| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| impropriety |
Posted - 04/01/2010 : 10:48:45
I'm going to start out by apologizing for the multiple counts of threadjacking I've been guilty of in recent weeks. The idea of the desert dogs packing up and moving to Winnipeg's got me a little excited.
The Globe and Mail has an article today with some pretty solid facts regarding the financial issues the NHL faces when it comes to keeping the team in Glendale:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/bettman-pitches-nhl-as-must-see-tv/article1519366/
To paraphrase, if the league does not find a qualified buyer for the Phoenix Coyotes by June they are no longer obligated to abide by the terms of Jobing.com arena's and are essentially free to look at other options (ie. relocation). Among the future ownership prospects is Toronto's David Thomson, a major player in Winnipeg's True North Sports Entertainment, the owners of the MTS Centre and the Manitoba Moose team that plays there. Ice Edge Holdings is facing significant roadblocks when it comes to finding someone to finance their $160MM venture in the desert.
Growing up in Alberta during the Oilers' glory years, I'm a die-hard Oilers fan that was never exposed to the Winnipeg Jets while they were in Winnipeg. I live in Winnipeg now, and the local media gets whipped up into a frenzy any time one of these relocation rumours gets going.
Whether or not you think it's a good idea to have a team in Winnipeg, based on the information in the media lately, how likely do you think it is that an NHL puck drops in the MTS Centre in October 2010?
|
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/13/2010 : 11:43:05
This is a completely sensationalized, media drivin, Hollywood opinion of how the real world works. It can not be proven which opinion is more accurate as neither you nor I are anywhere near the BoG, Bettman, or anything within the framework of the NHL. However, one of the opinions is based on some kind of logic and reason. The other is based on wild accusations and media propaganda.
I just can't seem to understand how multimillionaires and billionaires who own hockey teams and run the BoG are all complete morons who can't see that Bettman is a complete tool yet millions upon millions of Canadian Hockey Fans can???
Seriously, is that the argument???
And I only brought up Balsillie because you did. If you wish, I can prove 6 ways to Sunday that Balsillie's attempts at purchasing the Penguins and the Predators was under false pretenses to keep the teams in their respective cities when it has been proven with various legal documents that he intended to move both to Hamilton once he owned them through loop holes in the NHL Constitution.
Beside the point?? Yes. Wildly incorrect?? Not at all.
|
| n/a |
Posted - 06/13/2010 : 00:37:41
Let's rephrase you question:
Who is more guilty?
The person who suggests the action, sells it under false pretences, gets it approved, then blames everyone else but himself when it blows up - and convinces his bosses fairly well of this?
Or, the people who were sold the lie, approved the action, and then bought the reasons for the failure as well
Do I think any of the BoG were smart to try hockey in the desert? No, it was a greedy move filled with lies about tv deals, expansion and more US dollars. But when you have snake-oil salesman Bettman selling it to deluded owners, and you only need a majority, well, the intelligence of a group we all know is usually the lowest common denominator, especially when you have powerful corrupt members leading the group (see: Toronto).
I won't respond to your ridiculous comment about Balsillie and further sidetrack this discussion . . . it is both wildly incorrect and totally beside the point.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/12/2010 : 14:40:17
To an old point, who is more guilty:
The person suggesting the action
or
The people who approve the action.
And it does not require a 30 person consensus, it required the majoirty of the Board agreeing to something, to which, I will add again, Bettman has zero vote on.
If the Board, being all these horrible, horrible businessmen, wanted actions anything other than those Bettman is involved in, he would be fired.
You can blame Bettman all you want, but all it really does it lend to an opinion that you are ill-informed. He is the puppet. The Puppetmaster is the Board.
Put the blame in the correct place.
Finally, my comment
"And one who so quickly throws out the Liar label and yet talks solidly about Balsillie??"
The intention behind that was that in EVERY involvement Balsillie was has with the NHL he has been deceitful and underhanded.
Every-single-one. |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/11/2010 : 10:30:33
See, the argument you make - that 30 bosses can somehow constantly arrive at a consensus and direct Bettman on what to do and how to do it - this is just not possible. Nor is it logical or realistic to assume that all ideas and proposals for initiatives, strategies with how to deal with matters, etc are directed by a huge and very fragmented group (Board of Governors).
