Coyotes Tempe Entertainment District/Arena photos

[Zarley]

A rink in/near Old Town would be great. Why don't they do that?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

This is about access to the east valley, not just Scottsdale. Scottsdale has money, but so does Chandler and Gilbert. The hope to build the game and future fans is in the east valley where facilities are being developed. Scottsdale is an older market with money, but the southeast portion of Phoenix is the market the Coyotes need to target for long term health of the franchise. Tempe is the best location possible as it is the convergence of all roads in metro Phoenix.

Sure, Scottsdale is just a bit of shorthand to all the east side(and there’s a lot of land there). The Tempe area makes the most sense to most areas.

[powderjunkie]

Since 1967, five cities have had teams come and go and come back again.

Four times it has worked:
- Bay Area
- Colorado
- Minnesota
- Winnipeg (so far)

Double Fail:
- Atlanta

People say that if they leave, hockey will never return to PHX. And that is probably true, but it isn't a logical reason to resist relocation. If the market is actually good enough, it could work again in the future with a fresh start.

[Jordan!]

Originally Posted by Zarley

A rink in/near Old Town would be great. Why don't they do that?

They almost did with Los Arcos back in the day.

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

Looking at the history of Yotes ownership over the years, you know they're going to screw it up. It's not going to happen.

And even if it is a go, the team should be excluded from revenue sharing if they end up playing in a large shed for 4 years.

I personally give it a 2/10 chance of happening but I'm jaded.

I will say, posturing with Glendale aside they are doing things the right way and this has been in the works for over 2 years.

[GioforPM]

There’s a pretty good possibility that all this alternate arena talk is posturing to negotiate a stub agreement with Glendale pending a new arena. I know that each side talks like the relationship is done, but practically, Glendale may want a transition as well. It’s an equally ugly situation for the municipality.

[Jordan!]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

There’s a pretty good possibility that all this alternate arena talk is posturing to negotiate a stub agreement with Glendale pending a new arena. I know that each side talks like the relationship is done, but practically, Glendale may want a transition as well. It’s an equally ugly situation for the municipality.

No, Glendale's over - they're in bitter EX GF mode and renovating the arena to be a 365 day a year rodeo venue

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

There’s a pretty good possibility that all this alternate arena talk is posturing to negotiate a stub agreement with Glendale pending a new arena. I know that each side talks like the relationship is done, but practically, Glendale may want a transition as well. It’s an equally ugly situation for the municipality.

I think you may be onto something in some ways. I just don't see a situation where the owner who's expected to lose tens of millions of dollars by going to a 5k venue isn't than forced by the NHL to go back to Glendale for a 2 year term or something by paying a very high level of rent.

If the Coyotes paid the city significant rent, in essences bankrolling some of these renovations, than I think they could potentially make a deal. Pure speculation though.

I also think the NHL needs to have a close look at how this will affect the competitive play for the league. There is no way that the team will be remotely competitive long term and be considered an actual NHL quality franchise if this gong show continues. They can't just be a contract dumpster and franchise that uses unique ways of meeting the cap floor. Sooner or later something has to give.

[SuperMatt18]

If I'm the NHL I'd be a lot more comfortable here if there was already a signed deal with either Tempe or to renovate the Veterans Colosseum, and shovels were in the ground already.

But I'm not sure how you sign of on a 3,600 to 5,000 seat stadium with no real end in sight. Even if you were to get approval and sign off from Tempe at this point, are you really okay with playing at ASU's stadium for at least 4 seasons likely.

Unless there are truly no alternative options and Houston, Kansas City, and Quebec have all rescinded their previous interest in being home to an NHL Franchise I'm not sure how this would palatable to the other NHL owners and NHLPA.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

If I'm the NHL I'd be a lot more comfortable here if there was already a signed deal with either Tempe or to renovate the Veterans Colosseum, and shovels were in the ground already.

But I'm not sure how you sign of on a 3,600 to 5,000 seat stadium with no real end in sight. Even if you were to get approval and sign off from Tempe at this point, are you really okay with playing at ASU's stadium for at least 4 seasons likely.

Unless there are truly no alternative options and Houston, Kansas City, and Quebec have all rescinded their previous interest in being home to an NHL Franchise I'm not sure how this would palatable to the other NHL owners and NHLPA.

Isn't this all about protecting the 600 million in franchise fees for a new franchise?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Sure, Scottsdale is just a bit of shorthand to all the east side(and there’s a lot of land there). The Tempe area makes the most sense to most areas.

There's lots of land? Where? Scottsdale? Scottsdale is pretty much built out and has such draconian restrictions on development projects it is very difficult to get anything done there. The metro Phoenix area is so constrained by reservation and national forest land that it is difficult to expand in most directions. They could expand southeast, but that is no better than building another Glendale white elephant. The best angle is to find something existing and build over it - a la ASU and burying ASU Karsten for the expansion of the university facilities. They need to stay central which means something at the confluence of 101 & 202, or off the I-10 corridor near the airport. The 101 & 202 interchange is the best option. Land there is tough, but there is a gravel pit off Alma School (Mesa) and the 202 that could be perfect (I think it's Cemex property). The only other legitimate parcel is the chunk of ASU Karsten that was the back nine, but that is ASU property and we know Crow and ASU ain't budging on that.

[Enoch Root]

There is room at Talking Stick.

And there are options east of the 101, up around Bell or Legacy.

But I think Talking Stick is perfect - captures Scottsdale and Mesa, and is pretty close to Tempe and ASU

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is room at Talking Stick.

And there are options east of the 101, up around Bell or Legacy.

