|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Sept 28, 2012 17:40:01 GMT -5
Future of Coyotes uncertain as ever ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/future-coyotes-uncertain-ever-185500007--nhl.htmlOne upside of the lockout for the NHL is that it has given the league more time to deal with the mess that continues to be the Phoenix Coyotes. Whether the deal to sell the ward of the state to Greg Jamison is dead or has simply hit another in a long line of obstacles is open to conjecture, but it’s clear the future of the Coyotes is nowhere close to assured. This much we know: that Horatio Skeete, the acting city manager for the City of Glendale, told councillors there in an in-camera meeting earlier this month the deal was to have been completed by Thursday and it was not. That news is coming amid claims by one industry source the deal is, in fact, dead and Jamison has not been able to raise the money to purchase the team from the NHL. It was reported in early August Jamison, the former CEO of the San Jose Sharks, had come up with the final $20 million he needed to fund the $170 million purchase of the team from the NHL. (According to our source, Jamison had to come up with $70 million toward the purchase price.) Nothing has been heard since then and if Jamison were to have all his financial affairs in order to purchase the team, wouldn’t things have moved forward in the almost two months since then? The only thing that has really happened since then is captain Shane Doan signing a four-year, $21.2-million contract, but that was more necessitated by the impending lockout than it was a reflection of the status of the Coyotes. To this point, neither a deal has been reached between Jamison and the City of Glendale to restructure the team’s lease with the Jobing.com Arena nor has Jamison purchased the team from the NHL, which has been operating it since 2009. One member of the NHL’s board of governors reached by THN.com said he hasn’t heard anything one way or another on the status of the Coyotes purchase, but said he doubts the deal with Glendale will ever get done. “I just can’t imagine any city would enter into that kind of agreement, would it?” he said. “That might be me just sitting here saying, ‘Does that make any sense?’ But usually when you ask whether it makes sense, it doesn’t make any sense.” With the City of Glendale apparently unwilling to give the Coyotes any more short-term lifelines, the fate of the team is uncertain. If the season is truncated because of the lockout, perhaps the league might be willing to operate for one more year in the desert because the losses will be less than they would be for an entire season. According to a source, the prospect of suspending the franchise until it can be sold and moved is a possibility. The problem for the NHL is it doesn’t have another Winnipeg – a city with an appetite for NHL hockey with an NHL-ready building waiting to be used – at the moment. Last summer, when the Atlanta Thrashers imploded, the league was able to move the team relatively quickly because everything was already in place in Winnipeg. Other candidates to take a team – namely Seattle, Quebec City and Toronto – do not have their buildings in place yet. NOBODY WINS NOW The more you speak to the NHL’s rank-and-file, the more you get the impression the league is trying to crush the players in these negotiations. That’s probably already evident in the league’s behavior so far in these talks, but it is disturbing. I was speaking with an NHL veteran recently, a player who went through the lockout that wiped out the 2004-05 season. When asked whether the players would have the resolve to sit out another season, he said a year ago he would have thought that wouldn’t be the case. “But Gary (NHL commissioner Bettman) makes it really easy for us to come together,” the player said. “If this was a nice guy who came across as a guy just trying to make a deal to protect the owners, that would be one thing. But it’s the arrogance that makes us stronger. Gary’s arrogance scares me. Guys I’ve talked to are willing to go the whole year.” An agent relayed a conversation one of his clients had with his team’s owner that stunned the player. “This owner said, ‘This is billionaires against millionaires,’ ” the agent said. “ ‘I’m the billionaire and I’m going to win.’ ” It would be far more comforting to hockey fans if there were a desire to get a deal that is fair to everyone. But the league appears to have one goal in mind and that’s to win. Those kinds of deals help nobody in the long term, because all they do is provide the aggrieved side with the feeling it must do the same the next time around. LET’S MOVE ON Never been happier to see Sept. 28 come and go. Finally, we’ve reached the 40th anniversary of Game 8 of the 1972 Summit Series. So, presumably, that means by Saturday we can all get on with our lives without the marathon of sappy tributes to the most overrated event in the history of the game. Ken Campbell is the senior writer for The Hockey News and a regular contributor to THN.com with his column. To read more from Ken and THN's other stable of experts, subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.
|
|
|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Sept 28, 2012 21:29:07 GMT -5
Don't blame Coyotes for Glendale's problems (Blame Glendale) It took just 22 minutes for the Glendale City Council to agree to shell out $180 million to build an arena for the Phoenix Coyotes. City leaders had spent the previous weekend urging then-Coyotes owner Steve Ellman to dump Scottsdale – where skeptical city officials weren’t buying his pitch – and come west. In a flash, Glendale’s dazzling dreams of hockey grandeur were coming true. “It truly is a historical event,” a beaming Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs said that April evening in 2001. Turns out Scruggs was right. Eleven years later, the city is in a financial hole of historic proportion as a result of its sports-crazed leaders. Glendale is now facing the distinct possibility its citizens will revolt and repeal the temporary sales tax stuck to them in August – a tax the city is desperate to hang onto given the avalanche of sports bills that threaten to send the place into a financial freefall. Even if voters agree on Nov. 6 to continue the added tax to pay for professional hockey and spring baseball digs, cuts of “optional” stuff – you know, parks and libraries and police and such – still are coming. Glendale doesn’t glitter lately as much as it bleeds red ink. Which is why I was astonished this week to see the city continue its losing quest to fight a casino on its border. There’s no question but that the Tohono O’odham pulled a fast one after Arizona voters in 2002 gave the tribes exclusive rights to gaming, based in part on a promise that no new casinos would be built in the Valley. Within a year, this southern Arizona tribe quietly bought land on a county island at 95th and Northern avenues and proceceeded to have it designated as part of its reservation so it could plop down a casino. Glendale and others sued, but the tribe has prevailed at every turn. So, of course, the city that’s broke on Tuesday voted to continue the fight, despite this month’s loss before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Cost thus far: $3.2 million in legal fees – and growing. That $3.2 million could have kept a lot of librarians in business. Even as the City Council voted to continue tilting at slot machines, city management unveiled its plan for what happens if voters repeal the tax. The Pass-It-Or-Else Plan, as I call it, goes on tour next week in Glendale neighborhoods. Basically, the city is threatening to gut its staff, close two of three libraries, drain a pool, cancel all downtown festivals – events that actually make money -- and of course, it’s employing the favorite threat of cities everywhere: cut police and firefighters. All this, if citizens overrule their leaders and ax the sales tax. But the most galling part of all? The city’s insistence that its desperation is due to the economy. “Many people say the Coyotes are the cause of this problem, but that’s not the truth,” Councilman Manny Martinez told citizens this week. Actually, he’s right. The Coyotes aren’t the problem. The city’s leadership is the problem… …Leaders who put residents on the hook for a hocky arena that has brought in a grand total of $3.8 million in direct tax revenue since May 2010, while costing $50 million in management fees. …Leaders who have committed to paying $16 million a year for the next 20 years to Greg Jamison, if only he will buy the Coyotes and keep the team in Glendale. Already, they’re trying to renegotiate that stinker. But their predicament will likely get worse if the team departs, leaving taxpayers with an empty $180 million white elephant to pay off. …Leaders who were so desperate to grab a piece of the Cactus League that they built a $200 million spring-training complex in 2008. That shrewd deal will cost taxpayers $13 million in the coming year, with none of the new retail promised to pay the debt the city now faces for the next 30 years. …Leaders who, despite it all, still want to fight the Tohono O’odham. Fighting still, when they should be teaming up with the tribe. In fact, if I was mayor I would knock off the lawsuit and immediately make the Tohono O’odham -- they of the portable reservation -- a peace offering. To wit: Jobing.com Arena and Camelback Ranch. Toss a few slot machines near center ice and down the third base line and you could quickly pay off a decade’s worth of this city’s deplorable decisions. And if that works, Glendale’s residents might also want to hand over city hall. www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/LaurieRoberts/172505(Column published Sept. 29, 2012, The Arizona Republic.)
