The Ongoing Coyotes Sale Thread

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I must have missed the court case. Did Goldwater win their lawsuit?

They did. In the court of Dissentowner's imagination. Matlock, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal represented GWI and Lionel Hutz, Dan Fielding and Jack McCoy represented Glendale.

Bull was the Bailiff and Harry Stone was the judge. He did magic and talked about Mel Torme a lot.

[Bluzman]

Originally Posted by troutman

Lessons learned in Phoenix? (Brunt)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle2015894/

[I]So just what have we learned here?

It is hard to imagine the taxpayers of Glendale are this stupid but as a member of the media famously labeled Arizona after they passed their immigration law, "Arizona is the new Mississippi".

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

Funny.. it's the GWI's fault that Glendale is even pursuing this additional $25 mill

Funny, it's Glendale and Hulsizer's faults that GWI had to get involved in the first place.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Barnes

They did. In the court of Dissentowner's imagination. Matlock, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal represented GWI and Lionel Hutz, Dan Fielding and Jack McCoy represented Glendale.

Bull was the Bailiff and Harry Stone was the judge. He did magic and talked about Mel Torme a lot.

Ok smarty, then why was the team not sold to Hulsizer? I mean if the NHL knew they had a case with their big money lawyers then surely they would have went ahead with it anyhow to dump this money losing pit. Look at the posters who thanked that post, Cp's finest for sure,lol. Didn't Bouw originally say it was the GWI's fault? Where was the smart ass post there?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Ok smarty, then why was the team not sold to Hulsizer? I mean if the NHL knew they had a case with their big money lawyers then surely they would have went ahead with it anyhow to dump this money losing pit. Look at the posters who thanked that post, Cp's finest for sure,lol. Didn't Bouw originally say it was the GWI's fault? Where was the smart ass post there?

You haven't been paying attention have you? The threat of the lawsuit, whether succesful or not, killed the bond deal. It scared off the market. There was no 'go ahead with it anyhow' option.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Ok smarty, then why was the team not sold to Hulsizer? I mean if the NHL knew they had a case with their big money lawyers then surely they would have went ahead with it anyhow to dump this money losing pit. Look at the posters who thanked that post, Cp's finest for sure,lol. Didn't Bouw originally say it was the GWI's fault? Where was the smart ass post there?

I am utterly baffled that someone could be so active in this thread yet still not understand even the basic framework of this deal.

Let me ask you this; why are you so militant about Constitutional matters that would affect taxpayers in another country who live 2,300 miles away? Why do you care so much?

And as for the posters who thank my smart ass posts, I think they are some of the most upstanding, intelligent, generous members of the community. I do however question the love for fruity malted beverages one of them has.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by valo403

You haven't been paying attention have you? The threat of the lawsuit, whether succesful or not, killed the bond deal. It scared off the market. There was no 'go ahead with it anyhow' option.

You may want to clue Resolute 14 into that.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Barnes

I am utterly baffled that someone could be so active in this thread yet still not understand even the basic framework of this deal.

Let me ask you this; why are you so militant about Constitutional matters that would affect taxpayers in another country who live 2,300 miles away? Why do you care so much?

And as for the posters who thank my smart ass posts, I think they are some of the most upstanding, intelligent, generous members of the community. I do however question the love for fruity malted beverages one of them has.

I care because it is wrong and unfair to the taxpayers of the city of Glendale. I think it is absurb to use taxpayers money to keep a team in a location the locals obviously don't endorse. I care that money that could be spent to improve the city and make it better for the citizens that reside there is being used for the wrong reasons. I guess I just care about people, even if they live 2,300 miles away.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

You may want to clue Resolute 14 into that.

You never did answer my question. When did the lawsuit go to trial?

[PegCityFlamesFan]

We now go live to the Glendale City Council meeting.

[hwy19man]

"Ice Edge Holdings has withdrawn its minority interest in the proposed purchase of the Phoenix Coyotes."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=3653...medium=twitter

This story just keeps on going.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You never did answer my question. When did the lawsuit go to trial?