In this business environment, my guess is that Bettman proposes major initiatives to the BoG and gets them approved, and that minor matters are entirely directed by himself. And, being the lying, slimy lawyer, most of the time he is able to spin and misdirect any blame for any of his initiatives away from himself and onto others, and he is able to aptly sell his ideas to the BoG by mentioning that every one of them will make money or be to their benefit.
The key to a position like Bettman's isn't that you are so successful at what you do; it's successfully selling/representing yourself to the BoG that you are successful at what you do.
So yes, I do put a large part of the culpability on Bettman. Because the problem actually IS that there are 30 bosses, and not just one or two.
And I never talked about how honest Balsillie is . . . and am confused as to how that has anything to do with Bettman's handling of his job and his performance. The two things are entirely seperate issues. From what I saw of Balsillie, he was pretty straightforward, but I don't know him personally. From what I have seen, Balsillie's bid should have clearly gotten a few teams by now, but they were all semi-illegally thwarted by Bettman and his cronies.
At any rate, Balsillie is beside the point - Bettman is the slimy liar who let Canadian teams leave and doesn't want any other teams to get back to Canada, and anything he is saying now about Winnipeg is probably pure hogwash as he prepares a place in Kansas City or elsewhere.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 10:05:33
Again, as always, people point the blame in the wrong direction.
30 other fingers need to be points. Gary Bettman has bosses that direct him what to do.
And one who so quickly throws out the Liar label and yet talks solidly about Balsillie??
That's a joke right??? |
| n/a |
Posted - 06/10/2010 : 05:18:37
Thanks for that update guest.
Is everybody done defending the greatest LIAR the world has ever known, Gary Bettman, The Count? Ice Edge and Reisendorf were bull sh-- the whole time, just fronts to keep out Balsillie at the time and later stave off a sale.
But reality has caught up to the commissioner's ploy, and eventually, this team HAS to move out of the desert.
Go Winnipeg! Go Quebec City! Go southern Ontario!
Go away, Bettman.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest7113 |
Posted - 06/08/2010 : 09:37:08
Update:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/reinsdorf-group-pulls-out-of-coyotes-pursuit/article1596114/
Reinsdorf officially pulls his offer, Ice Edge is the only group left in contention.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/hard-times-may-scuttle-coyotes-deal-95840184.html
Ice Edge finally admits that their so-called financing is anything but a sure thing. Pretty much a crapshoot even if they reach an agreement. Glendale imposes a deadline for Ice Edge to provide proof they can toss that kind of skrilla around on an NHL team. |
| Rambo2305 |
Posted - 05/31/2010 : 10:33:48
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6189
Winnipeg would have the smallest NHL arena, for sure. But I don't think that means anything. Altlanta, Nashville, Dallas, the Floridas, all have bigger arenas, but how many tickets do they give away? Or for at least very cheap? I heard Phoenix had specials where you get a free ticket with a bottle of booze. In Florida you can get parking, food voucher, and a ticket for something like $20.
I don't see this type of marketing happening in Winnipeg. It may have the smallest arena, but when you add up the ticket sales, it should by far surpass the larger arenas in the southern States.
I'd be way more concerned about corporate support in Winnipeg than the arena size and fan support. But the fact that Thompson is involved is encouraging.
Go Jets Go in 2011!!
Agree...$14 gets you 10 rows up in Tampa...same seats at the Air Canada Centre are $250...if you get them from a friend lol otherwise...season tickets only |
| Guest6189 |
Posted - 05/31/2010 : 07:49:03
Winnipeg would have the smallest NHL arena, for sure. But I don't think that means anything. Altlanta, Nashville, Dallas, the Floridas, all have bigger arenas, but how many tickets do they give away? Or for at least very cheap? I heard Phoenix had specials where you get a free ticket with a bottle of booze. In Florida you can get parking, food voucher, and a ticket for something like $20.
I don't see this type of marketing happening in Winnipeg. It may have the smallest arena, but when you add up the ticket sales, it should by far surpass the larger arenas in the southern States.
I'd be way more concerned about corporate support in Winnipeg than the arena size and fan support. But the fact that Thompson is involved is encouraging.