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 30, 2012 9:49:37 GMT -5
www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/revised-arena-agreement-would-see-prospective-coyotes-owner-jamison-receive-less-in-first-five-years/article4577333/Revised arena agreement would see prospective Coyotes owner Jamison receive less in first five years DAVID SHOALTS The Globe and Mail Published Saturday, Sep. 29 2012, 6:02 PM EDT Last updated Saturday, Sep. 29 2012, 9:20 PM EDT A revised agreement on an arena lease for the Phoenix Coyotes will be presented to councillors for the suburban city of Glendale on Tuesday with reduced payments to prospective owner Greg Jamison over the first five years. The original 20-year lease was front-loaded with $97-million (all currency U.S.) in the first five years going to Jamison and his partners, which now include Ice Edge Holdings LLC, a group of Canadian and American businessmen. But acting city manager Horatio Skeete negotiated a reduction of the payments in the first five years to about $72-million, with the payments in the final 15 years being raised to keep the overall cost of the lease to the city at $324-million. The payments are officially for Jamison to manage Jobing.com Arena. MORE RELATED TO THIS STORY Tohono O’Odham tribe emerges as key player in Coyotes sale Signing Doan may help Coyotes maintain momentum, provide stability Ice Edge back in the mix to purchase Phoenix Coyotes Originally, Jamison was to receive $17-million in the 2013 fiscal year, the first year of the lease, but that is expected to drop to around $12-million or $13-million. However, even if Glendale council agrees to the revised lease, the sale of the Coyotes by the NHL for $170-million is not a sure thing. It will be conditional on Jamison and his partners raising additional money, somewhere between $20-million and $40-million, to cover the annual losses of the Coyotes. The team, which wound up in the NHL’s hands when it went bankrupt in 2009, has never turned a profit since moving into Jobing.com Arena in 2003. Glendale, a city of 250,000 people, was hit hard by the recession, which decimated the sales-tax revenue it expected to pay for its expensive foray into building arenas and stadiums to attract professional sports teams. It was forced to lay off dozens of city employees and cut services in order to deal with a $35-million budget deficit for fiscal 2013. The city is also facing the loss of a city sales-tax increase in November’s municipal election. The increase, which was hoped to produce at least $22-million for the city in the coming fiscal year, will be placed on the ballot and is expected to be turned down by the voters. An agenda posted on Glendale’s web site says city staff “is seeking guidance from City Council on proposed modifications to the Arena Management Agreement” with Jamison for Jobing.com Arena, which is owned by the city. Jamison needs the money promised in the lease to complete his financing plans to buy the Coyotes. Outgoing Glendale councillor Phil Lieberman expects council to be presented with a revised deal that lowers the payments in the first five years and raises them in the final 15. But he admitted he does not know what Jamison and Skeete agreed to this week. They met on Tuesday along with Anthony LeBlanc, the leader of the Ice Edge group, Skeete announced Thursday they reached an agreement. “I have no idea,” Lieberman said of what he expects to see in the new lease agreement. “The city is so screwed up nobody knows what’s going on.” Jamison could not be reached for comment. Since council’s session on Tuesday is a workshop and not a regular meeting, the councillors will not formally vote on the revised lease. That is expected to come on Oct. 9, the next scheduled public meeting. After the November election, it is expected the Tohono O’Odham Nation will emerge as Jamison’s key lender or equity partner. The native tribe is currently in a court battle with Glendale over its plans to build a resort and casino adjacent to the suburban community. But with Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs and several other councillors opposed to the tribe’s plans not running for re-election, it is expected the new council will be more receptive to the Tohono nation’s involvement with the Coyotes.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 30, 2012 10:20:14 GMT -5
www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/morning_call/2012/09/glendale-manager-city-still-working.html?page=allGlendale manager: City still working on new Coyotes deal with Jamison Phoenix Business Journal by Mike Sunnucks, Senior Reporter Date: Saturday, September 29, 2012, 9:53pm MST Mike Sunnucks Senior Reporter- Phoenix Business Journal Email | Twitter | Facebook Glendale city manager Horatio Skeete says he’s still trying to reach a new arena deal with Phoenix Coyotes suitor Greg Jamison and his investment partners. Skeete said Saturday the city was still working on new terms for a Coyotes arena deal. Glendale won’t finalize a $300 million arena management and payment plan the City Council approved in June. Skeete wants to change the first five years of city money going to Jamison to $72 million down from $92 million. Jamison and Anthony LeBlanc were in town this week to work on the Coyotes deal. LeBlanc is a principal with Ice Edge Holdings LLC. That group previously tried to buy the Coyotes and is now working with Jamison. A Jamison representative did not comment on the latest developments, if any, in the Coyotes saga. An update on the new arena deal is scheduled to be presented to the Glendale City Council on Tuesday. The language contained in the council agenda for that update gives some indication that terms of that new deal will be disclosed on Tuesday. But city officials said Friday and then again today they are still working on a deal with Jamison. The council could also decide Tuesday whether to just approve a new arena deal and publicly present that to Jamison. The city could also decide to end current negotiations with Jamison if final terms can’t be reached. Skeete’s comments that a deal is still being worked on come the same day as a Toronto Globe and Mail story saying a new arena deal has been reached and will be presented on Tuesday. That Toronto story also said Jamison still needs to raise or finalize financing to actually buy the Coyotes from the National Hockey League. The Globe story claims ones of the partners to the deal is the Tohono O’odham Nation. The tribe has denied it is working with Jamison’s group. The Hockey News reported Friday that there are again questions to whether Jamison has the money and financing to buy the Coyotes. Jamison’s camp has said he has the money to the buy the team and it hasn’t even been in some form of escrow. All this also comes with the NHL in a lockout and the league just canceled all preseason games.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 30, 2012 10:22:40 GMT -5
^^^ Wow. Dueling journalists (Sunnucks-Phoenix business journal; Shoalts, Globe and Mail; Campbell, the Hockey News) debate the fate of the coyotes in the wild American Southwest.
