Is there precedent for this, though? I can't see the NHL being at a point where they have;
a) a team ready to move, and;
b) an ownership group and arena ready
and then saying "Well this would be perfect, except we just re-aligned our divisions, so unfortunately you guys will have to wait until an eastern team is in trouble, but thanks for being ready!!
We've certainly seen the opposite where the league has a team ready to move and an ownership group ready in Winnipeg, and then they just played them in the former team's division until they realigned.
Maybe sureloss or someone else more in the know could point to a time where they've ditched a move over alignment issues, but I just couldn't see them doing it from a business perspective.
It's partly politics and partly money. Detroit was promised to be moved to the East years ago and Columbus apparently as well. This has created an unbalanced league with 16 teams in the East and only 14 in the West. It was done with the obvious plan to expand in the West, QC wasn't part of that plan even though they seem a natural. One part of it may be the American TV contract where saying they have a potential 5.5M American viewers in Phoenix trumps having zero viewers in Quebec.
I can't name a time where they've ditched a move because of alignment issues but this last alignment was made with a plan in place and moving a team from the West to the East wasn't part of it no matter the logic. As for the seeming logic of the move, if logic was the priority, the Coyotes would have been gone to Hamilton, or Kansas City, or Portland years ago.
As for Glendale's motives, they may be able to cut their losses without a deal with the Coyotes.
Quote:
In additon, Morgan states, “What that lease agreement will look like is anyone’s guess. Glendale City Councilwoman Yvonne Knaack said recently that the annual fee to the city could “be anywhere from $6 (million) to $10 million on operating, and then maybe another $9 million on debt.”
Councilmember Sherwood publicly recognized a figure of at least $10M to $12M annually for a lease management agreement. Vice Mayor Knaack acknowledged a similar figure as well. She is also correct about the arena construction debt of approximately $9M a year. This is where it gets dicey. Will this council accept a deal that requires a substantial annual payment along with the annual construction debt? Combining the two, the figure will be somewhere in the $20M range annually. But that requires this council to cut expenses elsewhere to absorb the costs of the deal and to continue to build a contingency reserve fund. To date there has been absolutely no will to cut by the new council. In fact, they are considering adding 15 firefighter positions and a new $650K truck and 31 police positions to this budget. They simply cannot do both – manage the annual costs associated with the arena while creating new budgetary expenditures.
Right now they are paying the Coyotes 15M per whereas they could get another arena management company to do it for less (10M to 12M.
Actually the deal with the Coyotes doesn't look that bad since according to TSN they only cost Glendale $8.5M.
Quote:
The city was then to receive a portion of the revenue generated from the arena's operation. The Coyotes paid the city about $6.5 million last season, meaning the city's net loss on the arena was about $8.5 million.
They want to renegotiate just to save more money. Their argument to cancel the deal is that one of their negotiators had a conflict of interest.
Of course this $8.5M cost doesn't include the $9M per Glendale pays in arena debt. There is no way they get out of that.
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Bettman says he is "really not concerned about the Coyotes. If I lived in Glendale, I would be concerned about my government."
The Following User Says Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
- Arizona Coyotes Co-Owner, President and CEO Anthony LeBlanc issued the following statement following tonight’s Glendale City Council meeting.
"We are disappointed with the city's decision to violate its obligations under the agreement that was entered into and duly approved only two years ago. We will exhaust any and all legal remedies against the city of Glendale for this blatant violation of its contractual obligations to us."
During the meeting, Coyotes representatives threatened a $200 million law suit
The Following User Says Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Bettman says he is "really not concerned about the Coyotes. If I lived in Glendale, I would be concerned about my government."
I love Bettman
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tyler For This Useful Post:
- Arizona Coyotes Co-Owner, President and CEO Anthony LeBlanc issued the following statement following tonight’s Glendale City Council meeting.
"We are disappointed with the city's decision to violate its obligations under the agreement that was entered into and duly approved only two years ago. We will exhaust any and all legal remedies against the city of Glendale for this blatant violation of its contractual obligations to us."
During the meeting, Coyotes representatives threatened a $200 million law suit
I'm sure die hard coyotes fans (I'm guessing there are some) side with the Coyotes. But boy, everyone else in that area must absolutely despise everything to do with the Coyotes and whether they blame the team, their government, or the nhl, they'll never want to voluntarily spend a dollar supporting that team. They can all fight out all their legal battles, but whatever potential market there ever was has been completely poisoned.
It's true, but is it really a wise thing to say if you want to keep a team in Glendale long term?
What does he really have to lose, though? The City is reneging on the contract and now IceArizona is going to file a huge lawsuit that could arguably end up costing the tax payers even more.
Also, Gary doesn't give a flying f about the City of Glendale, even if the coyotes do stay there long term. That's my impression, anyways.
They plan on suing for $200 million? What taxpayer in his right mind would actually buy tickets to the Coyotes after they just sued you (literally). Gong show no other words.
It's partly politics and partly money. Detroit was promised to be moved to the East years ago and Columbus apparently as well. This has created an unbalanced league with 16 teams in the East and only 14 in the West. It was done with the obvious plan to expand in the West, QC wasn't part of that plan even though they seem a natural. One part of it may be the American TV contract where saying they have a potential 5.5M American viewers in Phoenix trumps having zero viewers in Quebec.
I'm not sure if the Quebec scenario really played a role. Don't forget, the current alignment wasn't the first choice of the BoG. The original plan was to have the Western Conference with more teams until the NHLPA rejected it.
Once the Wings and Jackets were moved east, the players accepted it. But I have my doubts that the league tailored expansion plans based on something that wasn't their first choice to begin with.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 06-10-2015 at 09:45 PM.
No, but I have a feeling Bettman knows that he's not going to get what he wants in the long run.
I have a feeling that what you think he wants, and what he actually wants isn't the same thing. He's not actually going fangirl about the Phoenix market.