Go Jets Go in 2011!! |
| Guest9169 |
Posted - 05/31/2010 : 07:20:26
Gary Bettman is an idiot. I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth and never will. |
| Rambo2305 |
Posted - 05/31/2010 : 06:36:24
If Reinsdorf becomes the majority owner...within a couple years, he'll look to move the team to Chicago and create a North Siders vs. South Siders battle similar to the Cubs vs. White Sox...
Bettman would ok it as long as it was another American team :D |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/29/2010 : 06:17:47
I don't recall saying the arena was an issue. I recall saying that expanding a small arena by 3000 seats is a mistake and they will have to build new sooner than later. This is based on my experience in Edmonton and my dislike for Rexall Place.
My argument has always been that Winnipeg is still on the outside looking in and it's a pipe dream to think this Phoenix franchise is moving to Winnipeg this year. It's simply not happening with the City of Glendale, Ice Edge, and the NHL as road blocks. |
| Guest4666 |
Posted - 05/28/2010 : 19:51:58
Weren't you suggesting that the biggest factor working against Winnipeg was the size of the arena? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/28/2010 : 19:17:58
quote:
Originally posted by impropriety
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Bettman---more-patience-95131794.html
Summary:
Bettman says the MTS Centre is an NHL-calibre facility. This is in spite of the fact that it seats approximately 15,000 people.
Bettman acknowledges by name the offer made by True North as a bona fide offer.
Does this settle some of the points we've been discussing in this thread?
No. Not at all. The question never was how valid the offer from True North is. The question is 'how likely is the puck dropping at the MTS Centre in 2010 season?"
The answer to that is now absolutely zero. Especially as the NHL has made the deal with Glendale for the City to cover the loses. Part of that agreement was that the EARLIEST date the NHL could seek relocation is December which means that the EARLIEST the team would actually relocate is for the start of the 2011 season.
|
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/28/2010 : 16:27:51
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Bettman---more-patience-95131794.html
Summary:
Bettman says the MTS Centre is an NHL-calibre facility. This is in spite of the fact that it seats approximately 15,000 people.
Bettman acknowledges by name the offer made by True North as a bona fide offer.
Does this settle some of the points we've been discussing in this thread? |
| Radoria |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 18:15:31
Here is an interesting article as to why the Jets left which kind of sums it up:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/glendale-repeats-our-long-ago-mistakes-93661829.html
It lends some creedence to what Beans has been saying regarding lack of support from the city (not the fans). What it doesn't expand upon is that the frontrunner of potential ownership groups (Manitoba Entertainment Complex, or MEC) was able to secure the funds to build a new arena but not enough to purchase the team. |
| Gusteroni |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 12:40:59
Impropriety:
I was just expressing my concern for the people on Winnipeg if this does not come to fruition as many will feel like they were just kicked in the Sami Salo's. I have a feeling if it does not happen for them this year they will have a team there within a few years.
There is no doubt that the NHL cannot lose anymore money to the failing Coyotes and the teams paying for them to survive aren't going to have this continue on. As long as Jerry Reinsdorf is in the mix the Coyotes could be staying put but there are conflicting stories about his involvment. The only thing at the moment that might point to the Coyotes staying is that the City of Glendale is putting up the 25 Million to keep the team playing at Jobing.com arena for the 10 - 11 season and in truth I did not expect them to go ahead with it. They need an owner by June 30th though and until that happens I believe this is still up in the air.
When Hell freezes over, I'll play hockey there too. |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 11:55:44
@ Gusteroni:
I don't think "when the Coyotes don't return this year" is quite accurate. It's still a big 'if'.
The NHL can't take another year of losses in Glendale. Bettman, as Beans has pointed out, is accountable to the Board of Governors, and they won't buy into it. Until Glendale comes up with the cash, the BoG is on the hook for the losses because the team is operating on their dollar. If there are any delays in the city providing the guarantee (ie problems securing financing or Goldwater's lawsuit over the legality of covering the losses at all), the team is gone.
The NHL needs to know soon because of things like the draft (coming up in a little over a month) and the scheduling issues, as well as the July 1 free agency deadline. True North's offer to purchase also comes with a deadline because they need to know whether they have to plan the upcoming year with the Moose (recruitment, etc).