Pass the popcorn please!
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 30, 2012 10:31:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Oct 6, 2012 0:15:03 GMT -5
www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/donald-fehr-the-players-defender/article4593338/?page=allQ&A WITH DONALD FEHR Donald Fehr: The players' defender JEFF BLAIR TORONTO — The Globe and Mail Published Friday, Oct. 05 2012, 8:00 PM EDT Last updated Friday, Oct. 05 2012, 11:55 PM EDT The NHL had just announced that it was cancelling 82 regular-season games due to the owners’ lockout of players when NHLPA chief Donald Fehr sat down for a Q and A with Globe and Mail columnist Jeff Blair. Among his thoughts? There is some merit to the concept of a soft salary cap and luxury tax – and just because the players did not ask for the current salary cap to be done away with in their initial proposal, which came as something of a surprise based on Fehr’s history with the only major sport without a salary cap (Major League Baseball), there might come a time when they put it on the table. And if you want to know why Fehr has stressed the need for discipline on the part of the players during the lockout – something even his harshest critics within Gary Bettman’s office admit he has done well – you need to go back 30 years to another labour battle and a school baseball field in southern California. DISSECTING THE LOCKOUT THE LIGHTNING ROD Q&A with NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman ROY MACGREGOR Is divvying up a $3.35-billion hockey pie really that hard? SHOALTS Both sides should remember lessons of the 1994 NHL lockout DUHATSCHEK The Answerman on Kadri, replacement players and European adventures NHL LOCKOUT NHL should look to the success of revenue sharing in other pro leagues NHL LOCKOUT NHL players awash in rainy-day funds MULTIMEDIA Globe readers' love-hate relationship with hockey DUHATSCHEK NHL owners would do well to listen to players SHOALTS A soft cap, with a tax, would solve NHL lockout Q: Does the court of public opinion matter for you and the NHLPA? A: Obviously the public matters. Those are the fans, the people who ultimately buy the tickets and watch the game on TV and you want to try and explain everything you can. You want to see if the fans can understand your position, that the public perception of the particular dispute is as close to what we think the facts and the circumstances are. If you’re asking me about public opinion in the sense of taking a poll of people who are not familiar with the comprehensive nature of negotiations and all the rest of it, and then negotiating on the basis of what the results of that poll happen to be? The answer is no, any more than you would if I was representing a reader in a lawsuit and I said: ‘I have no idea what your legal position is, let’s take a poll and see what they say.’ Q: How important is it that when this is all said and done, the reputation of individual players hasn’t been damaged? A: It’s essential that the players be involved and be involved intimately and knowledgeably, that they participate collectively and make the decisions that need to be made. When you get into negotiations which involve dispute, there are going to be times when the conversation is more heated than you might like it and tempers might flare. I would be very surprised if anybody on the other side took off after individual players or tried to make them look bad and if they did I think the only effect that would have would be to enhance that player’s stature in the eyes of other players enormously. Q: Why is the concept of revenue sharing so important to the players? A: Three reasons. First, unless you have an enormous portion of your revenues centrally generated – like the NFL – you are a local revenue sport, and you have the likelihood, if not the virtual certainty, that you will have a disparity in revenues. In hockey, you have a wider disparity than in any other sport as far as I can tell. What that means is that the problems the owners complain of tend to be focused on the teams that have the lower revenue. So, the question is: Are the higher revenue teams going to be willing to help out, in whole or meaningful part, the weaker teams? You have to remember that if you get to be a team in the NHL, you didn’t just decide to set up shop and join the league. Somebody had to agree that you could have a franchise, they had to agree on the purchase price, where you’re going to be, what the circumstances are … what your capital requirements would be and what your lending limits will be. They all have responsibility for one another. The second point is, from a bargaining standpoint, when things don’t go well, where does the responsibility lie and where should those teams look for help? We think the other teams ought to be in the business of doing that. Third, one of the things that makes negotiations tremendously difficult is for somebody to say in effect: ‘We have teams that aren’t doing so well, so let’s lower salaries on the teams that aren’t doing so well so we will be comfortable with it. Forget whether any management failure had a part in it. But we’re also going to lower the salaries on the teams that are making very large profits by the same amount.’ That sort of means we’re going to pay the players based on the worst performing, least efficient, most undercapitalized teams. That’s not the way markets are supposed to work. Prices are supposed to be set by the other end of the scale. Q: Canadian teams are doing well now, and one of the things you hear up here is, ‘Why don’t they just fold teams like Phoenix?’ Why is it important to the players that those teams survive? What if rosters of the remaining teams were expanded to prevent job loss?
A: My understanding is that the NHL went to the so-called southern strategy in an attempt to develop a national footprint in the U.S. for the purposes of a much larger national TV contract. There are a lot of people who think that strategy failed. From the players’ standpoint, we want a healthy league with as many teams as we can have and that raises two questions: If a team in city A could be doing much better in city B, and the fact that it’s still in city A is causing us labour problems, why don’t we move it? Atlanta moving to Winnipeg and getting rid of those problems is an example of that. The second question in bargaining is: If a team is kept in a city in which it is not doing very well, and there is another place it could be relocated and do better and make labour relations and everything else easier, and the decision is to leave it in the first city, whose responsibility is that and who ought to bear the cost for it? Those questions from our standpoint have self-evident answers.
