Coyotes to stay in Phoenix, apparently

[Kin]

For one, even with their long playoff run, it's safe to assume the team is still faced with tens of millions of dollars in losses (even after the $25M in each of the last two seasons).  Is there any way this team could ever make a profit?

cw is probably better suited than me to answer this but I think it's actually not that crazy a roadmap for the Coyotes to find a way to some sort of profitability. Forbes had them with a 24.4 million dollar operating loss last year. If you toss in the 14.5 million management fee Bates mentions, the likely drop in salaries coming out of the upcoming CBA, a move towards more revenue sharing and a slight uptick in revenues generated as the demographic shift grows Glendale and Phoenix and it's not all that tricky to see it being a profitable business at some point.

 

[Bates]

In your world Nik I waould assume you would also put theaters, art gallaries and the such into the group of sports facilities that Cities should not be paying to build.  Your City would not be a very good place to live as generally these type of building are never built with private money.  While it is easy to look back and see Jobing.com as a bad idea from the City's perspective the plan in the beginning was an attempt by Glendale to turn their city into something meaningful and special.  Not sure many could have seen the economic disaster that was coming.  On a side not the Westgate area is starting to move forward as a new new Tanger outlet is currently being built next to the arena.

 

[Kin]

In your world Nik I waould assume you would also put theaters, art gallaries and the such into the group of sports facilities that Cities should not be paying to build.

You know the old saying about what happens when you assume? You end up getting things wrong. That's what's known as a false equivalency.  Saying that investing public money in sports facilities is not a good investment doesn't mean all public investment is bad.

Your City would not be a very good place to live as generally these type of building are never built with private money.

Well, again, citing specific investments as bad doesn't mean all investments are bad. But my city would be a fabulous place to live. Light on hockey arenas, great public schools. Also, no last call.

  While it is easy to look back and see Jobing.com as a bad idea from the City's perspective the plan in the beginning was an attempt by Glendale to turn their city into something meaningful and special.  Not sure many could have seen the economic disaster that was coming. 

Well, leaving aside the people who did see the real estate bubble about to burst it's more or less irrelevant. The idea that public money going to private sports stadiums is a bad use of taxpayer money is not unique to Glendale or to the economic climate post 2003. It's just true.

 

[cw]

Would you be happier if the team left and you had to pay even more annually?

If that were the case? No, but I'm speaking about the situation as a whole. I'd be pretty upset at anyone in city government who'd ever thought that the 88th biggest city in the United States building a hockey arena was a good idea and my being upset with them wouldn't really be abrogated by them dealing with the resulting catastrophe as best as they could.

All the city is trying to do is just take the lesser of two evils.

If you were a Glendale resident, would you be largely satisfied with your city's financial management when it came to their involvement with the NHL as a whole?

Again, I get that they're making an honest attempt at cleaning it up rather than shoving it all under the bed but it's still their mess.

The original decision to build the rink is obviously highly questionable in hindsight at this point in time and the city deserves their share of responsibility for that.

Some significant things are often overlooked though:
1. According to several, landing the Coyotes helped them attract more pro sports money but you don't see those dollars go against this deal
2. They were duped by Ellman - who basically only got the Coyotes to help him with his Westgate deal
3. The team was badly managed by people who didn't care much about hockey and made the city's financial situation with the team worse today
4. Nobody forecast the bad economy would hit there first and hit them as hard and as long as anyone in NA

They're ultimately responsible for the decision but some things happened beyond their control and they got suckered by some sweet talkin' folks.

 

[cw]

For one, even with their long playoff run, it's safe to assume the team is still faced with tens of millions of dollars in losses (even after the $25M in each of the last two seasons).  Is there any way this team could ever make a profit?

cw is probably better suited than me to answer this but I think it's actually not that crazy a roadmap for the Coyotes to find a way to some sort of profitability. Forbes had them with a 24.4 million dollar operating loss last year. If you toss in the 14.5 million management fee Bates mentions, the likely drop in salaries coming out of the upcoming CBA, a move towards more revenue sharing and a slight uptick in revenues generated as the demographic shift grows Glendale and Phoenix and it's not all that tricky to see it being a profitable business at some point.

Settling the ownership issue will result in them being able to sell boxes, sign corporate sponsers & advertisers, boost attendance and implement their plan to increase revenues like parking. I think the team revenue will bounce back quickly by 10-20%.

When the housing market returns, (it might be just starting to show signs), then I expect the migration to their area, predicted to be the fastest or second fastest in NA, will resume.

