[News] UPD: City of Glendale to vote on new arena agreement with Coyotes - Page 17 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Jordan! · 06-12-2015, 03:50 PM

Man, I remember a time when all that mattered was how pissed off I was that the Oilers won the draft lottery.

ForeverFlameFan · 06-12-2015, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

That's great that they stated that. Where are they going to play if Glendale locks them out of their rink?

Already talking with the mayor in Phoenix.

CroFlames · 06-12-2015, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Already talking with the mayor in Phoenix.

Why didn't they just go to Phoenix in the first place then? Oh wait, they were in Phoenix before.

ForeverFlameFan · 06-12-2015, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Why didn't they just go to Phoenix in the first place then? Oh wait, they were in Phoenix before.

And they should have stayed. Glendale was a mistake from the beginning it was ever considered to go and play there.

Resolute 14 · 06-12-2015, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Why didn't they just go to Phoenix in the first place then? Oh wait, they were in Phoenix before.

C'mon dude. This just isn't helpful at all.

The arena in Phoenix is a basketball faciilty that was always meant as a temporary home until a new rink was built. That we all know that the location in Glendale was a mistake doesn't make your dismissive snark meaningful as an argument.

Though it does stand as an amusing possibility, if the Coyotes end up right where they were in 1996... playing in a basketball arena in Phoenix as a temporary measure until a new faciilty is built.

getbak · 06-12-2015, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Cooper Rummell ‏@CooperRummell

#BREAKING Judge grants @ArizonaCoyotes temporary restraining order against Glendale. @KTAR923

So, that should allow them to play in Glendale next season...probably.

Sport Psych · 06-12-2015, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GGG

Wasn't the speculation that this group bought the coyotes with the intent of hitting their losses clause and then moving the team. They just needed to be good soldiers and then they get a relocation fee instead of paying the expansion fee.

So if that speculation was true wouldn't these guys be excited and just moving up their timeline for moving?

Yep. Problem is that the place to which they hoped to relocate isn't ready yet. (And no, I have no idea where that place is, although my guess would be either QC or Seattle.)

undercoverbrother · 06-12-2015, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

And they should have stayed. Glendale was a mistake from the beginning it was ever considered to go and play there.

Sadly, the set up there for activities before the game was awesome. Food, drinks area for Hockey Activities.

While the location of the arena was a mistake, what ended up being built was pretty cool.

IMO.

Jordan! · 06-12-2015, 04:39 PM

I don't know, i've recently felt the team is done in Glendale.. period. Not a matter of if, just when. Even prior to this.

It's Phoenix or bust in my opinion

The Original FFIV · 06-12-2015, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sport Psych

Yep. Problem is that the place to which they hoped to relocate isn't ready yet. (And no, I have no idea where that place is, although my guess would be either QC or Seattle.)

Yeah, a hedge fund manager from Philly seems an odd choice for an owner, and he's been very quiet from the get go.

Float some dough for the franchise, with the understanding you can sell it for more 1-2 years down the line to someone and make a tidy profit for all your troubles.

This is playing out like theatre - just waiting for the next act to begin.

Enter the white knight from Seattle...

Resolute 14 · 06-12-2015, 05:03 PM

Lets be honest... it just wouldn't be a Coyotes off-season without legal documents.

Application for the temporary restraining order.

The TRO had two demands: (1) The city, city council, and nine specifically named individuals be forbidden from acting to terminate the contract. (2) The defendants be obligated to honour the damned contract. They re-iterated their position by noting that Tindall was not significantly involved in the contract negotiation, and even if he was, the city itself already waived any conflict of interest concerns. They also argued that the motion and vote was made in bad faith because the city waited two years to bring it up, and that the city gave insufficient notice when it did bring it to a meeting/vote.

And, The main complaint. I haven't read it yet...

Edit: all the documents: http://coyotes.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=770735

Jordan! · 06-12-2015, 05:11 PM

Just kill me now

troutman · 06-12-2015, 05:13 PM

The injunction was probably granted ex parte (without notice) meaning COG will have a chance to set it aside. I imagine the court will uphold the injunction without some smoking gun.

Yes, there will be a return hearing. June 29th.

Glendale Council is meeting Tuesday afternoon in an executive session. They have not yet sent written notice to terminate the agreement, pending this session.

T@T · 06-12-2015, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

Just kill me now

Look on the bright side, If they go back to Phoenix for this season it cuts your drive in half.

Resolute 14 · 06-12-2015, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troutman

The injunction was probably granted ex parte (without notice) meaning COG will have a chance to set it aside. I imagine the court will uphold the injunction without some smoking gun.

Yes, there will be a return hearing.

What's your thought on the complaint itself? Based on the timeline of Tindall's departure from the city and the negotiations on the lease, my layman's impression is that the city is on very shaky ground. The negotiations did not begin until after Tindall was told he would no longer be retained, but before his severance deal was finalized. Pretty hard to believe he had a significant impact on the contract.

Unless the city comes up with your smoking gun, I really don't see how they succeed.

troutman · 06-12-2015, 05:46 PM

Olbermann vs. Ronda:

http://youtu.be/DgNMprCFr4s

troutman · 06-12-2015, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What's your thought on the complaint itself? Based on the timeline of Tindall's departure from the city and the negotiations on the lease, my layman's impression is that the city is on very shaky ground. The negotiations did not begin until after Tindall was told he would no longer be retained, but before his severance deal was finalized. Pretty hard to believe he had a significant impact on the contract.

Unless the city comes up with your smoking gun, I really don't see how they succeed.

I will have a longer look later - I assume the COG lawyers believe they have more on IA than just the Tindall business, because that does not seem strong enough. COG must be fairly confident to take on this risk.

troutman · 06-12-2015, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beatle17

Are you? If not, why do you care whether she is, and she has apparently committed much more money to the Coyotes than just about all of us on this board.

I'm not sure that is true. IA recieves $18 M a year support from the NHL which must come in part from ticket revenues paid by fans of other teams?

This story says $25 M revenue sharing:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle21489565/

topfiverecords · 06-12-2015, 06:13 PM

Team should move to Munday Texas...on a Monday.

Beatle17 · 06-12-2015, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troutman

I'm not sure that is true. IA recieves $18 M a year support from the NHL which must come in part from ticket revenues paid by fans of other teams?

True enough, but I think it may come from TV and league advertising money because we all know that the NHL has crappy revenue sharing.