Phoenix XXXVII - The Heat is On

[Plub]

Where the league enjoys an unprecedented level of cooperation with public funding. LOL I'm sure if the "public" got to say it's piece, there wouldn't be nearly as much cooperation as there is with a city council that just, tosses the taxpayer money around like it's Monopoly money.

The fact that any amount of public outcry could impact the way elected officials spend the taxpayers money, is infuriating. I also can't imagine how GWI would fight so hard to block a bond purchase, because of the impact it could have on taxpayers, then turn around and NOT fight to protect 25M a year worth of tax payer money as it gets spent on this joke of an operation.

False. The people in Glendale that have voiced their opinion have almost unanimously supported the 25mill guarantee to cover losses at the end of the season. The public is in-fact supporting the City council. They aren't stupid, they understand what losing the team would mean to the city and more importantly the immediate area around the Job.

GWI's interest were never about sticking up for the taxpayers, I thought that was obvious by now.

Other than those falsities; I think we can all agree that this needs to end. It's ****en pathetic.

 

[Fugu]

This post seems to ignore the most basic fact of all: The NHL Owners had no intention of funding Phoenix Coyotes losses for the 2010-2011 season. The phrase "oh so close" is subjective. Whether or not you feel a non-Glendale sale was "oh so close" is not a matter of fact but rather a matter of opinion. However, now that we have additional information regarding the spring/summer of 2010, we can look back with more clarity. Here was my offering at the time:

03-03-2010, 04:49 PM #775 CasualFan posted

I think the NHL's intention will be governed by their options. I don't think you can close the door entirely on the league attempting to sign another temporary lease agreement with Glendale. However, from a business standpoint it would be among the least desirable options. Absent a last minute public funding approval, the Glendale market is untenable. Hard to imagine the NHL Owners wanted to lose another bundle of money next year.

I think it's reasonable to assume that the NHL knows what is possible in Hamilton after the events in this case. I also would not be surprised to learn that the league is already in possession of terms from AEG for how a Sprint Center lease would look.

The NHL's desire to move the Coyotes will continue to be governed by their options. The fact of the matter is that the NHL did have at least one contingency plan to relocate the franchise if the only other option was to maintain the Coyotes in Glendale and absorb the losses. (I speculated that they may have had an agreement in principal with Kansas City. As it turns out, they constructed one with Winnipeg.)

I find any post claiming that the NHL "would have sold to TSNE if they wanted to" to be dishonest in nature, either by ignorance or intent. The incentive to sell to TSNE was dictated by financial impact. When Glendale voted in favor of alleviating the burden of losses, the incentive to relocate the team was quelled. If one elects to interpret that as being "oh so close", that is a valid opinion. It is not an opinion that ignores any of the facts, especially when you consider that absent that public funding, the league had secured terms for a non-Glendale sale.

We also have no idea what ASG was willing to endure, say if the NHL had opted to sell Phoenix to TNSE instead of allowing the Thrashers to be sold. The NHL may have taken ownership of the Thrashers (perhaps) but with no arena and no city government to hold hostage.

 

[Fugu]

False. The people in Glendale that have voiced their opinion have almost unanimously supported the 25mill guarantee to cover losses at the end of the season. The public is in-fact supporting the City council. They aren't stupid, they understand what losing the team would mean to the city and more importantly the immediate area around the Job.

GWI's interest were never about sticking up for the taxpayers, I thought that was obvious by now.

Other than those falsities; I think we can all agree that this needs to end. It's ****en pathetic.

I admit not following this thread much past the COG approval of the funds.

Was there a referendum or some other metric that showed public support (honest question)?

 

[Killion]

There probably are tax benefits as well if the team is in the red. We really don't know where the money went, do we? We do know the city would never agree to just pickup the amount on a bottom line that is considered a loss.

The NHL formed 2 holding companies registered in Delaware for the Coyotes & another for Arena Management. I dont know what route the money took from the NHL to the BK Courts to purchase the team but no matter, its registered & run as a separate entity from the NHL, as is the AM division.

The league has a line of credit so they probably transferred $140M into the Coyotes LLC account along with deposits thereafter to pay for ongoing expences. The NHL has to provide the COG with an Invoice/Statement stating losses & subject to audit so no, they cant just "claim" losses, and of course no one just signs a blank cheque which is why its capped.

No idea what the tax benefits might be if any. The NHL itself is a not for profit yet the holding companies are distinct & separate entities. Perhaps one of the Lawyers or Tax Accountants here could opine on the technicalities if they feel so inclined.....

 

[Killion]

Was there a referendum or some other metric that showed public support (honest question)?

