You generally don’t develop a property by buying multiple pieces of land and deciding afterwards which one you want to develop. No developer would ever follow this strategy, it’s either a misquote or more BS from these guys.
The question at this point is which piece of land he will be allowed to develop. No developer would ever willingly follow this strategy, but at this point all the normal strategies have failed.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The article literally states his goal “is to have multiple sites under contract”.
But executing multiple LOI’s with intent to only close on one? Again no reputable businessperson does this either.
Multiple sites under contract means that he has control over a number of sites.
Since it's no secret he's doing that, there is nothing disreputable about it. perhaps he's paid an option fee to do this?
My guess is that there is a ton of empty land in Arizona, and potential sellers are eager to sign up for even a chance of being a chosen seller.
If a seller enters into an agreement which doesn't bind the buyer to actually close, there is nothing wrong with the buyer not closing. It is done all the time.
Prior to this thread, I had a soft spot for Arizona / their fans because I love underdogs, but now I just hope Cooley busts and the yotes get moved somewhere else.
Prior to this thread, I had a soft spot for Arizona / their fans because I love underdogs, but now I just hope Cooley busts and the yotes get moved somewhere else.
Multiple sites under contract means that he has control over a number of sites.
Since it's no secret he's doing that, there is nothing disreputable about it. perhaps he's paid an option fee to do this?
My guess is that there is a ton of empty land in Arizona, and potential sellers are eager to sign up for even a chance of being a chosen seller.
If a seller enters into an agreement which doesn't bind the buyer to actually close, there is nothing wrong with the buyer not closing. It is done all the time.
A LOI is not a contract. And having multiple LOI’s in play is not “done all the time” by serious people.
Buying options on different tracts of land, not knowing which ones you want to develop, would be dumb. No intelligent person is doing that. Especially with the cost of capital in this market.
This guy loves blowing smoke and I’m surprised anyone believes what he says.
This is all just a song and dance until they announce the move to Salt Lake in February or March (maybe a little later if they're in the playoff hunt).
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
A LOI is not a contract. And having multiple LOI’s in play is not “done all the time” by serious people.
Buying options on different tracts of land, not knowing which ones you want to develop, would be dumb. No intelligent person is doing that. Especially with the cost of capital in this market.
This guy loves blowing smoke and I’m surprised anyone believes what he says.
A LOI if drafted properly can be a binding commitment if that is the intention of the parties.
Depends on the cost of the option. If there is little demand and lots of supply. Sellers may be only too happy to at least be in the game.
This is all just a song and dance until they announce the move to Salt Lake in February or March (maybe a little later if they're in the playoff hunt).
I would be extremely surprised. Not on a basis of principle (Salt Lake may well be able to support a team better than Phoenix) but rather practicality. They're not going to give up on this until they exhaust all options in the Phoenix area, and if the NHL or the BoG were intent upon forcing the issue, they would've done it after the vote failed. It looks like the Coyotes are trying to establish redundancy for themselves in case the Mesa inquiry falls apart, so I suspect this won't be resolved for quite a while. Their initial deal at ASU covers four years — wonder if they'll end up being there five.
__________________
"This has been TheScorpion's shtick for years. All these hot takes, clickbait nonsense just to feed his social media algorithms." –Tuco
I think the fact they are setting up land options as fall back plans if they fall through suggests that they have been given a drop dead date for having an arena in place.
Have the land options set up ahead of time and then start with top choice and work way down until a arena deal is done or you run out of options.
if the NHL or the BoG were intent upon forcing the issue, they would've done it after the vote failed.
You're assuming that didn't happen. I'm assuming it did. There just wasn't enough time after the vote to get something in place for this season, so they have one last kick to get something done before the league pulls the plug.
My prediction is the rumours will start circulating in January or so. A few cities will be mentioned, but it will most-likely be a sale to the owner of the Jazz and a relocation to the Delta Center (which is its name again) with plans for a new arena before they host the Olympics again.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
You're assuming that didn't happen. I'm assuming it did. There just wasn't enough time after the vote to get something in place for this season, so they have one last kick to get something done before the league pulls the plug.
My prediction is the rumours will start circulating in January or so. A few cities will be mentioned, but it will most-likely be a sale to the owner of the Jazz and a relocation to the Delta Center (which is its name again) with plans for a new arena before they host the Olympics again.
I'm not sure about that. I think if they wanted to wrest control of the franchise, they would've had both the time and the means to do so. The Thrashers moved to Winnipeg in record time.
__________________
"This has been TheScorpion's shtick for years. All these hot takes, clickbait nonsense just to feed his social media algorithms." –Tuco
I've never understood why sports arenas aren't multiplexes with more diversification of income source. Imagine a version of a resort mall like West Edmonton Mall that also had a pro sports arena attached. Then build a residential district around it
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
A LOI if drafted properly can be a binding commitment if that is the intention of the parties.
Depends on the cost of the option. If there is little demand and lots of supply. Sellers may be only too happy to at least be in the game.
There is no generalities in these situations.
I’m not talking about generalities. I’m saying these guys are buffoons and there is no way they are entering into contracts for multiple parcels of land and then picking one later. I can’t be any more specific than that.
Frankly I’d like to see this LOI they claim to have signed. If it even exists, I am quite confident it is highly vague with no breakage fees and no meaningful economic terms. This press release is PR to keep the wolves at bay.
To be clear an LOI can be worded many ways but in my experience it is always a sign of a buyer who is genuinely interested and willing to complete the deal in good faith. Not someone who is “shopping around”.
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
