The Ongoing Coyotes Sale Thread

[Jordan!]

The word is that the NHL may pursue a court injunction to define if the deal is illegal or not. Definitely time to do so now.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Until the GWI files their lawsuit, the deal is clearly seen as illegal, and the city of Glendale won't be able to pay the $25M owed in this agreement. This is far from over. Go GWI!

The city has already paid $25 million for the same agreement to cover the season past. GWI had nothing to say about that.

So, as usual, you are dead wrong. At this point, this deal is legal, and will continue to be so until a court decides otherwise.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The city has already paid $25 million for the same agreement to cover the season past. GWI had nothing to say about that.

So, as usual, you are dead wrong. At this point, this deal is legal, and will continue to be so until a court decides otherwise.

So, it's legal to steal cars until you are caught?

[Resolute 14]

Heh. In this case, it is more like arguing that borrowing a car is legal.

Lets face it, if the $25 million payout was illegal, GWI would have been all over it a year ago. Unless they decide to take the plunge and find out for sure, the argument that this deal constitutes an illegal gift is nothing more than wishful thinking.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Heh. In this case, it is more like arguing that borrowing a car is legal.

Lets face it, if the $25 million payout was illegal, GWI would have been all over it a year ago. Unless they decide to take the plunge and find out for sure, the argument that this deal constitutes an illegal gift is nothing more than wishful thinking.

I suspect the GI was being mindfull of its public image, if the NHL could have found a buyer that put his own money up to buy the team the initial 25 million from the city would have been a cheap, even if illegal, price to pay.
Had the GI obstructed it they would have been roundly condemned by even their own supporters.

Now it would appear the situation is going to drag on and cost the taxpayers millions more, they can persue it without losing support, in fact it gains them credibility with more Arizonans.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Heh. In this case, it is more like arguing that borrowing a car is legal.

Lets face it, if the $25 million payout was illegal, GWI would have been all over it a year ago. Unless they decide to take the plunge and find out for sure, the argument that this deal constitutes an illegal gift is nothing more than wishful thinking.

It's also possible that GWI didn't take the plunge last time as they were saving their bullets for another fight, namely the bond issue. With that out of the way for the time being maybe they do take action this time around. There's a lot of strategizing going around in that camp, I'll certainly give credit where it's due, they've been quite clever. I'm still not sure their argument would be a win, and it's definitely not a slam dunk, but it might have some merit. The posturing from them has gotten quite tiring so it would be nice to see them actually put their claims to the test.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Might want to change the title of this thread. Hulsizer is out.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Heh. In this case, it is more like arguing that borrowing a car is legal.

Lets face it, if the $25 million payout was illegal, GWI would have been all over it a year ago. Unless they decide to take the plunge and find out for sure, the argument that this deal constitutes an illegal gift is nothing more than wishful thinking.

I suspect the city is far closer to trying to lend out their citizens cars,

"we need Hertz to open up a branch, and they can't afford cars of their own so we've decided to lend them your cars, which of course you can lease back from them as needed for a low monthly rate"

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

Might want to change the title of this thread. Hulsizer is out.

Yes, twitter people are saying this too.

judefox10
NHL sources tell me Matthew Hulsizer is stepping back from deal with Coyotes....he could have been perfect fit for AZ !

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I suspect the GI was being mindfull of its public image, if the NHL could have found a buyer that put his own money up to buy the team the initial 25 million from the city would have been a cheap, even if illegal, price to pay.
Had the GI obstructed it they would have been roundly condemned by even their own supporters.

I don't think there is a single shred of evidence that GWI would back down over its public image. Backing down in this case would actually go opposite the image they seek to project. They have never struck me as the "it's a matter of degrees" type when it comes to their view on the legality of a deal. If they thought it was illegal, they would have challenged, period.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

Might want to change the title of this thread. Hulsizer is out.

Hmm, if true, this puts the NHL in a pickle.

They want to keep the team in Phoenix, but they don't want to own it. I agree with Cowperson, Winnipeg is the solution of last resort. Are they finally down to the last resort?

[ricardodw]

and then Columbus joins the circus:


Losing $25M in 2010-11


They really lost 33M but will be getting only $8-9m in equalization payments down from the 12-13 they expected.

Winnipeg can hold out and get to pick the best contracts from Phoenix, Atlanta and Columbus as the league needs to lose these 3 losers and contract by 2. a 28 team league with 7 in Canada and 21 in the US...


The original 6 ratio (when hockey worked) would be 9 in Canada and 18 in the US.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Are they finally down to the last resort?

Both prospective buyers (willing to keep the team there), one of which didn't want to own the whole works, and the other who didn't want to pay the whole works, are out. Unless there's a rabbit and a hat somewhere...

I guess it entirely depends on how long the NHL is willing to own and lose money on the team.

I guess the other option is do like the Packers or Riders and go to a publicly owned team.

[Hells Bells]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Winnipeg can hold out and get to pick the best contracts from Phoenix, Atlanta and Columbus as the league needs to lose these 3 losers and contract by 2. a 28 team league with 7 in Canada and 21 in the US...

That sounds fair.

Lets also give them a choice of either Crosby or Ovechkin while were at it.

[Jordan!]

Time to change the ole Avatar?

[tjinaz]

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...h-shot-at.html

Assumes the pole position. GWI looks the other way when baseball is involved.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The city has already paid $25 million for the same agreement to cover the season past. GWI had nothing to say about that.

So, as usual, you are dead wrong. At this point, this deal is legal, and will continue to be so until a court decides otherwise.

It was a different situation entirely, there was a one year deal on the table as opposed to up to 10 years and the team was believed to being sold to a group with money of their own to spend. It also does not mean that it did not break the law last time, nothing was filed against it at that time. So in actuallity you are dead wrong, as usual. At this point this deal is questionable as a court has not decided at all yet.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I don't think there is a single shred of evidence that GWI would back down over its public image. Backing down in this case would actually go opposite the image they seek to project. They have never struck me as the "it's a matter of degrees" type when it comes to their view on the legality of a deal. If they thought it was illegal, they would have challenged, period.

Again, your out to lunch here. It is a total different scenario then the former where it was believed to be a short term solution with a sure fire payback after a group purchased it with their own money. This time it could be 10 years of taxpayers money with no guarantee that money will ever be recouped. You are still totally clueless on this.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I don't think there is a single shred of evidence that GWI would back down over its public image. Backing down in this case would actually go opposite the image they seek to project. They have never struck me as the "it's a matter of degrees" type when it comes to their view on the legality of a deal. If they thought it was illegal, they would have challenged, period.

There is a difference between 'backing down' and choosing when and how to get involved though.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Hmm, if true, this puts the NHL in a pickle.

They want to keep the team in Phoenix, but they don't want to own it. I agree with Cowperson, Winnipeg is the solution of last resort. Are they finally down to the last resort?

The NHL will be dropping the puck at MTS Centre long before this Coyotes thing is resolved. A part of me thinks that the NHL might move this team to Kansas City (while continuing to own it) similar to MLB/Expos before it's ever fully resolved. Just my opinion, though.