Nope. The op is relying upon anecdotal information, media & editorialists, bloggers, fans, politicians & pundits, chat boards & the voice of the person on the street.

 

[yotesreign]

Nope. The op is relying upon anecdotal information, media & editorialists, bloggers, fans, politicians & pundits, chat boards & the voice of the man on the street.

Well I won't speak for the op, but there's also the voice of the woman on the street and she hasn't said anything in opposition to this either.

 

[Plub]

I admit not following this thread much past the COG approval of the funds.

Was there a referendum or some other metric that showed public support (honest question)?

Negative. Sorry if I made it sound like there was a concrete vote done in booths, that wasn't my intention, although I made no attempt to make that clear in the original post.

Killion is mostly right. But what made me say that was the fact that the majority of the people showing up at the city council meetings were in favor of keeping the team here, and having the 25mil set aside for the NHL. If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they? If it was such a big deal to them, and they felt they weren't being treated fairly as taxpayers, surely they would have shown up in large numbers to get that point across.

 

[Killion]

Fixee',

 

[Killion]

If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they?

At a Tea Party eating Cupcakes.

 

[billy blaze]

Negative. Sorry if I made it sound like there was a concrete vote done in booths, that wasn't my intention, although I made no attempt to make that clear in the original post.

Killion is mostly right. But what made me say that was the fact that the majority of the people showing up at the city council meetings were in favor of keeping the team here, and having the 25mil set aside for the NHL. If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they? If it was such a big deal to them, and they felt they weren't being treated fairly as taxpayers, surely they would have shown up in large numbers to get that point across.

from my perspective the Glendale residents that showed up at council were not in favour by at least a 3 to 1 margin (at least the ones that addressed council.) The other attendees whose taxes do not go to support the Coyotes were overwhelming in their agreement to have their neighbours foot the bill.

 

[davemac1313]

Negative. Sorry if I made it sound like there was a concrete vote done in booths, that wasn't my intention, although I made no attempt to make that clear in the original post.

Killion is mostly right. But what made me say that was the fact that the majority of the people showing up at the city council meetings were in favor of keeping the team here, and having the 25mil set aside for the NHL. If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they? If it was such a big deal to them, and they felt they weren't being treated fairly as taxpayers, surely they would have shown up in large numbers to get that point across.

Not sure that I agree that the council representation is actually a clear representation of all constituents. The way the council is run, and its no different elsewhere, the decision was made regardless of what the public said. Most people only attend those types of things if they have a personal investment in it, or a crush on Scruggs.

When is the next general election? and will it be put to a referendum at that time? Should we expect the taxpayers to all buy Seasons Tickets this year to minimize losses? A non-scientific, "everyone says/knows" theory is simply not supportable.

Go to any coffee shop and listen to just about every table ***** about how the government (any government) is wasting their money, yet few of them go to council meetings. By not attending does not necessarily mean they support something. Usually overall majority displeasure is displayed at the voting booth.

 

[Dado]

If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they?

At the office writing checks to GWI instead of meaningkessky posturing at council meetings.

 

[AllByDesign]

ASG was about to refuse to cover anymore losses. What then?. Contraction?.

I dont believe the op is disputing the fact that the NHL had an early backup plan with TNSE, Thats common knowledge. But it was just that, an Insurance Policy with no promises made that it'd happen until every possible avenue had been exhausted in Glendale. The league had no other option in Atlanta, in Glendale they have a few. As the path from Arizona to Manitoba had been clear twice, last June & last month, had the league wanted to pull the trigger & do a deal they could have. The Thrasher sale saved the Coyotes, TNSE's Relo Fee if applied to the NHL's LOC iused to buy & operate the team could go a long way towards enabling a local sale.

The real dilly would have been if Glendale had not ponied up $25 mill again. The NHL now looks like they were going "All-In" a month ago with nothing more than an 8 of hearts as a high card. Had Glendale washed their hands of the Coyotes, what then? The NHL would have two teams that would require shuffling in short order. Either they had another True North up their sleeve or they would have had to just shut one team down.

Glendale city council are larger hero's than I ever realized.

EDIT: Seems Fugu postulated a similar line of thinking already.

 

[Dado]

Might explain why CoG is only being charged a portion of the losses.

 

[Killion]

Glendale city council are larger hero's than I ever realized.

Yep. In the "what if" category that wouldve been a cork popper. Big Bang. A rather close shave.....

 

[Killion]

Might explain why CoG is only being charged a portion of the losses.

Which are bound to be equal to though likely greater than this past seasons losses of app. $40M if this drags on through the summer.

 

[Dado]

So, technically, CoG is getting a deal!

 

[Killion]

So, technically, CoG is getting a deal!