Q: Why shouldn’t the owners get a bigger share of revenue? They are the ones who take the risks. Why shouldn’t they be entitled to a bigger share? A: First of all, when you get into entitled, you’re getting into a very strange concept in a capitalist economy. A player is entitled to a job, but if he can’t play, he doesn’t have the job. Not only that, if he plays this year as well as he did last year, but you find somebody else better, he won’t have the job. Second, were this an industry in which the owners were prepared to say: ‘We will have a free market, and let the owners do whatever they want with salaries on an individual basis and players can negotiate and if it works out better for an individual player or worse for an individual player, that’s the way it is?’ As long as they didn’t conspire on salaries, the players would take that tomorrow, and every club could have its individual risk and every owner make a judgment. The problem is that the owners want a salary cap, and any salary cap – even 57 per cent – underpays the players in the aggregate. Otherwise the salary cap is no good to the owners. It’s only good if it caps or artificially limits what the salaries would be. Q: What differences have you noticed negotiating with Gary Bettman compared to baseball commissioner Bud Selig? A: I don’t want to get into personality differences for any number of reasons, one of which is after these negotiations are over and time goes by I’ll probably have a more balanced view than I do now. Secondly, you have to remember that in Gary’s case and in Bud’s case – David Stern and Roger Goodell, too – the notion that they are representing their own personal view of the world rather than what their constituents want them to do is not consistent with my understanding of what happens. If you put Roger Goodell in Gary’s job or Gary in Roger Goodell’s job you would get positions which are more or less the same because they are dictated by the owners and not the commissioners, unless they’re dictated by the common labour strategy of lock out and ask questions later, which exists in the cap sports. Baseball is different in one particular way, and this strikes me as more important as time goes on: Bud Selig is different than any other commissioner I know of with the exception of Al Davis in the early years of the American Football League and the reason is he owned a club and ran a team and he understands what it’s like at the ground level. Without that experience I’m not sure your perspective can be the same. The other thing is that the central operations of the other three sports have for a long time been more significant and larger than they are in hockey. I’m not sure why that is, and I’m not prepared to say it’s a significant difference yet. Q: A lot of people wonder about NHL players going overseas during the lockout to take other players’ jobs away … A: The owners in hockey locked out the players for a year last time. With the same outside advisers, you had a lockout in football and basketball and even had a lockout of the NFL officials, for goodness sake. They’ve been talking about it for a long time; everybody has known for a long time that the lockout is the strategy of first resort. So when they say they’re going to lock out and act like they’re going to lock out – and then do go and lock out – people tend to believe them. All professional athletes have short careers, they need to play when they can. And my understanding is that in most cases in Europe, the leagues have been expanded to allow for the extra positions that the NHL players are taking for what we hope will be a short period of time. Q: That’s an interesting choice of words – that a lockout has become a “strategy of first resort.” Do you think that will ever change? A: I don’t know. I wouldn’t have thought it would have lasted this long, but One of the problems you get into with a cap is it almost gives the owners an incentive to say: ‘Let’s lock out and see what happens.’ And that’s what has happened in all of the cap sports. I think it’s destructive, I think it creates an inherent stability – and I think it can make people look foolish, like it did in the NFL with the officials. But I think that’s the nature of cap bargaining. So, when Bob Goodenow years ago said that if you agree to a cap now you will have it for sure and the trend of lockouts is likely to continue, he was right. Q: The owners seem to be saying that you haven’t made a real counterproposal, that you are merely repositioning. How would you respond? A: It’s spin. I simply don’t treat it seriously. Look, the owners started out by running as fast as they could and as hard as they could away from the players, saying ‘Catch me if you can, even though every move you make is against your own interests.’ The players, instead of moving away from them, said: ‘All right, we want to try and make a deal. We’ll limit our future increases, we’ll do a couple of other things, but we want you to have additional revenue sharing and we want it targeted for the teams that need it, and we want you to cut costs so that there’s some shared sacrifice. Oh, and by the way, how can you ask us to change free agency so that it’s worse for players, eliminate salary arbitration – all these other things – which were the tradeoff for the 24-per-cent concessions you got in the last lockout?’ The owners response is: So if 24 per cent of all these things isn’t what you want, how about a fully phased in 191/2 per cent that is now a 171/2-per-cent reduction? And still all those other things on the table and we don’t agree with you on player contracting issues and there are no other costs we can cut. And, oh, by the way, if we add an extra trainer you have to pay for that, too.’ This isn’t Ping-Pong. You have to distinguish between offers which are really made for the purpose of trying to reach an agreement and those which aren’t. Q: Bill Daly said recently that the owners and players have addressed many of the other non-core issues, and that that is a change from previous negotiations. Why that change? Is that a personal philosophy? A: From our standpoint, if you’re bogged down on one set of issues, you go and talk about the other ones. You try and get agreements where you can. We’ve been suggesting it, they resisted it for a week or two and finally said ‘Okay,’ and in some cases progress was made and in others not much. My view has always been you negotiate about what you can find a way to negotiate about, and if you can’t negotiate on subject A you move on to subject B and then come back to A. The players have endorsed it; it’s not a very difficult concept. It’s utilized in a lot of different industries, sometimes maybe you just have to keep meeting about the same thing even though not much else is different. Q: There has been talk of mediation. Are you open to that? A: If it would be thought to be helpful. You do have professional negotiators on both sides, but we’d consider it. There hasn’t been a tremendous record of mediators being able to lend a lot, but that doesn’t mean in a given situation that would not be the case. Q: My Globe and Mail colleague David Shoalts wrote recently that a soft cap and luxury tax could get a deal done. Would you go for that? Do you think it would work? A: We’d certainly be open to talking about something like that. So far, at least, there has been zero interest in discussing anything except an absolutely hard cap on the other side. It’s just a question from the owners position what the numbers would be. I think it’s something we’d be prepared to talk about if they were, but I want to caution you: It has not come up yet and I have no reason to believe the owners are interested in it. But anything which puts more pieces in play conceivably gives you more things to work with in attempting to construct an agreement. My personal interest is for something simpler rather than more complex but that pushes you in the direction of no cap, and that’s not a direction, as of yet, the players are prepared to go. Q: A lot of people thought your initial proposal would be no cap … A: When they say that, they think negotiations are about personal wants or desires or my own view about what a perfectly ordered world would look like, or the views of anybody sitting in my chair. We discussed all possibilities with the players, and the players said if we can make an agreement that we can live with and help stabilize the sport – that’s what the revenue sharing is all about – and get us out of this cycle without going backward, we’d like to try to do that. If we can’t, and it becomes clear after time that it becomes clear that we can’t, I don’t know that those instructions would hold. Q: How do you respond to owners’ criticism that you delayed negotiations, and that a lot of stuff should have been done before we got to this point? A: Spin. Does anybody think that our problem negotiating is that we haven’t talked enough? Or that you can’t run a calculation and figure out what a 171/2-per-cent reduction on the players’ share would be? Or that take less and not more is a difficult concept to understand? Or that free agency has to be 10 years in the league rather than it is now or salary arbitration … you know, this doesn’t take a lot of discussion. There may be a lot of issues. That’s not one of them. Q: Why not just go to a 50/50 split and be done with it? Would that get a deal done? A: It wouldn’t get it done in the immediate term, because it’s a 12 1/2 -per-cent pay cut. We have told the owners that the players were willing to – if we got revenue sharing and other stuff – have a fixed dollar amount share for two or three years which would have the effect of having it fall toward 50 and consider things past that. Q: People have said that the players appear much more disciplined this time around … A: Players are vastly more informed and aware that owners and their representatives will look for any confirmation of what they want to believe, which is that players are ready to give them back hundreds of millions of dollars and that it’s just this recalcitrant staff that doesn’t want them to. You have to be careful about sending that kind of message if you don’t want it believed. We went through it in 1981 in baseball. There was a reporter who got hold of some Los Angeles Dodgers players, working out on a University of California-Riverside Field – this was pre-internet, much less Twitter - and said to them: ‘You know, what are you guys doing out here and would you like to be playing?’ What they said was: ‘Of course we’d like to be playing, but we won’t come back unless there’s a fair and equitable deal.’ That last half didn’t get reported, and the baseball owners shut down negotiations. A strike that should have ended in 41 or 42 days ended in 50. So you acquaint players with that. Having said that … one of the things we wonder is that if you have to have a rule like the owners do, where if you say anything that isn’t approved, you can be fined an enormous amount of money? That raises two questions: When in the world did we get to the point of regulating free speech in America again? And secondly, what is it we’re afraid they’re going to say?