As far as I know, the idea of an 'alternate schedule' involving the new Jets has been exaggerated. The NHL has suggested that what they had was a 'matrix' that determines who would play whom, but doesn't go so far as to name dates and whatnot. It's essentially a preliminary schedule, as a contingency. It's also been postulated that the Jets would join the Northwest division, with Colorado joining the Pacific. |
| Gusteroni |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 11:28:58
I sure hope the people of Winnipeg don't get their hopes up too high as there could be a huge disappointment when the Coyotes don't return to the Peg next season. I can see how their hopes can be high as the NHL made an alternate schedule including Winnipeg in place of Phoenix. If Winnipeg did get the Coyotes would they play in the Northwest division and the Canucks would move to the Pacific division?
When Hell freezes over, I'll play hockey there too. |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 10:08:41
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Dont-give-up-NHL-tells-city--93667974.html
Summary of comments made by NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly regarding Winnipeg's desire (and ability) to host an NHL team in the near future. There's also a few comments from the mayor of Winnipeg, Sam Katz, about his optimism regarding a franchise relocating to Winnipeg in the near future.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Load-of-landmines-on-road-to-keeping-Coyotes-in-desert--93668139.html
Quotes from the Goldwater Institute's attorney regarding potential lawsuits against the City of Glendale for contravention of the state's laws that prohibit public grants going to private business. Main issue the Goldwater Institute is facing is that the lawsuit cannot actually be filed until the money is given to the NHL (which would not happen unless a purchaser could be found by the June 30 deadline). Looks like they're going to try the angle that the city is in the wrong to even authorize the city manager to try and secure the funds for this purpose.
I don't know if I would go so far as to say that Liebermann has been paid off, but he definitely says one thing while doing another. He vocally opposed both Memorandums of Understanding that have been proposed, and voted for them despite what he said. I didn't get the feeling (while I was watching the live video coverage of the Glendale meeting) that he'd been paid off, but I did get the distinct feeling that the whole thing with Logan, the young kid in the Coyotes jersey, was staged. It was a little too 'feel good' to happen spontaneously.
A quick word about Bettman 'not being the boss'. While it's true in theory, you could say the same about any elected official. The Prime Minister answers to the voters, so you could argue that certain decisions are not his to make if they are not in the best interests of the public, but he can still make them. It's within his authority (see Klein, Ralph).
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 07:56:43
Hey Slozo, you should be asking the correct questions.
Where was the Board of Governor's directing Bettman to get involved in Winnipeg's issues??
It very easy to forget that Bettman is not the Boss, just an employee of the NHL. He doesn't get to make that call. |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/13/2010 : 07:32:21
Back in 96, where was Bettman taking over the Winnipeg franchise until they could find a suitable owner? Where was Bettman, trying to keep the stability of the league and trying to appease the huge swell of fan support at the time?
He was not there . . . or rather, he WAS there - stabbing them in the back, and quickly setting things up to move them to an american city in the desert with not even a remote connection or fanbase for hockey.
I think Liebermann has a side deal with Bettman, or has been paid off. I have no proof of this, but situationally, that's what it looks like.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 16:47:15
I am talking about the City of Winnipeg back in 96 when they left.
Where was the City with a new arena and a local ownership group a la the Edmonton group or Calgary group to save the Jets??
They were not there.
|
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/12/2010 : 08:44:15
Interesting the way you worded that, Beans. Zero support from the city of Winnipeg? Do you mean financially, or fan support?
Iirc, 35,000 people showed up at the 'Save the Jets' rally. I watched the CoG council meeting last night. There are 285 seats in their viewing gallery, and it was not full. I counted 12 people in the seats wearing Coyotes merch (which, admittedly, was a large portion of their fanbase). The chair of a Coyotes fanclub got up to speak when they opened the floor to questions, and she said they have 385 members after 3 years. This, Beans, is -after- their miraculous year and increased fan support, and -after- their 4 consecutive playoff sell-outs.
Liebermann, the council member who vowed to oppose the movement at all costs, tore apart the people proposing the movement with questions about the legality and practicality of the CFD (a district of businesses around the arena that would see a portion of their profits funnelled into the $25MM that would end up in the NHL's pockets). He then promptly changed his tune after a ~7 year old boy in a Coyotes jersey asked him to keep them in Glendale. He supported the movement from that point onward. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 21:16:50
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
NEWSFLASH BEANS:
Phoenix is still a failing franchise. Please show us how much money they made this year if you attempt to disprove this!
