The Ongoing Coyotes Sale Thread

[troutman]

Glendale's fight for Coyotes turns 2
Mission to keep hockey team has cost the city millions
http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...t-turns-2.html

Since the custody battle began, Glendale had spent more than $4 million for attorneys and consultants. And, if the second NHL pledge is approved this week, the city's tab to keep talking will total $50 million.

With Tuesday's expected commitment of cash from the city, they'll have another year to do it.

Glendale may pay NHL for more time to find Phoenix Coyotes buyer
http://www.azcentral.com/community/g...ying-time.html

[troutman]

Glendale votes on Tuesday to cover Coyote team's losses
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/spe...121421224.html

One way or another — this will be over on Tuesday night.

Lieberman, however, told the Globe and Mail he doesn’t think the team will sell to Matthew Hulsizer.

"We do not have a signed deal with Hulsizer — and there is some discussion as to whether we will ever get one or not get one. I don’t personally want to give him $110 million," said Lieberman. "In my mind, this (proposal) will give us a year to find somebody else who may be willing to buy it and come up with much more money. Real money — instead of city money."


[I don't see any way that COG does not support the resolution]

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by troutman

Glendale votes on Tuesday to cover Coyote team's losses
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/spe...121421224.html

One way or another — this will be over on Tuesday night.

Or, over one way, delayed for another season the other way.

[Resolute 14]

Interesting that GWI has been silent on the agreements to cover losses...

[troutman]

^^^^^

GLENDALE LOOKING TO RENEW CONTRACT TO KEEP COYOTES
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=364902

The Goldwater Institute says it has to identify the source of the $25 million commitment by Glendale before it can determine whether to sue the city over this proposal.

Lieberman did not sound optimistic that a deal with Hulsizer can be worked out.
"I don't think we can finance Hulsizer. We voted on this on Dec. 14th, this is five months later," said Lieberman. "I don't think the bonding companies want this deal. I have not been able to dig up financial records on Hulsizer, try to find them."

However, he did bring up a familair name when it comes to prospective buyers for NHL franchises.

"I would be personally interested in seeing if we could do a deal with (Research in Motion president Jim) Balsillie," added Lieberman. "I think the best thing we could do is to get him to buy it and keep it here for 10 years and then I don't give a damn what he does with it."

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by troutman

Glendale votes on Tuesday to cover Coyote team's losses
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/spe...121421224.html

One way or another — this will be over on Tuesday night.

Lieberman, however, told the Globe and Mail he doesn’t think the team will sell to Matthew Hulsizer.

"We do not have a signed deal with Hulsizer — and there is some discussion as to whether we will ever get one or not get one. I don’t personally want to give him $110 million," said Lieberman. "In my mind, this (proposal) will give us a year to find somebody else who may be willing to buy it and come up with much more money. Real money — instead of city money."


[I don't see any way that COG does not support the resolution]

In a roundabout way, with great irony, this is pretty much exactly what the Province of Manitoba and city of Winnipeg were doing in the mid-90's in trying to keep the team in place at the time.

Almost the same dollar amount too.

At least Glendale actually has a reason for the effort, to keep cash flows intact for servicing a long-term arena debt. You may not agree with the wisdom of that but the reason exists in fact.

Manitoba had no reason beyond esthetics and some theoretical loss of economic benefits which are questionable when it comes to sports teams in any location.

In Phoenix, uncertainty as to location/ownership will mean it will be very difficult to have businesses commit to sponsorship dollars and for potential season ticket holders to invest emotionally in the team. That won't be aided by pushing the maximum pressure point for negotiations out to some other vague date in the future.

Ideally, for the reason cited above, they'd want to be wrapping this up by mid-summer. Most corporations are making next year sponsorship strategy decisions around that time.

The dynamics of this are always very interesting and, from a purely selfish point of view, I'm secretly glad it continues to linger. There's no end of amusement with it.

Cowperson

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by troutman

^^^^^

GLENDALE LOOKING TO RENEW CONTRACT TO KEEP COYOTES
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=364902

The Goldwater Institute says it has to identify the source of the $25 million commitment by Glendale before it can determine whether to sue the city over this proposal.

Lieberman did not sound optimistic that a deal with Hulsizer can be worked out.
"I don't think we can finance Hulsizer. We voted on this on Dec. 14th, this is five months later," said Lieberman. "I don't think the bonding companies want this deal. I have not been able to dig up financial records on Hulsizer, try to find them."

However, he did bring up a familair name when it comes to prospective buyers for NHL franchises.

"I would be personally interested in seeing if we could do a deal with (Research in Motion president Jim) Balsillie," added Lieberman. "I think the best thing we could do is to get him to buy it and keep it here for 10 years and then I don't give a damn what he does with it."

Get ready to get sued Glendale. We all know where that money will be coming from.

