The Ongoing Coyotes Sale Thread

[browna]

Originally Posted by PegCityFlamesFan

Bettman is on TSN radio right now, I'll post some info after. I can't stand listening to this weasel.

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

Most interesting thing he said in this interview is that he'd consider keeping the team in Glendale for another year if the City wanted to pick up another year of losses.

Clearly the first quote is the coles notes version (for Jets zealots) of SCC's details.

[PegCityFlamesFan]

Actually I was listening to him speak as I was logged in. Was the second interview I heard today from him and I can't stand his smug rhetoric, was like listening to the same BS from December where a deal is being made, etc... Nothing new came from it, although I was impressed with TSN's questions.

Best answer was explaining why the Jets left in the first place, hopefully cleared up the notion that "Bettman hates Canada", how Edmonton was saved by the NHL giving Edmonton time to put investors together, etc..

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

There is no good deal for them, you're right. There's Bad and then there is Worst.

What would you take? You're not getting the Coyotes my friend.

You are so damned delusional, it's unbelievable. The Coyotes are not staying in Glendale.

[Northendzone]

given that glendale already has some skin in the game, perhpas underwriting the losses for another year would provide them time to go find a deal with someone - although presumably by now anyone who might be interested has already laughed and said no way........

[Scrollbar]

if the league holds on to the coyotes one more season and the city agrees to pay for those losses it will make the league look so freakin bad.

i mean, that will likely result in an announcement next day that the thrashers are movin to winnipeg but... i want to hedge my bets, as many jets fans do

[Bluzman]

Originally Posted by Scrollbar

if the league holds on to the coyotes one more season and the city agrees to pay for those losses it will make the league look so freakin bad.

i mean, that will likely result in an announcement next day that the thrashers are movin to winnipeg but... i want to hedge my bets, as many jets fans do

The league already looks really bad and I'm not sure if they have much more to lose anymore. It is a clown show right now.

[PegCityFlamesFan]

Without those free White Out shirts tonight, makes a big difference.

[Sluggo]

Bettman is probably scrambling to keep that team in Phoenix for another year... First a TV deal to placate the angry owners, a last ditch effort to extend the deadline for another year and probably a stealth move of another franchise to Winnipeg -so they wont be called the Jets- so he can save the shred of face he believes he still has.

[calgaryred]

Originally Posted by Sluggo

Bettman is probably scrambling to keep that team in Phoenix for another year... First a TV deal to placate the angry owners, a last ditch effort to extend the deadline for another year and probably a stealth move of another franchise to Winnipeg -so they wont be called the Jets- so he can save the shred of face he believes he still has.

NHL owns the name Jets not the Yotes franchise, regardless if the team that transfers to Winnipeg comes from Phoenix or Atlanta, the Jets name isn't an issue

[Sluggo]

I still think the NHL can come out with some 'hockey play' esque excuse that the Phoenix organization has some sort of historical right to that name like with Dallas and Minnesota albeit in that case there is a few more added possibly intentional reasons.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Sluggo

I still think the NHL can come out with some 'hockey play' esque excuse that the Phoenix organization has some sort of historical right to that name like with Dallas and Minnesota albeit in that case there is a few more added possibly intentional reasons.

I'm not sure I follow. The NHL could come up with an excuse to "give" the Jets name to the Phoenix organization?

If that's what you mean, why would they do that?

[calgaryred]

Originally Posted by Sluggo

I still think the NHL can come out with some 'hockey play' esque excuse that the Phoenix organization has some sort of historical right to that name like with Dallas and Minnesota albeit in that case there is a few more added possibly intentional reasons.

No, they wouldn't Minnesota are not called the Stars, because the franchise is still called the Stars.. Just like Atlanta couldn't call themselves the Flames because the franchise still is called that. If anything its smart for Winnipeg to use the Jets name it's still marketed by the NHL, and Winnipeg fans see their team as the Jets. As a pro team it's been around since 1972

Right now the question is do they come back as the Manitoba Jets or Winnipeg Jets?