Filling the seats for 4 playoff games didn't save them.
Is the NHL so ready to go to bat for a team that went to the playoffs and lost to Detroit? Oh wait, that EXACT same thing happened to Winnipeg in 1995/96 . . . and that was for a team that had made the playoffs 11 out of the last 15 years, making the second round twice during the Oilers dynasty.
And the NHL rolls out totally garbage rationalisation about drastic moves, stability, etc?!? Where the heck is the logic?
Answer: there is no logic when dealing with the NHL.
Goodluck to you Winnipeggers . . . Winnipegans?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Hey Captain Obvious, thanks for the Tip!!
I never said that the Frachise was safe and secure. What I did say is that the City fronted $180 million for a franchise and the teams has sucked for the better part of a decade. Now they have a decent product on the ice, maybe a little momentum, and a potential ownership group committed to making a go of a team in Phoenix. One could argue that Phoenix has never had this opportunity in their time in Arizona. All I said is it would be short sighted and ignorant saying a team would not have a shot.
Edmonton, which is a crazy hockey city, went well over a decade without turning a profit until an ownership group committed to producing a quality product got involved.
And let's not misquote why the Jets left in the first place. They had ZERO support from their City and no owner will willing to stay there and front the cash for a new arena when that franchise(regardless of their success) was not a money maker either. |
| Guest4666 |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 20:38:45
Looks like the City of Glendale passed the motion to give the city manager approval to attempt to secure the funds to facilitate the IEH deal. Interesting to note that Reinsdorf is still in it, and Bettman mentioned on HNIC that he was never actually out. |
| Radoria |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 18:32:40
Beans makes an interesting point regarding other potential cities that Phoenix could be relocated to, such as Quebec City/Kansas City. As of today I don't believe QC has an NHL-caliber arena (although there may be plans to build one). Kansas City does have an NHL caliber arena, the Sprint Centre, however the Kansas City Scouts left for Colorado (and ultimately ended up in New Jersey) due to limited fan support.
Secondly, the Phoenix Coyotes have now made the playoffs six out of 13 times since they relocated (including four seasons in a row from 96-97 to 99-2000). Surely in six of those years there was a playoff buzz about the team and their financial fortunes were destined to improve as the public perception was that this was an up-and-coming team - the fact is they have yet to turn a profit in a season regardless of their on-ice performance. |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 10:44:46
NEWSFLASH BEANS:
Phoenix is still a failing franchise. Please show us how much money they made this year if you attempt to disprove this!
Filling the seats for 4 playoff games didn't save them.
Is the NHL so ready to go to bat for a team that went to the playoffs and lost to Detroit? Oh wait, that EXACT same thing happened to Winnipeg in 1995/96 . . . and that was for a team that had made the playoffs 11 out of the last 15 years, making the second round twice during the Oilers dynasty.
And the NHL rolls out totally garbage rationalisation about drastic moves, stability, etc?!? Where the heck is the logic?
Answer: there is no logic when dealing with the NHL.
Goodluck to you Winnipeggers . . . Winnipegans?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/11/2010 : 09:08:41
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/LIVE-BLOG-Glendale-council-meeting-on-Coyotes-deal-93293609.html
This is a live blog that will cover the City of Glendale council meeting tonight. The actual meeting starts at 9pm CST.
What Glendale council will vote on:
- Glendale city councillors will vote tonight on the NHL's demands to cover operating losses incurred by the Phoenix Coyotes next season if the team cannot be sold to a group that will operate the team at Jobing.com Arena.
- A vote in favour of satisfying the NHL's requirements would enable the city manager to try to secure the financial mechanisms (a bank note or line of credit) to meet the NHL's demands.
- The NHL wants a guarantee any losses incurred by the Coyotes in 2010-11 are covered should they have to operate the team again.
- A yes vote does not satisfy the NHL's demands but only gives the city manager the authority to attempt to do so. Only a certified financial agreement will satisfy the NHL. In essence, Glendale must make a contract with a financial institution to cover these losses that have been estimated in the $30-million range.
- The vote passes with a simple majority.
- Source: Winnipeg Free Press
What the agenda says:
Authority to satisfy the NHL's requirements for Phoenix Coyotes
PURPOSE: This is a request for city council to grant the city manager authority to sign the agreements and secure the financial mechanisms that are reasonably necessary to satisfy the NHL's requirements in order for the NHL Phoenix Coyotes to remain in Glendale during the NHL 2010-11 season.
