The Ongoing Coyotes Sale Thread

[THE SCUD]

Winnipeg is a stop gap measure, until the league decides to fold it or can get it into MLSE's territory in S. Ontario. If a team ends up there I wouldn't get too attached.

Winnipeg, unlike Phoenix, is something the league is going into eyes wide open. Winnipeg is just a carcass to keep the team warm until a suitable, permanent replacement is found.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by browna

Luxury boxes would be the big one, at $150K+ per year, per box, or so.

The revenue estimates the CBC used said they'd get $10 million a year from luxury boxes. There are 46 suites in the MTS Centre, so they'll have to charge an average of $217,000 per suite, per year to reach that target.

[Loyal and True]

I don't blame the NHL for sticking it out in Arizona. It is too big of market with a huge upside for growth. They just have to get the formula right, which will take alot of time and money (at most $1 or $2M per year for each NHL owner for a several more years). The investment could still pay off in the long run. There has been some costly mistakes made in Arizona, but I don't think you should dismiss the market based on those mistakes.

The success and growth of hockey in California since 1989 Gretzky-era is remarkable and certainly profitable. LA Kings hung in for over 20 years prior without a major breakthrough, but now you have three teams and lots of revenue. Not to mention the grassroots growth of the game. I'm proud that my favorite game is finally relevant and growing in regions like LA/Orange County and San Francisco Bay Area.

Maybe Winnipeg could or should get an NHL team. Even still, Winnipeg is a small, and very mature market for the NHL. It could make a little money, but eventually could also lose money if market conditions change. Where is the huge upside for growth in Winnipeg?

I think the Winnipeg mayor is logical to consider that Winnipeg might have to wait for a different opportunity to have an NHL hockey team again.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

I don't blame the NHL for sticking it out in Arizona. It is too big of market with a huge upside for growth. They just have to get the formula right, which will take alot of time and money (at most $1 or $2M per year for each NHL owner for a several more years). The investment could still pay off in the long run. There has been some costly mistakes made in Arizona, but I don't think you should dismiss the market based on those mistakes.

The success and growth of hockey in California since 1989 Gretzky-era is remarkable and certainly profitable. LA Kings hung in for over 20 years prior without a major breakthrough, but now you have three teams and lots of revenue. Not to mention the grassroots growth of the game. I'm proud that my favorite game is finally relevant and growing in regions like LA/Orange County and San Francisco Bay Area.

Maybe Winnipeg could or should get an NHL team. Even still, Winnipeg is a small, and very mature market for the NHL. It could make a little money, but eventually could also lose money if market conditions change. Where is the huge upside for growth in Winnipeg?

I think the Winnipeg mayor is logical to consider that Winnipeg might have to wait for a different opportunity to have an NHL hockey team again.

Sometimes the present's downside outweighs the future's "upside". Especially in cases like this where the upside will never be realized.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Sometimes the present's downside outweighs the future's "upside". Especially in cases like this where the upside will never be realized.

That's pretty much what people (even Jerry Buss) used to say about California in the 80s.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by browna

And given SCH's connections and past history, I trust his word over absolutely every one else's here.

Not the first time it's been said, and the best part is that the last time it was said, he turned out to be completely wrong.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

I don't blame the NHL for sticking it out in Arizona. It is too big of market with a huge upside for growth. They just have to get the formula right, which will take alot of time and money (at most $1 or $2M per year for each NHL owner for a several more years). The investment could still pay off in the long run.

So after 20 years of it failing there at a debt to the tune of $800 million (hypothetically), it could start to pay off? At some point you have to cut your losses.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Not the first time it's been said, and the best part is that the last time it was said, he turned out to be completely wrong.

I was told the bonds were set to close so I mentioned it on here. That's the only time I got anything wrong. What I haven't been wrong on is the will of the NHL to get a deal done in Phoenix.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

How big of a donation to CP do you plan on backing that statement with this time?

No donation. I gave $100 last time, Bingo appreciated it.

Also, the Phoenix thing COULD still fall apart. I gave them a 1% window last time and I'd say that still stands.

[lvsteven]

Originally Posted by PegCityFlamesFan

Darren Dreger

Something is better than nothing.
I would just hate to see it fail there.
Again.

But around here if you don't spread 'em for the pro Winnipeg side you are considered a heritic...

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by THE SCUD

Winnipeg is a stop gap measure, until the league decides to fold it or can get it into MLSE's territory in S. Ontario. If a team ends up there I wouldn't get too attached.

Winnipeg, unlike Phoenix, is something the league is going into eyes wide open. Winnipeg is just a carcass to keep the team warm until a suitable, permanent replacement is found.

Ok. Name the top 30 viable places in North America to put NHL markets...aaaaand go!

[dash_pinched]

Glendale has a $25 million bill due Monday...

Glendale has until Monday to pay $25 million to the National Hockey League to cover this season's Phoenix Coyotes losses, according to a bill sent to the city Tuesday.

The documents, sent a week after the team finished its season in the playoffs, show that actual losses for eight months ending in March totaled $36.6 million.