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Oct 23, 2012 14:15:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Jan 29, 2013 9:54:32 GMT -5
Glendale mayor: No extension to be offered in Phoenix Coyotes deal By Jim Cross Originally published: Jan 29, 2013 - 5:00 am Jim Cross Reporter -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Position: Senior News Reporter. Started with KTAR July 4, 1999. The clock is ticking on the potential deal between the City of Glendale and prospective Phoenix Coyotes owner Greg Jamison. Less than 72 hours before the deadline for Jamison to buy the team from the National Hockey League, Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers said there will be no extension for the proposed 20-year deal that would pay Jamison to manage the city-owned Jobing.com Arena. Weiers wouldn't speculate on where the matter stands but said the city gave Jamison until Thursday and not "one second longer." "We are not there yet," he said. "If he doesn't put the deal together, we won't go down that road again with him. Obviously, if we can keep the Coyotes here under different circumstances and without that same deal it is certainly something I would like to push forward with." The deal guarantees Jamison about $300 million over the next 20 years, should the purchase of the team be completed. Jim Cross, Reporter ktar.com/22/1605591/Glendale-mayor-No-extension-to-be-offered-in-Phoenix-Coyotes-deal
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Jan 29, 2013 12:23:08 GMT -5
Daniel Blanchet @mxdan316
Selon Phil Lieberman, il manquerait à Greg Jamison 35 à 40M$ pour acheter les #Coyotes. Il ne croit pas qu'il réussira à acheter l'équipe.
Google translation: According to Phil Lieberman, Greg Jamison lacks 35 to $ 40 million to buy the Coyotes #. He does not believe he will succeed in buying the team.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Jan 29, 2013 12:48:44 GMT -5
m.journaldequebec.com/2013/01/28/question-dheuresSPORTS - Hockey Question d’heures Simon Cliche Hier à 7:13 PM [Photo les archives] [Jamison a confié au quotidien The Republic qu’il s’attendait à compléter l’achat des Coyotes dans les prochaines heures.] S’il faut en croire Greg Jamison, le sort des Coyotes de Phoenix devrait être scellé mercredi ou jeudi. Jamison a confié au quotidien The Republic qu’il s’attendait à compléter l’achat des Coyotes dans les prochaines heures. «Il y a beaucoup de choses qui se sont produites dernièrement. Nous allons de l’avant et nous ferons une annonce avant la fin de la semaine», a-t-il promis. La date limite imposée à Jamison pour l’achat des Coyotes est le 31 janvier. De son côté, le conseiller de Glendale à la retraite Phil Lieberman ne s’attend pas à ce que le nouveau conseil municipal entérine l’entente entre Greg Jamison et le précédent conseil quant à la gestion du Jobing.com Arena, domicile des Coyotes de Phoenix, à la fin de la semaine. Il ne pense pas non plus que Jamison sera en mesure d’amasser l’argent nécessaire pour acheter les Coyotes d’ici la date limite de jeudi soir. «Deux mois avant la fin de mon mandat, j’ai pris la décision de prendre ma retraite afin de ne pas être responsable de ce qui arrivera avec les Coyotes. Mais selon ce que j’ai entendu, je m’attends à un vote du nouveau conseil contre Jamison. Je sais à coup sûr que la conseillère Norma Alvarez votera contre lui, a confié Lieberman de son nouveau domicile, en Californie. «De toute façon, je n’ai jamais cru qu’il serait en mesure d’acheter les Coyotes. Il continue de négocier avec la LNH, mais selon mes sources, il lui manquerait entre 35 et 40 millions de dollars.» Pendant qu’il siégeait à Glendale, Lieberman n’a jamais caché qu’il était contre toute entente liant la Ville à Jamison. Lieberman ignore que ce Phoenix réserve aux Coyotes. «Dans les prochaines semaines, le nouveau conseil aura des décisions importantes à prendre. À partir de qui sera le gestionnaire du Jobing.com Arena. Je peux affirmer que je suis très heureux de ne plus avoir à m’occuper de ce dossier.» Gillett à Markham Par ailleurs, George Gillett, l’ancien propriétaire du Canadien, était de passage à Markham, en fin de semaine, selon une information de La Presse. Gillett aurait rencontré des investisseurs afin d’acquérir, un jour, une concession de la LNH en banlieue de Toronto. «Des conseillers (municipaux) m’ont demandé de passer les voir et de m’asseoir avec eux, dimanche matin, pour donner une perspective économique à leur projet d’infrastructure qui comprend non seulement le hockey mais aussi le divertissement», a expliqué Gillett. Le conseil municipal de Markham votera quant au projet d’entente de financement d’un nouvel amphithéâtre qu’il avait établi avec Graeme Roustan et son partenaire, le milliardaire Rudy Bratty, probablement aujourd’hui. Selon le Hockey News, au moins six des 13 membres du conseil municipal entendent voter contre le projet de Roustan. Google translation: SPORTS - Hockey Matter of hours Simon Cliche Yesterday at 7:13 PM [Photo Archives] [Jamison told the newspaper that The Republic expects to complete the purchase of the Coyotes in the coming hours.] If we believe Greg Jamison, the fate of the Phoenix Coyotes should be sealed Wednesday or Thursday. Jamison told the newspaper that The Republic expects to complete the purchase of the Coyotes in the coming hours. "There are many things that have happened lately. We are moving forward and we will make an announcement before the end of the week, "he promised. The deadline imposed Jamison to purchase Coyotes is January 31. For its part, the advisor Glendale retired Phil Lieberman does not expect that the new city council approves the agreement between Greg Jamison and the previous advice on the management of Jobing.com Arena, home of the Coyotes Phoenix, at the end of the week. It does not think that Jamison will be able to raise the money needed to purchase the Coyotes by the deadline of Thursday evening. "Two months before the end of my mandate, I have decided to retire in order not to be responsible for what happens with the Coyotes. But from what I've heard, I'm expecting a new council vote against Jamison. I know for sure that Councillor Norma Alvarez vote against him, Lieberman told his new home in California. "Anyway, I never thought he would be able to buy the Coyotes. It continues to negotiate with the NHL, but according