[Muta]

Not looking good for Phoenix right about now. And, I don't think Balsillie would have a keen interest in keeping 'his' team in that market for atleast ten years.

[Resolute 14]

Lieberman can talk about Balsillie all he wants. That ship has very likely sailed from the NHL's perspective, and with good reason.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Lieberman can talk about Balsillie all he wants. That ship has very likely sailed from the NHL's perspective, and with good reason.

I can't entirely agree.

Yes, Balsillie tried to buy the Coyotes out of bankruptcy in an attempt to circumvent the league's own method of picking and approving owners. He hasn't particularly played by the rules and that's a no-no.

But this is a guy who wants a team so damn badly that he'll do nearly anything for it. And he's got the cash. The NHL decided to forego an extra $100 million by not selling to Balsillie. The guy has the money (and it's his own) and is willing to spend it. This guy would be a great owner. Hulsizer, by comparison, is a loser who wants the CoG to basically buy the team for him and won't just put up his own money (or can't?).

[Resolute 14]

Balsillie would actually be a terrible owner.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see him operating a team in Hamilton, as the entertainment value would be off the chart. But this is a guy who has proven he does not play well with others, and he wants into a league where the existing owners all agree that the league (Bettman and Daly) speak for the group. No exceptions. Balsillie won't play along. He will march to the beat of his own drummer, and that will rile up the other owners.

What you or I personally desire is very unlikely to be what the owners do. And based on the Nashville and Phoenix situations, I very much doubt the BoG wants a damn thing to do with Balsillie.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I can't entirely agree.

Yes, Balsillie tried to buy the Coyotes out of bankruptcy in an attempt to circumvent the league's own method of picking and approving owners. He hasn't particularly played by the rules and that's a no-no.

But this is a guy who wants a team so damn badly that he'll do nearly anything for it. And he's got the cash. The NHL decided to forego an extra $100 million by not selling to Balsillie. The guy has the money (and it's his own) and is willing to spend it. This guy would be a great owner. Hulsizer, by comparison, is a loser who wants the CoG to basically buy the team for him and won't just put up his own money (or can't?).

Hulsizer isn't a loser, he's just not stupid enough to think hockey is likely to work in Phoenix.

What he is asking for is perfectly sensible, he wants 5 or 6 years of free ownership to see if he can turn the yotes into a profitable team. if not (which is the most likely scenario to him judging by his level of commitment) he will walk away with little or no loss to himself.

[Northendzone]

saying he'd be a terrible owner might be a bit of a stretch

at the end of the day the BoG has 30 separate interests - however, when they speak to the tsn boys they all need to sing the same song......maybe jimmy b might be a good owner because he might force those guys to see things a different way......

if the nhl did go back to him, i wonder what he would be prepared to offer......

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

What he is asking for is perfectly sensible, he wants 5 or 6 years of free ownership to see if he can turn the yotes into a profitable team.

Sensible for whom? That's like wanting to live in a house for 5 or 6 years before getting a mortgage to see if property value goes up...

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Sensible for whom? That's like wanting to live in a house for 5 or 6 years before getting a mortgage to see if property value goes up...

Given that there are no other offers, clearly he is being very sensible...

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

What he is asking for is perfectly sensible...

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

... he wants 5 or 6 years of free ownership to see if he can turn the yotes into a profitable team.

I'd like to see ANY industry that would consider this a 'perfectly sensible' arrangement.



Hell, even the Slap Chop only came with a 30 day money-back guarantee and that piece of crap wasn't even $30.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Sensible for whom? That's like wanting to live in a house for 5 or 6 years before getting a mortgage to see if property value goes up...

Sensible for him of course, and yes, if you could live in a house for a few years to see whether the value went up wouldn't you?

I never said it was a good deal for the Glendale taxpayer, they will get bent over and rogered senseless like a catholic choirboy if this deal goes through.

The team is utterly worthless, in any other industry it would declare chapter 11 and sell off its assetts, only in the inane world of pro sports and public finance would anyone think keeping the franchise in this location makes sense, but once you have decided you want to keep a team in a location it cannot make money in, but in fact loses vast sums of money, at that point you have to pay someone to take the pig on.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Here's what they're voting on tomorrow:

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0509draft.pdf

This agreement between Glendale and the NHL can be renewed for each of the next TEN years. The amount ($25 million for 2011-12) is a negotiable item at the end of each season.

[Ps241]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

Here's what they're voting on tomorrow:

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0509draft.pdf

This agreement between Glendale and the NHL can be renewed for each of the next TEN years. The amount ($25 million for 2011-12) is a negotiable item at the end of each season.

History will show Monday was a big day for Winnipeg hockey fans......also a day this story became less relevant to us.....I was around in 1995 when the Jets left

Looking forward to seeing your team next fall flames fans

[MacGruber]

if its rejected, winnipeg gets the coyotes
if approved winnipeg gets the thrashers.

thank god this mess is almost over and this thread can die.