- The NHL has expressed its intention to keep the team in Glendale, but has established deadlines and imposed requirements that require certain immediate financial commitments and assurances by the City of Glendale.
- The agreements allow the team to remain in place for the NHL 2010-11 season; allowing staff the necessary time to complete the required agreements with the ownership group that will be committed to retaining the team in Glendale for the remainder of the orginal lease term.
- Source: City of Glendale
|
| irvine |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 22:48:50
How long will the Coyotes continue to sell out? Even if the product on the ice continues to succeed?
We can't say for certain, as they have just began to finally succeed. But something tells me, they'll not sell out all season. Not even close.
They may sell out at the beginning of the year, but I'd be willing to bet on them slowly decreasing in attendance (even with some success) as time goes on. They may continue at 60-75% attendance, but I don't see them continually selling out.
Also, how long can a team remain successfull in the salary cap NHL? A couple of season, unless you are Detroit?
Eventually, and I predict much sooner rather than later, the Coyotes will be in the same boat they have been in since they began in Phoenix. Losing income, with a low attendance record.
Other franchises suffer too, with lack of success. But they continually have a fan base (less than normal, but it's there), and they continue to sell merchandise. Other teams may lose a few million per season, but not $25-100 Million per, as Phoenix does. The year before loses (if I remember correctly) was $170Million dollars. How does one allow that to continue, without atleast really considering a move.
Why wait? You may reduce your loses, but you're not going to begin making money in just one year. Why delay the inevitable.
Phoenix may be a 'success' at this moment in time, but it's bound to go back under. And if somebody believe it will not, perhaps they need to look at the past of Phoenix a little closer.
Irvine/prez. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 20:01:58
I think WAS failing is a better way to say it. It isclear, similar to the NHL in any other cities(other than Montreal and Toronto) if the team wins the seats get filled. Even in places where the NHL is very strong (like Edmonton and Calgary) ran into poor crowds when the product sucked and sell out when the product is better.
I think the folks in Glendale would like to see at the least an opportunity to see the team succeed. It was obvious that under previous ownership, little was done to produce a solid product on the ice. Now that there is a solid product on the ice, the team leaves?? Glendale kinda gets the short end of the stick on that deal don't they?? After shelling out the cash for the stadium they get nothing for it??
No amount of concerts, etc can compensate for the costs of the stadium. It sitting empty would be worth about as much as $25 million. Also, how much of those annual loses are rent for the building?? It is almost like Glendale covering the loses with their own money at least a big part of it.
Now, to your analogy, I wouldn't sell my tickets. I am a fan. I would go to the games if I already paid for the tickets. I don't pay $9 for parking, I take the Train for $2.50. If I choose to drink a $9 beer, that's my choice. But I don't sell my hockey tickets.
Ever. |
| irvine |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 19:29:37
I like the analogy impropriety. And I agree, to an extent.
Perhaps it would be cheaper for the tax payers to allow the arena to sit, 'empty'. As it will still bring in some funds, from concerts, certain venues, etc...
But, as you said, why spend more on something, that is failing.
Irvine/prez. |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 13:02:12
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not very well-versed in Arizona politics. I'm not sure how many council members there are, or how influential each one might be.
This was the quote that jumped out at me, though.
Arizona laws prohibit communities from granting excessive subsidies to private businesses. When they are made, they have to make a clear benefit to the taxpayers.
When you're talking about demonstrating a clear benefit to taxpayers, you're talking about the city paying $180 mil to cover an empty arena, or $205 mil to cover an arena and a team that the average Phoenix/Glendale resident doesn't really care about. They don't just have to sell that to the fans, they have to sell it to the non-fans (which greatly outnumber the fans). If they spin it right, the empty arena costs the taxpayer less.
I don't think I buy into this 'in for a penny, in for a pound' business.
Now, you're an Oilers fan so this analogy should hit close to home. I think you can appreciate it. If you've got season tickets to this past year's Oilers, and come February you're sick of trekking down to RX1 to watch them lose, you might try to sell the remainder of the year's tickets - right? What happens when nobody's interested in buying them? Do you go to the games anyway? Do you pay $15 for parking, $9 per beer and $5 each for Popcorn for the kids? You've already paid for the tickets, so I understand the fact that you want to get your money's worth. Is it worth all that extra money to go and watch something you've all but lost interest in? Judging by the empty seats in Edmonton towards the end of the season, I'd say no.