to my sources, it lacks between 35 and 40 million. " While serving in Glendale, Lieberman has never hidden that he was against any agreement between the City Jamison. Lieberman know that Phoenix Coyotes reservation. "In the coming weeks, the new board will have important decisions to make. From who will be the manager of Jobing.com Arena. I can say that I am very happy not to have to take care of this issue." Gillett in Markham In addition, George Gillett, the former owner of the Canadiens, was visiting Markham, weekend, according to a report in La Presse. Gillett have met with investors to acquire, a day, a NHL franchise in suburban Toronto. "Advisors (municipal) asked me to go see them and sit with them on Sunday morning to give an economic perspective to their infrastructure project that includes not only hockey but also entertainment," said Gillett. Markham City Council will vote on the proposed agreement to finance a new arena that he had established Graeme Roustan and his partner, Rudy Bratty billionaire, probably today. According to the Hockey News, at least six of the 13 council members intend to vote against the draft Roustan.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 2, 2013 11:20:51 GMT -5
Google translation: February 1 The Sun (Québec) Régis Labeaume recognizes that the businessman Greg Jamison did not happen to find the money to buy the Phoenix Coyotes is "an additional opportunity." But the news does not change the "program" that Pierre Karl Peladeau and he is given. "Honestly, we were not surprised, for two weeks, there's not many people who thought it was possible," commented the Mayor of Quebec press briefing at City Hall on Friday morning. A rare comment for those who had been particularly quiet or silent in recent months about the issue regarding a possible return of a team of National Hockey League (NHL) Quebec. Mr. Labeaume responded to confirmation that Greg Jamison has failed in his attempt to raise the money in time, on Thursday evening to buy the Coyotes to the NHL. "It is of course that there may be an additional opportunity there, said the mayor. You can not deny it, I think it would be a bit silly to do, but it does not change the work we have to do. " Incentive to "realistic" Taking care not to rejoice too much hassle team that continues to Glendale, Mr. Labeaume therefore called on the people not too excited. "I encourage everyone to realism. The NHL is a big company, while we were a dream, them, they manage a business. But we decided to do everything we can to become an attractive city for the NHL. Us, everything is there, and the decision is theirs. " Régis Labeaume also pointed out that the priority of Quebec City in the short term is the construction of the amphitheater in a budget of $ 400 million in September 2015. Construction also crosses a milestone next week with the opening of bids for the steel structure. The fact that the work is initiated gives some advantage over the cities of Seattle and Markham, who also considering building a new arena to attract NHL team, acknowledged Mr. Labeaume. "I respect and Seattle Markham, but it remains that we are the most advanced, it is a fact." But still, the Mayor of Quebec has hammered: if the City is working on the amphitheater, the work of finding a team is the president of Quebecor, Pierre Karl Peladeau. In this regard, the work of the respective two parties continues. "It will not change the work we do. It, I'll explain it. Mr. Peladeau and I speak regularly. Everyone has a very determined work, we advance. " www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/sports/actualites-sportives/201302/01/01-4617482-coyotes-une-opportunite-additionnelle-dit-labeaume.php
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 2, 2013 11:24:42 GMT -5
Mike Sunnucks @mikesunx Mea culpa on the stories the Coyotes sale was going to get done. Lots o pple were assured, reassured & well mea culpa frm me. Feel bad 4fans
17h Steve Rousseau @steverousseauqc @mikesunx Huge props to you for that ! A lot of people should do the same.
17h Vincent Doyon @vindoyon @steverousseauqc @mikesunx Some names come to mind...
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 2, 2013 11:25:22 GMT -5
Ryan Hollett @crypticshock Pierre LeBrun stated today for the first time in 5 years he feels there is a chance of a #Coyotes relocation. Glendale has to move fast. Retweeted by Vincent Doyon
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 2, 2013 11:27:08 GMT -5
Pascal B @matrix78 Haha yeah he has vanished just like Jamison's investors RT @nhlwinnipeg the @cryingfrenchies has disappeared off the face of the earth... Retweeted by Vincent Doyon
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Feb 2, 2013 11:29:12 GMT -5
Phoenix Coyotes sale: What went wrong and what is next?
Mike Sunnucks Senior Reporter- Phoenix Business Journal
Greg Jamison didn’t buy the Phoenix Coyotes yesterday, missing out on a beneficial $308 million city of Glendale arena deal that essentially subsidized his bid. The missed deadline and Jamison’s inability to raise the cash increased the odds that the league-owned Coyotes will be sold and moved out of the Phoenix market.
There were plenty of skeptics all along to Jamison’s bid and whether he had the money to buy the financially struggling Coyotes. But there also were plenty of folks around the Coyotes, Glendale City Hall and media reports — including from the Phoenix Business Journal — voicing confidence the deal would get done.
We reported when we heard Jamison was short on cash, needed investors or last-minute help from the National Hockey League. We also reported when officials around the Jamison bid, the Coyotes and Glendale were confident the deal was going to get done.
Jamison had the blessing of the NHL and $308 million from Glendale in his favor. Coyotes’ captain Shane Doan re-signed in September after assurances were made to him the team would be sold to the Jamison group. Coyotes players, staff and executives are privately upset the latest effort faltered after three years of assurances of the team’s sale and future in Glendale.
No deal
Backers at Glendale City Hall and around the hockey team’s front office were routinely assured the deal was going to happen. That resulted in reports — including from here — that the deal was close, the deal was eminent, the deal was going to get done.
