CAD crash again and stands a very good chance of being a welfare recipient long before that point.
I believe a safe argument could be made that adding Winnipeg would have a similar impact to the CBC as an "Edmonton" or "Calgary" adds.
Now that I am through with all of that.
It's nice to see all of the new people who have decided to come to the party. Some of you may remember that once upon a time ago, I stated that at 9% I would be willing to spend my own money on "Coyote Bonds". After the offer memorandum was put forth I made a complete flip-flop on my initial statement. I will now share why with you.
In the press conference, Mr. Bettman asserted that if not for the GW interference the Bonds would have easily sold easily. I say "nay-nay". My flip flop was not based upon the threat of litigation. My flip-flop was solely based on the business plan in the outline of how the Bonds were to be serviced. The business plan is folly. I am not a big player investor, but with what I do invest in, I take an active role. Some choose to leave it up to their planner and hope for the best. I want to look at the prospectus before I commit. What this Bond offering is faced with is an immediate servicing shortfall. Why would I lend my money to a business plan that from the outset, shows that revenues will not be sufficient to repay the loan? The only way that Glendale shows that they can make good on their loan is by attaching tax revenues. I have a problem with this as well. Not for the tax payer, but for the integrity of the group charged with devloping their business plan. I'll give you an example.
Mr. Chin runs a successful Chinese take out restaraunt. He would like to open a Pizzaria to better take control of the "take-out food" market. Mr. Chin is looking to finance 2/3rds of this venture and is looking for $500,000 start up capital. I look at Mr. Chin's business plan, and his intent is to pay back the loan over a 10 year span with a 7% interest rate. His forecasts show that after costs he projects to be short about $1,000.00 each month after servicing the debt. Of course as the business grows, it shows a decreasing shortfall to break-even by the end of the term. To make it work he pledges revenue from his Chinese food restaraunt to cover the shortfalls.
I look at the numbers and think at first glance, well as long as he is pledging revenue I stand to receive my loan and interest back. Ater letting it all sink in I start to wonder... why is Mr. Chin getting into the Pizza Business? At the end of the day I don't invest in Mr. Chin. It is a bad investment for me, and a bad investment for Mr. Chin.
This is not designed to be akin to the Coyotes Parking in parallel, but a simplistic breakdown of the structure of the business plan. If the numbers are designed for failure, failure will follow. My instinct is that if GW wasn't involved here, Glendale would be hard pressed to sell these bonds. I know there are valid argument to the contrary, and I don't discount that. We should have a prospective from someone who invests and see if they would put their own cash into the deal. I know I wouldn't.