They are. And of course, the money will never have to be paid because a deal is imminent.

 

[TheLegend]

First of all I'm happy that Winnipeg got a team. But after reading this, it just confirms in my mind that that the NHL threw Atlanta under the bus as a reward to TNSE for their patience and for helping them in Glendale.

Atlanta's owners threw the Thrashers under the bus.... the train.... and nearly every other transportation system they could think of.

The NHL had no choice.

 

[TheLegend]

I meant Atlanta the Franchise. But even considering ownership, you would have to think that even a dysfunctional ownership group would be preferable in the pecking order of problems to fix than a situation where the league is the owner of a zombie franchise.

But this dysfunctional ownership group wanted the hockey franchise out of their barn..... period. Had the NHL took over ownership of the team they would have not had an arena to play in.

 

[TheLegend]

Negative. Sorry if I made it sound like there was a concrete vote done in booths, that wasn't my intention, although I made no attempt to make that clear in the original post.

Killion is mostly right. But what made me say that was the fact that the majority of the people showing up at the city council meetings were in favor of keeping the team here, and having the 25mil set aside for the NHL. If there was a large group of people opposed to this, where were they? If it was such a big deal to them, and they felt they weren't being treated fairly as taxpayers, surely they would have shown up in large numbers to get that point across.

At a Tea Party eating Cupcakes.

Make that.... in a Tea Party meeting at Marie Callander's eating Cupcakes..... the "ooey gooey" kind.

 

[TheLegend]

They are. And of course, the money will never have to be paid because a deal is imminent.

 

[MAROONSRoad]

I read that too, including other readers' description of it being "oh so close".

It is kind of silly, really. The simple fact of the matter is this:

If the NHL wanted to sell the Phoenix Coyotes franchise to TNSE, it was perfectly able to do so, and would have done so. To talk about someone being "oh so close" to having a transaction that the NHL could have easily made happen at either the second half or end of last season or this season - IF it WANTED to - well, you have to ignore that basic fact.

Your comment is just silly, really silly. The NHL wanted to sell the team to TNSE only if they had to. And they would only have had to if the NHL was placed in the position of having to pick up the losses for keeping the Coyotes in PHX. The NHL was not prepared to do that. So the NHL had Winnipeg as a backup plan or plan B for the franchise. That is made absolutely clear.

The reason they did not sell the Coyotes to TNSE is because COG at the last moment agreed to cover $25MM of the losses. This happened two years in a row.

The only reason you are still challenging this story is because you insisted previously that TNSE was not as close to purchasing the Coyotes in Spring of 2010 as others had suggested. You were wrong about that. In fact, as Chipman makes clear he was in talks with the NHL about the Coyotes as far back as 2009 prior to the bankruptcy.

GHOST

 

[yotesreign]

The NHL wanted to sell the team to TNSE only if they had to. And they would only have had to if the NHL was placed in the position of having to pick up the losses for keeping the Coyotes in PHX. The NHL was not prepared to do that. So the NHL had Winnipeg as a backup plan or plan B for the franchise. That is made absolutely clear.

The reason they did not sell the Coyotes to TNSE is because COG at the last moment agreed to cover $25MM of the losses. This happened two years in a row.

GHOST

The above is reality. Thanks, Ghost.

 

[Whileee]

The above is reality. Thanks, Ghost.

Your comment is just silly, really silly. The NHL wanted to sell the team to TNSE only if they had to. And they would only have had to if the NHL was placed in the position of having to pick up the losses for keeping the Coyotes in PHX. The NHL was not prepared to do that. So the NHL had Winnipeg as a backup plan or plan B for the franchise. That is made absolutely clear.

The reason they did not sell the Coyotes to TNSE is because COG at the last moment agreed to cover $25MM of the losses. This happened two years in a row.

The only reason you are still challenging this story is because you insisted previously that TNSE was not as close to purchasing the Coyotes in Spring of 2010 as others had suggested. You were wrong about that. In fact, as Chipman makes clear he was in talks with the NHL about the Coyotes as far back as 2009 prior to the bankruptcy.

GHOST

Yes, the suggestion that the NHL was not serious or "close" to selling the Coyotes to the TNSE is contradicted by Chipman's own statements. Moreover, the oft-repeated meme that the NHL would never allow a team in Winnipeg has been soundly refuted since they were willing to have either of two of their largest Southern markets relocated to Winnipeg, with Glendale preserving the Coyotes for the Phoenix market with their largesse. I think the events of the past few weeks and the public comments by Chipman certainly make it clear that the machinations in Glendale probably delayed the negotiations between TNSE and ASG for the Atlanta franchise.