Then on Wednesday, those assurances eroded and confidence waned. On Thursday night, Jamison confirmed he doesn’t have the money. The deal never got done, continuously extending the Coyotes ownership saga and uncertain future.
That left Glendale and its new City Council and mayor facing the reality of the Coyotes leaving. There could be a new group or recycled ownership bid from past suitors — Jerry Reinsdorf, Ice Edge Holdings or Matthew Hulsizer. Fox Sports Arizona reports today there could be interest from a wealthy Canadian businessman.in buying the hockey team and keeping them here. The Coyotes saga has been replete with tire kickers and window shoppers, to partially borrow a line from the Toronto Globe & Mail.
Burn me once
But the city is not likely to offer a big $300 million arena subsidy again, and the NHL would have to sell the team in a fire sale to keep it here.
The NHL and city could give a new owner an out to move the team after five years to get a deal done for the money-losing Coyotes. Otherwise, who will buy a team that has been on the market for years?
Jamison said he still is trying to buy the team. But if passing the hat around when Glendale had its $300 million arena deal on the table didn’t bring in enough money, how will Jamison buy the team with that city cash gone?
Depending on who you talk to, information obviously has been sketchy. Jamison either lost investors late in the process over management of team, was never that close to having the needed cash, or the NHL would not budge on price and financing when Jamison was close to getting the deal done.
The NHL bought the Coyotes out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009 for $140 million. The league wants $170 million for a team it can’t sell and keep in Phoenix.
“We remain hopeful the Coyotes sale process will be resolved successfully and we will continue to work with the City of Glendale to move the process forward,” said NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly in statement.
Glendale’s official statement was equally lukewarm.
“The city and the current owner of the Coyotes, the National Hockey League, will continue to work together on a solution that is in the best interest of Glendale and our citizens. The next step involves seeking direction from the City Council to determine how to move forward with this process,” the statement reads.
Glendale has crafted at least seven different arena and revenue plans to help potential Coyotes buyers acquire the team. None of them have worked and none of the prospective buyers have consummated a deal.
What’s next?
There are wildcards and unlikely chances of the Coyotes long-term future being at a new arena somewhere else in the Valley perhaps with American Indian tribe partner.
The most likely path for the NHL and Coyotes now — barring a new and unlikely deal here — is for suitors from Quebec City, Seattle and even markets such as Oklahoma City, Kansas City and Las Vegas to come calling for a team that can’t get sold here in the Valley.
The Coyotes are here for the rest of this season, and the NHL will certainly entertain new offers. But those offers may also be welcomed outside the Valley.
Mike Sunnucks writes about politics, law, airlines, sports business and the economy.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Mar 18, 2013 9:27:21 GMT -5
Daniel Blanchet @mxdan316 Manny Martinez: "If there is no sale done or NHL doesn't announce they will continue 2 manage #Coyotes before end of season, they'll leave"
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Mar 18, 2013 9:28:06 GMT -5
Max Lachance @lachancemax According to some #Coyotes fans, J. Shannon said on #Sportsnet that Doan's agent, T. #Bross, is working with 3 groups to keep the team in AZ
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Mar 18, 2013 9:31:42 GMT -5
www.journaldequebec.com/2013/03/17/un-sujet-taboutranslated by google translate COYOTES Taboo Coyotes players must live with uncertainty ALBERT @ LADOUCEUR JOURNAL OF QUEBEC PUBLISHED: SUNDAY 17 MARS 2013, 7:32 p.m. | UPDATE: Sunday, March 17, 2013, 7:59 p.m. PHOTO ARCHIVE, AFP Coyotes have lived beautiful series last spring and struggling farm in the Western Conference this season to participate in the grand ball spring. You are currently in the VIP area ALSO READ Bettman to bitter fans GLENDALE - In granting accreditation for a match to a local journalist Coyotes Quebec, communications director said that the team policy requires players they do not comment on rumors surrounding the precarious situation of the organization Glendale. The 2011-2012 season proved to be particularly difficult for players and coaches. In fact, it is so for a long time. Phoenix and Atlanta have been washed away in the storm and it was only in Arizona, where the Coyotes are in the National League and are funded by the 29 other organizations. Uncertainty The forward Antoine Vermette not comment officially. We understand, however, that for three years, players have become accustomed to this uncertainty. If only one of all the predictions had come true, the Coyotes have been dismantled, play in Winnipeg or preparing to leave for a better world. They remain under the supervision of the League. Greg Jamison, an investor without safe, has still not purchased and other business people have failed to conclude a transaction they wanted to their advantage. A beloved city Players love Phoenix. Shane Doan has rolled the dice by not taking advantage of its status as a free agent because he wanted to stay in Arizona. He plays from 1996-1997, the year of transfer of the Winnipeg Jets. First choice (seventh) of the former organization of Manitoba in 1995, there has evolved a season. His children were born in Arizona and he lives on a beautiful ranch where the horses await their riders daily. Out of the auditorium after a game and feel the heat, open the roof of his convertible and go home to relax on the terrace is something unique in the life of a hockey player. Skip to the old Coliseum Jobing.com Arena for two years would compare to an owner who leaves his residence million to settle a housing sub-soul of an apartment building. Ranking tight The only loser and come out winner is Vermette. Now 30 years old with two years of his contract, he would play in his hometown if Phoenix brought in the capital. The Coyotes still want the team that gave him his full confidence. "This is a good combination for me, he said. I enjoy the support of coach Dave Tippett. I use a lot and in all situations. My offensive production gives me satisfaction, because I know that the coach does not linger as goals and assists when a player helps the team in another way. " The Yotes have lived beautiful series last spring. They are struggling farm in the Western Conference, where just six points separated the third place of the 14th yesterday. "Real rollercoaster, takes Vermette. A win and you can get three or four positions, one loss and you tumbled. The classification could still decide in the last week of the season. " Team established The Coyotes have played 12 March an excellent match against Los Angeles, scoring five goals spectacular (5-2). This led to think that a team like that would be much more exciting than expansion. "We mark our share of goals, but they are granted too. We're working on it. " Quebec, Markham would not leave Seattle or zero with the Coyotes. Two or three transactions could also help change the DNA of the team in a francophone environment. "Do AUGURE IT WRONG" - Manny Martinez GLENDALE | Councilman Manny Martinez, in office since 1996 at the Glendale City Hall, has fought hard for the Phoenix Coyotes remain in this city. He was one of six councilors who voted in favor of using 308 million to Greg Jamison, if it bought the team before January 31. "I continue to hope that the team will remain in