Because it was a ridiculous question. I made a reply at the bottom of pg 106. Everybody knows why it never went to trial. Keep trying to tell us though that the NHL could have went ahead with the deal if they wanted to and that GWI doesn't have a leg to stand on. Believe what you like but the team would already be sold if the city of Glendale was not trying to break the rules by gifting the team to some guy using taxpayers money to do it. Now are you going to actually make a thought out response or are you going to stutter the same thing yet again?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Because it was a ridiculous question. I made a reply at the bottom of pg 106. Everybody knows why it never went to trial. Keep trying to tell us though that the NHL could have went ahead with the deal if they wanted to and that GWI doesn't have a leg to stand on. Believe what you like but the team would already be sold if the city of Glendale was not trying to break the rules by gifting the team to some guy using taxpayers money to do it. Now are you going to actually make a thought out response or are you going to stutter the same thing yet again?

Please show me where I ever made that statement.

I'll save you the trouble. I never did. But it is clear that you need to fabricate arguments and attribute them to your opponents because you lack the intellectual ability to debate what they actually do say.

On those lines, you have stated as fact that the attempted bond sale was illegal. I would like to see your evidence. Since GWI claims it is illegal, and the city claims it is not, logic dictates that for your claim to be accurate, GWI successfully sued the city. I want to see the news story on the court case.

I guess it is easier to argue a point when you can resort to simply making things up, eh?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by hwy19man

"Ice Edge Holdings has withdrawn its minority interest in the proposed purchase of the Phoenix Coyotes."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=3653...medium=twitter

This story just keeps on going.

Had no idea Ice Edge was even still involved. There's been no mention of them in anything I've read/heard/watched recently.

[Northendzone]

assuming that the CoG opts to flush away another $25 m tonight - I wonder if they (CoG) will just start thinking about buying the Yotes $25m at a time.

as an aside, that kid who showed up at the last concil meeting should be forced to sign a contract stipulating that he will live in Glendale forever, so that he can reap the rewards of an increased tax burden

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Please show me where I ever made that statement.

I'll save you the trouble. I never did. But it is clear that you need to fabricate arguments and attribute them to your opponents because you lack the intellectual ability to debate what they actually do say.

On those lines, you have stated as fact that the attempted bond sale was illegal. I would like to see your evidence. Since GWI claims it is illegal, and the city claims it is not, logic dictates that for your claim to be accurate, GWI successfully sued the city. I want to see the news story on the court case.

I guess it is easier to argue a point when you can resort to simply making things up, eh?

No, it really doesn't. The GWI did not have to win nothing, they stated what the law stated was illegal and threatened to sue Glendale over it. If the city really believed that their claim was legit they would have got the deal done right? My claim is accurate because that is what is written as a law, what part are you not understanding here?

[Resolute 14]

Hulsizer was going to give $25 million of that bond sale back to the city to cover those losses in year one. Wonder if he'll do the same for year two? At this rate, Goldwater needs only to delay the sale for two more years, after which Hulsizer would just give the entire bond right back!

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, it really doesn't. The GWI did not have to win nothing, they stated what the law stated was illegal and threatened to sue Glendale over it. If the city really believed that their claim was legit they would have got the deal done right? My claim is accurate because that is what is written as a law, what part are you not understanding here?

Goldwater claimed the law stated it was illegal. That is a far cry from being able to state as fact that the law considers this illegal. The city can only offer the bond and hope they sell. Goldwater chilled the market, however, by threatening potential buyers with the lawsuit. Their actions were such, actually, that the city threatened to sue them over it.

The facts, as we know them, are that Goldwater's threats of a lawsuit chilled the market on the bonds. Given the threat drove up the risk, investors naturally went elsewhere with their money. That is not tantamount to an admission that the offering was illegal in the first place. Such a statement can only be definitively made once a court has ruled on the matter.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, it really doesn't. The GWI did not have to win nothing, they stated what the law stated was illegal and threatened to sue Glendale over it. If the city really believed that their claim was legit they would have got the deal done right? My claim is accurate because that is what is written as a law, what part are you not understanding here?

Still. Not. Getting. The. Point.

That was not an option. Once the suit was threatened the market collapsed. They could not get the deal done. It simply could not happen.

And your claim isn't accurate. This isn't a speed limit. It's not black and white. there are complex issues and arguments and issues involved. People highly versed in this area of the law disagree on the outcome.

[afc wimbledon]

Would it be fair to say though that the GI's claim was good enough that the bond market took it seriously?

I would assume if it was completely without basis those in the legal departments of the various brokerages and banks would tell their employers/customers not to worry about it.