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Glendale is alleging that Goldwater is engaging in Tortious Interference and therefore, yes, controlling the sale of the bonds.

In fact, the bonds had a favourable, in-the-market rating from S&P and an ordinary interest rate when first announced, suggesting they were priced in context with the market.

Glendale contacted investment firms directly and indicated they would be suing. It is only their allegation, never proven, that the deal is illegal.

No competent money manager looking after OPM - Other People's Money - is going to get involved at that point. There are just too many other things to be doing with money, most not involving lawsuits, to bother.

In other words, no one is avoiding the deal because of credit risk, too low an interest rate, worries about revenue streams, thinking Phoenix is a sucky NHL market, etc.

They're simply prudently going about their business elsewhere because someone told them a lawsuit would come.

Goldwater is definitely controlling the sale of the bonds.

Cowperson

or people didn't do their due diligence. A city bond sale for a 100 million to pay Hulsizer to buy back parking rights that the city currently owns?

Even the Yankees, who have a similar deal with NYC, do not generate enough parking revenue for that to be a success investment for the city.

What's backing the bond sale? the revenues from parking at the stadium? Is the City going to guarantee the return on the bonds?

its a silly bond sale, and anyone looking at it carefully would have walked away, Goldwater or not.

[dissentowner]

RIP Phoenix Coyotes.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

I believe they did.. in the event the sale went forward

This is the part I don't understand, the GI has a right to sue, any citizen does in order to enforce the law.
Only one party is private in the deal, and both the city and the GI represent the taxpayers, so how is it interference?
I mean I understand it does interfere with the sale, but it is a perfectly legal lawsuit.

This strikes me as being in the same ballpark as a group of shareholders suing the board of a company in a takeover battle.

[Jordan!]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

both the city and the GI represent the taxpayers,

To represent tax payers you need to be elected.. GWI has no support. They're getting free PR here.



We in Phoenix will have the last laugh

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

To represent tax payers you need to be elected.. GWI has no support. They're getting free PR here.



We in Phoenix will have the last laugh

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Sluggo

Bettman is probably scrambling to keep that team in Phoenix for another year... First a TV deal to placate the angry owners, a last ditch effort to extend the deadline for another year and probably a stealth move of another franchise to Winnipeg -so they wont be called the Jets- so he can save the shred of face he believes he still has.

Bettman just won a $2 billion TV deal, the largest deal in NHL history, and has the city of Glendale covering the Coyotes' losses. I assure you that the owners aren't remotely angry.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Bettman just won a $2 billion TV deal, the largest deal in NHL history, and has the city of Glendale covering the Coyotes' losses. I assure you that the owners aren't remotely angry.

Covering up to $25M of their losses, which supposedly isn't enough.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

This is the part I don't understand, the GI has a right to sue, any citizen does in order to enforce the law.
Only one party is private in the deal, and both the city and the GI represent the taxpayers, so how is it interference?
I mean I understand it does interfere with the sale, but it is a perfectly legal lawsuit.

This strikes me as being in the same ballpark as a group of shareholders suing the board of a company in a takeover battle.

Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

And a lawyer specializing in this:

http://www.businesslawyeraustintx.co...erference.aspx

This deal started off with a good rating from Standard & Poors and a normal, in-the-market interest rate and by all accounts, fairly normal interest from potential investors.

Goldwater sent letters to investment houses and certain investors telling them they would be suing to prevent the deal.

Any prudent manager of money would walk away from such a scenario, not because it was a crappy deal, but because of the threat of litigation. There's just too many other options to look at and you just don't have to get involved.

What Goldwater did is different than stepping up and saying the deal is lousy and people should avoid it. They did actively interfere in business relationships that would have likely occurred if they hadn't threatened a lawsuit.

It is only Goldwater's opinion the Coyotes deal is illegal. That doesn't make it fact.

Goldwater can say they represent taxpayers but, as a private group, there is no legitimacy to that.

If the deal collapses, the lawsuits will be enormous.

Cowperson