But I think Talking Stick is perfect - captures Scottsdale and Mesa, and is pretty close to Tempe and ASU

Talking Stick is on reserve land. I'm not sure the NHL wants to get into the legal issues associated with sovereign lands. There's a reason why the native bands buy naming rights to existing buildings rather than building their own and try to woo a tenant.

I can't think of anything off Bell or Legacy that would meet the parcel requirements and then the zoning requirements. They would have to do something in around Notre Dame Prep, and then bury the building to meet airspace restrictions for the airport. There are just so many powerful communities up there that would restrict development or sue to prevent it. There's a reason why much of Westworld is the dump it is. They can't get development permits to develop anything.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Isn't this all about protecting the 600 million in franchise fees for a new franchise?

It was before, but I'm not sure there is much appetite to expand again in the short-term, unless they want to capitalize on a 2nd team in TOR.

600/30 = $20M each (no idea if it's split equally).

A new franchise may help with a very modest in some league wide revenue sources (National TV deals, sponsorship/partnerships, licensing, etc.), but it also means that pie is divided 31, 32, or 33+ ways.

For simplicity let's say all the National TV deals are worth $1B/year. In a 30 team league, that means $33.3M each. 32 teams = 31.3M each. 33 teams = 30.3M.

Of course half of that goes to the players, so it's closer to a $500k per year hit, but if the other league-wide revenue is say $500M then it's more like $750k per year. Therefore over 26 seasons you might 'lose back' the $20M you gained from expansion.

Of course it's a bit more complicated than that, and the expansion fee generally outweighs the pie cutting, but there is a tipping point and you actually have to be able to get that $600M+...

Relocation fee may mean $200M without any real downsides at all.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Isn't this all about protecting the 600 million in franchise fees for a new franchise?

You couldn't be more right. Until a new prospective owner steps up and is willing to pay that kind of coin for this team, I see the NHL continuing to try and make it work here.

[SuperMatt18]

There is a cap on how many franchises the league can support too.

32 teams has them on par with the other largest North American sports leagues, and I don't see them growing to 34 in the short term to be honest.

10 years ago I think NHL was really trying to protect that expansion fee cost, but I think now that Vegas and Seattle are in place we see a move where some of the less profitable teams might get shopped around a bit more to improve the overall league profitability.

Merulo was rumored to pay around $300M. If you could value the franchise at around $300M, plus another $200M in relocation fees, that gets you right around where your $500M valuation for a franchise wants to sit, even if all that money doesn't directly go to the owners immediately (Vegas expansion fee was $500M).

Best plan might be relocating to Houston and getting the $200M fee for relocation, and then if you do try to expand maybe you go back to Phoenix as an option in 5-10 years and can actually get an expansion fee at that time. Owners actually would come out ahead in that scenario with an expansion fee and a relocation fee.

For Phoenix specifically the real long term solution really feels like it would be a partnership with the Suns for an arena that supports Hockey and Basketball. Still seems like a miss that they weren't able to figure something out together as part of the recent renovation / redevelopment of that arena.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

.

For Phoenix specifically the real long term solution really feels like it would be a partnership with the Suns for an arena that supports Hockey and Basketball. Still seems like a miss that they weren't able to figure something out together as part of the recent renovation / redevelopment of that arena.

It's been discussed to death 1000000000x. That arena was never designed to accommodate an NHL rink. The floor isn't big enough.

To reno it for hockey simply doesn't make sense.

$80M reno vs $600M+ new building was a no brainer for the City.

[powderjunkie]

It's hard to extract maximum value for an asset when under a tight deadline to sell. IMO the best result for the league would be to takeover the team (presumably buying out Meruelo and being able to force his hand based on failure to meet certain obligations like having an NHL calibre rink and paying taxes on time).

Invite markets to bid on a purely operational basis (ie. tenancy without ownership) for a 3-5 year term, while noting that a big process for full ownership will occur in the following 12-24 months.

Earning the operational bid would give a market a leg up in the next process, but it would let the league be wide open to proposals, even ones that require brand new buildings built. If there are enough strong bids, perhaps they consider expansion(s) along with the finalized relocation, but it's really hard to know what the endemic world looks like.


The big opportunity could be a 2nd team in TOR or Hamilton - I could see a lot of other owners pushing for it. I don't really know why the Leafs/Sabres objections are considered such a non-starter. LAK/ANA and the three NYC teams operate in closer proximity, and there are lots of examples in the other 3 NA leagues.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Austin is a defund the police and skyrocketing homicide rate city.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Go check the murder rate in Dallas and find a new way to confirm your narrative.

It's actually concerning how QAnon/far right BS is seeping it's way into any and all discussions these days. Very successful misinformation campaigns.

I had a discussion about the amazement of the James Webb telescope's mission this year turn to conspiracy theory in three texts last week. It's crazy.

[WCW Nitro]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That's what I don't get.

I can understand not moving Arizona (4.5M metro pop) to Quebec City (800k) in terms of overall market size and opportunity.

But there is no argument that would apply to Arizona that wouldn't also apply to Houston (7.0M metro pop) but without the baggage of the 26 previous years.

It's a bigger city with an actual downtown arena that can accommodate hockey.

Maybe Fertitta isn't interested anymore due to COVID, but he has previously stated publicly that his dream was to bring a hockey team to Houston.

I wonder if the demographics of the two cities might be an explanation as to why the NHL prefers Phoenix over Houston, I believe the visible minority percentage in Houston is much higher than in Phoenix and maybe the league feels that you can't simply look at total population in Houston as a determinant if hockey would work there.

[MacDaddy77]

Originally Posted by Jordan!

No, Glendale's over - they're in bitter EX GF mode and renovating the arena to be a 365 day a year rodeo venue

Just in time for my daughter to be looking into equestrian scholarships!