Edit:
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=321188
Not reading too much into it (mostly because there's not much to read into), but Ice Edge has backed out of talks until they are granted an exclusivity agreement. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 12:54:24
It is a very interesting article, but it is still not without red flags.
1) This is one Council Member, not all.
2) What is worse, the $25 million now or the $180 million arena sitting empty??
3) This still does not say anything about the team going to Winnipeg. What about Quebec City?? Kansas City?? |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 12:02:28
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/city-cant-meet-nhls-coyotes-demands/article1562692/
Here's the article I was talking about. It's from Saturday, but I was on a shopping trip with my girlfriend down to Grand Forks and Fargo for the weekend and missed it in the weekend issue.
This one is interesting because it's not a Winnipeg source, and the quotes come directly from one of the parties involved (a City of Glendale council member). If these are the arguments he's going to present, I would think that the other council members that are looking to get re-elected will follow suit. It's not just that the team is broke, the city is too. |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 10:48:18
The source is important - you're absolutely correct there. I guess what I was getting at was the quotes from Jones himself. The only influence the Winnipeg Free Press could have on direct quotes is I guess misquoting or removing context.
I read about 1/4 of an article from the Globe and Mail this morning before I shook the sleepydust out of my eyes. Let me see if I can track it down. I don't actually remember what it was about. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 10:37:52
One has to be careful of filtering the media from the propoganda. Consider the source. Every report I have found out of Winnipeg shows the chances of getting the Phoenix franchise far higher than any other media outlet.
With Reinsdorf out, Winnipeg does move from #3 to #2, however that is still a distant #2. The one thing that I can see that has changed in the past few days is that the NHL is saying if Glendale can not secure a deal, the decision to move the franchise will be swift.
I still think Glendale will get something done. |
| impropriety |
Posted - 05/10/2010 : 10:21:52
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/hockey/ice-edge-feels-winnipegs-pain-93258189.html
Feel free to stop me if you feel these articles are just re-iterating the same point, but it's in the newspaper every morning so it's difficult to forget about it. This article has some quotes direct from Ice Edge (who is now the sole purchaser interested in maintaining a franchise in the desert).
Some quotes that jumped out at me:
"We think Winnipeg is a viable market, with a new building that some might think is a little small, but with excellent ownership in place. We'd be behind having a team in Winnipeg. With the salary cap and the strength of the Canadian dollar, Winnipeg is a very viable market."
Jones rated Ice Edge's chance of closing the deal at 50-50.
Jones believes Winnipeg's ability to readily accomodate an NHL franchise puts the city of Glendale, which built Jobing.com Arena for the Coyotes, in a tenuous position.
I guess these quotes could be seen in one of two ways - either Jones is pandering to the Canadians that would like to 'make it seven' in an attempt to clear his name, or he's sincere when he says that he thinks Winnipeg is a viable market (despite the under-sized arena). Either way, it looks like the City of Glendale is going to be voting on whether they can cover the upcoming season's losses tomorrow.
|
| Guest4532 |
Posted - 05/07/2010 : 11:51:32
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/hockey/coyotes-sale-goes-sour--in-desert-93053824.html |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/07/2010 : 10:24:33
OK, couple of things.
Firstly, if Reinsdorf is out(which I doubt) then Ice Edge would be next. If there is anything coming out of Winnipeg, one would have to think it's a distance 2nd. No one wants to move the team out of Phoenix until they can play the, "This is the 3rd owner of the team in Phoenix and it still doesn't work" card. Until that happens, the lease and the City of Glendale will be very hard to fight off.
Now, this RIM/Anthony LeBlanc thing. I don't really know either, but one would ahve to thinks that the NHL and Bettman would have sniffed around enough ot know if Balsillie was anywhere near that deal. The other perspective could be that LeBlanc is now against Balsillie in some way. Do we know why/how he left RIM?? If it was not by LeBlanc's choice, this very well could be a revenge thing in that LeBlanc and his group take the team Balisillie wanted??
|
|
|