Arizona, but it does not bode well now, he said. If a sale is not completed or the NHL announced that it will continue to operate the Coyotes by the end of the season, they will leave. " Just as fans of the team, he hoped that Greg Jamison together investors and unearths the millions needed to acquire the organization. "Very disappointing as a result. Nevertheless, I believe that Mr. Jamison did honest work in his attempt to buy the Coyotes. He wanted to keep the team here and I think it would have been a good owner. " The attitude of Bettman He does not blame Gary Bettman provided. "The NHL is a big business and the mission of any business is to make money. Bettman requires 170 million for the franchise. We heard that he had received offers from 148 to 150 million, but I do not really know. I am not an expert in regard to the price of a franchise in professional sports. " The politician battling for survival Yotes, because he believed that, despite the millions invested by Glendale, the city would have benefited. "You saw the Westgate Shopping Center in the afternoon? The 41 home games of the Coyotes, plus playoffs, attracted hundreds of thousands of visitors spend in the shops and restaurants in the district. They will not come if they leave. " RADIO SILENCE OF THE MAYOR GLENDALE | An interview request with the new mayor of Glendale, Jerry Weiers, was denied. He was in Washington during the passage of the Journal. Jerry McCoy, a spokesman, said that there was absolutely nothing new in the case of sale, nothing different from what has been disclosed to members of the council. So there is no reason to give an interview about the future of the Coyotes. The election of Weiers, who succeeded Mayor Elaine Scruggs, combined with the inability of Greg Jamison potential buyer to complete the transaction, did volatilize financial assistance of 308 million over 20 years. A Zamboni emergency Weiers suggested in early February that other investors had come forward, but nothing came out. He reiterated that he wanted survival Coyotes in Glendale but not generously dipping into the pockets of citizens. "We will not compromise the safety and services in our city, Weiers said the Commissioner Gary Bettman. When a citizen calls 9-1-1, they expect to see the arrival of a police car or an ambulance, not a Zamboni. " As for the ex-councilor in the reign of Mayor Scruggs Phil Lieberman, he left to return to live in Glendale California. They say embittered by his last months of political life. He strongly opposed any financial contribution from the City. Should the departure of the Coyotes, the commercial district of Westgate, home of the team will suffer. Eventually, we may talk about a dinosaur more white than a white elephant.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on May 23, 2013 8:35:27 GMT -5
Geoff Brookes' comment- as the title of Bourque's article suggests, Daly's positioning of the Coyotes' fate in Glendale as "better than 50-50" is the NHL's way of saying (my opinion) "Gee guys, we're in a bit of a tight spot here!" I would really love to see the Nordiques return to the NHL for the 2013-14 season! Here's the article: Translation by google www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/opinions/chroniqueurs/201305/22/01-4653447-tout-pour-nourrir-la-rumeur.phpAll to feed the rumor FRANÇOIS BOURQUE The Sun (Quebec) Quebecor denies having entered into negotiations with the National Hockey League (NHL) for the purchase of a franchise. "The rumor is completely false," it read Wednesday morning on his Twitter account. The tone is categorical but it's worth what it's worth. The rumor is true that Quebecor would have denied as not to jeopardize talks with the NHL. Group Pierre Karl Peladeau knows to be discreet. In the poisonous atmosphere of the end of the season, even the common "no comment" could be misinterpreted. Accelerate speculation rather than calm. That said, it makes sense that the company maintains contacts with the NHL. Would that to remember the good memories of President Bettman and ensure that the League is up to date on the status of preparations for Quebec in the event of a rapid move. Since autumn 2009, hoping for a return of the Nordiques had ups and downs. At the discretion of the news from Phoenix or NHL, Quebec has sometimes thought it was in the bag, sometimes his dog was dead. We are certainly in a "good" period. Probably the most favorable from the beginning. All the stars seem aligned. 1. The NHL has yet to find local buyers for the Phoenix team. 2. The only group still in contention, that of Anthony LeBlanc said they needed an agreement with the similar to the previous purchaser city. It's $ 15 million per annum payable by the City, that the new board of Glendale is not ready to make. 3. The Arizona Republic published in early research suggesting that the true cost management Jobbing.com Arena is $ 5.1 million to $ 5.5 million per year. That's $ 10 million to $ 20 million less than what Glendale has paid in recent years in connection with the management and hockey arena. In a context where the City has had to cut its staff and services to balance its budget, the information has serious consequences. To get to the bottom, Glendale has launched a tender for the management of the arena. The deadline for submitting proposals is tomorrow. 4. For the first time, the NHL seems to doubt his ability to keep a team in Phoenix. There is no certainty about the future of the Coyotes in the short or long term, said a few weeks ago the vice-president Bill Daly. Chances are it is "better than 50-50," he said. This means that there is also an even chance she leaves, which is a huge opening from previous statements. 5. The Coyotes have not made the playoffs this spring, suggesting that they will lose more money than last year. It also suggests that popular pressure to move the town hall and keep the team is probably not very strong. By the way, season tickets for next season Coyotes are available on the official website of the team at $ 430. 6. After a saga of several years, the patience of the NHL seems dull. "At some point, you have to make tough decisions," said Daly. In the spirit of the League to bring a team to Quebec would certainly be a difficult decision. 7. One of the main "competitors" of Quebec in the race Coyotes, Seattle, has no imminent amphitheater project. The NBA team that hoped to attract Seattle before building finally rest in Sacramento. 8. The other competitor in Quebec, Markam in suburban Toronto, has not materialized its proposed arena. 9. The construction of the Quebec City arena is progressing on schedule, costs and standards expected. 10. Quebec City returns these days to tender to perform the minimum work upgrading the Coliseum (refrigeration rooms) in the event of early return of a team. ----- The fate of the Coyotes should be set no later than ten days, maybe 15. This is about the deadline to think moving a team for next season. Go beyond would probably risky, both for the league and for the new owner. Quebecor has already swallowed mouthfuls larger than a hockey team. The talk after all one hundred employees and an annual budget of approximately $ 100 million. With the glamor and prestige of the NHL, Quebecor should not be difficult to attract candidates for the organization. Remparts president Claude Rousseau, has offered help to quickly start a team. There is however no discussion to this effect with Quebecor, he said. Or for the sale of tickets or for sponsorship or for sharing the Coliseum for which the Remparts have priority access. There is not much doubt about the ability to sell tickets quickly enthusiasts Quebec Nordiques. Attach partners and sponsors, however, more complicated if the budgets of each other are already committed elsewhere. This is where time begins to be more pressing.
|
|