Glendale promised the NHL last year that it would set aside $25 million from a utilities-repair account to pay team losses in exchange for more time to land a team owner. For months, the money sat untouched.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...#ixzz1Kp8SJq3t

[PegCityFlamesFan]

Oh don't worry, once Hulsizer buys the team it will be all resolved. All those fans who feared Coyotes games because there was no owner will come out in droves...

[JBR]

Originally Posted by PegCityFlamesFan

Oh don't worry, once Hulsizer buys the team it will be all resolved. All those fans who feared Coyotes games because there was no owner will come out in droves...

I can visualize the exchange...

"Honey, would you like to go watch the local ice hackey game tonight?"

"I'm not going to finish dinner, dress the kids, drive an hour to watch a sport that I can't understand, then drive another hour home... on a weeknight"

"But sweetie, they have a new owner..."

"You get the keys, I'll get the kids!!!! Aaaaooooooo!! Go Coyotes!!!"

[VladtheImpaler]

Seriously, B&A, what exactly is going to change in Phoenix with a new owner? I am pretty neutral in this (I would never willingly set foot in Winnipeg again), but it's not like anything will change - the Coyotes are not going to become a cap team (Hulsizer won't spend any money to buy the team; why would he spend a cent more than he has to on operations?). You already have, arguably, the best coaches in the NHL, and one of the best regular season goaltenders. Things can only go downhill from here on the ice. You'd be getting a new owner, not Crosby and Ovechkin...

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

I don't blame the NHL for sticking it out in Arizona. It is too big of market with a huge upside for growth. They just have to get the formula right, which will take alot of time and money (at most $1 or $2M per year for each NHL owner for a several more years). The investment could still pay off in the long run. There has been some costly mistakes made in Arizona, but I don't think you should dismiss the market based on those mistakes.
.

I tend to agree with you here. The market has potential. I certainly don't blame the NHL for giving it a shot and trying to make it work. The current business is so badly buggered though that it seems unlikely that the current situation will ever be profitable. Under what circumstances will this team start to make money as things are now? They'll will forever be an NHL social program.

If the Coyotes leave, I would like to see them try that market again in the future, but it has to start with having the arena closer to main market areas.

[PegCityFlamesFan]

Don't worry, Belanger will stay, you build around him.

[tjinaz]

Seriously, B&A, what exactly is going to change in Phoenix with a new owner? I am pretty neutral in this (I would never willingly set foot in Winnipeg again), but it's not like anything will change - the Coyotes are not going to become a cap team (Hulsizer won't spend any money to buy the team; why would he spend a cent more than he has to on operations?). You already have, arguably, the best coaches in the NHL, and one of the best regular season goaltenders. Things can only go downhill from here on the ice. You'd be getting a new owner, not Crosby and Ovechkin...

As much as everyone says ... blah blah blah 15 years.... on the surface it seems so but in actuality not so much. Coyotes had arena issues right off the bat with obstructed view seats then when they got the new arena the plague know as coach Gretzky hit as well as Mad Mike Barnett and the rest of Gretzky's cronies running the organization into the ground.

Within the last couple of years the management and coaching have turned around with Don Maloney and Tippett but then this coincided with the Bankruptcy so... we have never really seen what the new management can do with a solid ownership situation. Other factors are possible NFL lockout and a Suns team that sucks. There is about a two year window here where Hockey can really pick up a lot of fans in Phoenix and hopefully we will see. If no one turns out now... then I would agree with you. Oh and Hulsizer has gone on record saying he will pay to build a competitive team, now whether he keeps his promise is yet to be seen.

Additionally .... Hulsizer wants to buy the team for what it is worth...approximately 140m. The NHL wants to roll the losses into the cost and charge 40m over the value to cover the losses. The whole bond deal is so that Hulsizer is not upside down on the deal from the momement he signs. If you bought a car and the previous owner was behind in payments would you expect to cover their shortage?

[automaton 3]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

If you bought a car and the previous owner was behind in payments would you expect to cover their shortage?

Well yes, arrangements have to be made with the creditors to discharge their security interest.

Otherwise you might be left watching forlornly as they tow what you thought was your new car away to auction.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

Within the last couple of years the management and coaching have turned around with Don Maloney and Tippett but then this coincided with the Bankruptcy so... we have never really seen what the new management can do with a solid ownership situation. Other factors are possible NFL lockout and a Suns team that sucks. There is about a two year window here where Hockey can really pick up a lot of fans in Phoenix and hopefully we will see. If no one turns out now... then I would agree with you. Oh and Hulsizer has gone on record saying he will pay to build a competitive team, now whether he keeps his promise is yet to be seen.

Additionally .... Hulsizer wants to buy the team for what it is worth...approximately 140m. The NHL wants to roll the losses into the cost and charge 40m over the value to cover the losses. The whole bond deal is so that Hulsizer is not upside down on the deal from the momement he signs. If you bought a car and the previous owner was behind in payments would you expect to cover their shortage?

Come on. Don't be naive here - Hulsizer wants to pick up an asset using other people's money. He hopes he can flip it and make a profit, most likely by relocating it. He's not an idiot (I assume) - he knows he can't make money staying in Glendale. The team lost $36M with a patchwork discount roster and very good results. Do you think he will spend another $10M on salaries? If you want to know what it will be like, watch the first Major League movie.