General Ongoing Coyotes saga thread

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Well when the NHL is asking for handouts from taxpayers to build new arenas, I'm interested in what they do with their money.

When has the NHL done that?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by valo403

In the entertainment aspect sure, but what do you care about their financial choices? If they want to lose money in Phoenix then so be it.

Because we want our franchises and league to be strong.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by troutman

Because we want our franchises and league to be strong.

As does the NHL, they aren't in the business of throwing money away for the sake of it, they're in the business of running a multi-billion dollar entity. Question the wisdom if you must, but I'm going to side with the people who not only have a great deal of business acumen, but also have access to all of the relevant information.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by valo403

When has the NHL done that?

Edmonton, Pittsburgh etc. I'd say very few American arenas are built without government financing.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by valo403

As does the NHL, they aren't in the business of throwing money away for the sake of it, they're in the business of running a multi-billion dollar entity. Question the wisdom if you must, but I'm going to side with the people who not only have a great deal of business acumen, but also have access to all of the relevant information.

This is a good point, but it does not mean we should not be interested, and trust that they always make good decisions.

There is something about this market (unlike Atlanta) that is very important to the NHL.

I imagine tickets "distributed" will be less than 10,000 again tonight vs NAS.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by valo403

As does the NHL, they aren't in the business of throwing money away for the sake of it, they're in the business of running a multi-billion dollar entity. Question the wisdom if you must, but I'm going to side with the people who not only have a great deal of business acumen, but also have access to all of the relevant information.

What sort of super secret relevant information do they have that renders irrelevant a minuscule fanbase and 15 years of losses? Market potential means nothing when no one in the market cares about your product.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Edmonton, Pittsburgh etc. I'd say very few American arenas are built without government financing.

So franchises asking for financing, that's different than the league asking.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by nik-

What sort of super secret relevant information do that have that renders irrelevant a minuscule fanbase and 15 years of losses? Market potential means nothing when no one in the market cares about your product.

How about the presence of an alternative market and the expansion fees that the league could expect from other markets?

Everyone tosses around other cities as if there are concrete offers from people to own a team in other markets, I'd love to see some support for that. Additionally, even if there's a concrete offer from say Quebec, why move a team there if you can take in a massive expansion fee instead? People also forget that the NHL has been on the hook for very little financially over the past few years in Phoenix, there was no reason to make a rash decision.

[nik-]

There are too many unhealthy teams to expand. They need to move, they're greedy, but not stupid.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by troutman

This is a good point, but it does not mean we should not be interested, and trust that they always make good decisions.

There is something about this market (unlike Atlanta) that is very important to the NHL.

I imagine tickets "distributed" will be less than 10,000 again tonight vs NAS.

I really can't believe how many times this has had to be restated, but the difference between the two markets is the fact that there has always been a group interested in buying and operating the team in Phoenix. The simple truth is, if there was anyone seriously interested in owning a hockey team in Atlanta two summers ago, there would be no Winnipeg Jets today.

That being said, I think we all know that lacking a sweetheart lease deal, the interest in owning a team in Phoenix will dry right up, so Jamison is probably that market's last gasp. Especially since the situation for the league will also change as it has cost the NHL very little to operate the team in Phoenix the last couple seasons for the same reason - sweetheart terms from the city. But that is going away.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by nik-

There are too many unhealthy teams to expand. They need to move, they're greedy, but not stupid.

Expansion bubbles have been floated since before the American economic meltdown, and the league's proposed realignment may as well have put "FUTURE EXPANSION TEAMS HERE" in big neon letters. The NHL is very likely to be a 32 team league. Probably likely about the time Seattle's new arena opens up, assuming there is an ownership group for the market.

[jroc]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

the difference between the two markets is the fact that there has always been a group interested in buying and operating the team in Phoenix.

Interest is nice, but how long has the NHL owned the Coyotes? like 3 years?

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I really can't believe how many times this has had to be restated, but the difference between the two markets is the fact that there has always been a group interested in buying and operating the team in Phoenix. The simple truth is, if there was anyone seriously interested in owning a hockey team in Atlanta two summers ago, there would be no Winnipeg Jets today.

That being said, I think we all know that lacking a sweetheart lease deal, the interest in owning a team in Phoenix will dry right up, so Jamison is probably that market's last gasp. Especially since the situation for the league will also change as it has cost the NHL very little to operate the team in Phoenix the last couple seasons for the same reason - sweetheart terms from the city. But that is going away.

Glendale gave the NHL $25 M for two years, meanwhile the Coyotes lost $36 M last season. They probably lost more the year before because of less playoff revenue. So that's at least $20 M the NHL has lost plus probably another $20 M in this shortened season since Glendale isn't giving away another $25 M this year. That's $40 M the NHL has lost so I wouldn't say it cost the NHL very little. So far the NHL has invested $180 M to $200 M on a franchise valued at a lot less, unless it's moved.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...time-in-desert

[Resolute 14]

1. Bleacher Report is a joke. Nobody who wants to be taken seriously would ever use it as a source.

2. I am well aware of what the overall losses are. Which, of course, is why I said 'relatively little'. The NHL is going to make back those losses via sale of the team and the expansion fees it will collect from the markets it has worked into a frenzy.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by jroc

Interest is nice, but how long has the NHL owned the Coyotes? like 3 years?

And the league was quietly trying to find help for Atlanta for just as long, with no real interest showing up. Jamison's bid seems more and more ridiculous with each passing day, but it far exceeds anything that was dug up in Atlanta.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

1. Bleacher Report is a joke. Nobody who wants to be taken seriously would ever use it as a source.

2. I am well aware of what the overall losses are. Which, of course, is why I said 'relatively little'. The NHL is going to make back those losses via sale of the team and the expansion fees it will collect from the markets it has worked into a frenzy.

1. Do you think the Bleacher Report is lying? They give a link for the reported losses.

2. I don't see Jamison paying $180 + M for the team. Last I heard he's trying to get the NHL to finance the deal.
Expansion fees have nothing to do with this deal.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...financing.html

[troutman]

8,581 tickets distributed vs NAS

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

1. Do you think the Bleacher Report is lying? They give a link for the reported losses.

2. I don't see Jamison paying $180 + M for the team. Last I heard he's trying to get the NHL to finance the deal.
Expansion fees have nothing to do with this deal.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...financing.html

What? Expansion fees have everything to do with this deal. If the Coyotes move to a new market that's one less market to expand into, which means less competition for a team, which means less ability to inflate expansion fees.

Ideally the NHL wants 3+ markets vying for 2 teams. If the Coyotes stay put that's much more likely to happen.

[Jordan!]

Originally Posted by troutman

8,581 tickets distributed vs NAS

Up 16% from last year after the same # of games.. after a lockout.

Next!

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

Up 16% from last year after the same # of games.. after a lockout.

Next!

Western Conference Finalist. Last in attendance:

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance

[Winnipeg is 29th]