As I've said a couple of times, given the choice between the Sabres & Coyotes in 10-15 years from now, I'd invest in the Coyotes because of that projected growth, the surrounding corporate money and that TV market.

Arguably, they went to Glendale too soon or they should have taken that deal in Scottsdale where a stronger base of the hockey fans were near by. If they can hang on for the next few years/decade, I don't think they'll look back.

 

[Kin]

The original decision to build the rink is obviously highly questionable in hindsight at this point in time and the city deserves their share of responsibility for that.

Well, like I was saying above, the decision to put public money into a multi-million dollar professional arena is not one that an elected official should need hindsight to question even if the circumstances are ideal. In this situation, with a smaller city facing an uphill battle in terms of winning a fanbase, I'd say it was irresponsible regardless of whether we're looking forwards or backwards.

 

[cw]

The original decision to build the rink is obviously highly questionable in hindsight at this point in time and the city deserves their share of responsibility for that.

Well, like I was saying above, the decision to put public money into a multi-million dollar professional arena is not one that an elected official should need hindsight to question even if the circumstances are ideal. In this situation, with a smaller city facing an uphill battle in terms of winning a fanbase, I'd say it was irresponsible regardless of whether we're looking forwards or backwards.

It's not as clear cut for me. Back during the bankruptcy, I reviewed the documents when the idea was presented to the city. They had third party 'experts' look at it and bless it.

If one gets professional advice from a doctor or lawyer, there's not much point in getting it if you're not going to listen to the experts. No one on city council can be expected to be an expert on every aspect of sports business.

Beyond the fact that these experts were somewhat wrong, they also were hit hardest by the economy. And  it also wouldn't be easily predicted that businessmen like Ellman or Moyes would plop down $100 mil or so on a team that was going to be terribly managed and gush losses because those losses also impacted their investment in Westgate.

The city is ultimately responsible for the decisions they made. But I wouldn't describe their actions at the time as irresponsible as if no due diligence was done, etc. Because it was. The experts and the business people they relied upon were the folks who really messed up this deal along with a economic downturn situation absolutely nobody predicted to be nearly as severe for the area as it has been.

And the predictions for the tremendous longer term growth for the area are still being made today.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Joyce Clark admits that she is a hockey ?newbie.? On her Twitter account, the Glendale, Arizona, councilor prefaces her opinions on the play of the Phoenix Coyotes with qualifiers like, ?I am a novice hockey fan.?

it?s probably fair to assume that she wouldn?t have a clue about how her new favourite team came to be at the expense of the City of Winnipeg, where there are more hockey fans residing in any three neighbourhoods than live within all of Glendale.

. As a new hockey fan, she may find it interesting to learn that the Nords were yanked out of Quebec City just in time for the people of Denver to celebrate a Stanley Cup victory that folks in Quebec City had been waiting for, oh, ever since the Nordiques had joined the World Hockey Association back in 1972.

The game is new to her and many of her constituents...

Joyce Clark@clarkjv
"I will be so pleased when Coyotes issue is settled. Then all of these Canadian poachers can move on to another team and another city."

As a councilor of a city that poached the Coyotes from the city that poached the Jets from Winnipeg, that takes guts...

"We get emails, we get tweets from Canadians -- sometimes posed as Arizona residents -- saying, ?It?s a bad deal and the City of Glendale shouldn?t be investing in a hockey team..."

he City of Glendale is hemorrhaging money, bracing for a $35 million budget shortfall this year, an expected 30 per cent hike in property taxes this August, and layoffs likely among city staff.

As for poaching inside the National Hockey League, the tables have indeed turned.

As the U.S. economy has struggled, we have seen a shift in Bettman?s southern migration. Winnipeg has its team back...

Reports say the Greg Jamison, the latest ?tentative? buyer in Phoenix, is requesting a four- or five-year window after which he can move the team if it is failing. That window coincides nicely with the completion date of Quebec City?s new rink.

For the complete story, go to:

link

 

[cw]

RIM continues in free fall losing half a billion and cutting 5,000 jobs
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/28/rim-3/?hpt=hp_t2

Judge upholds Glendale?s vote on lease agreement
link

 

[Zee]

RIM continues in free fall losing half a billion and cutting 5,000 jobs
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/28/rim-3/?hpt=hp_t2

Judge upholds Glendale?s vote on lease agreement
link

RIM looks bleak.  That delay on Blackberry 10 kills them too, no holiday season money coming in from new phones.  What a disaster.

 

[mc]

So sad. I know a few RIM fanboys jumping ship today buying the Samsung Galaxy III. crackberry.com has quite a feww of the faithful going to Android as well.

 

[Bender]

So sad. I know a few RIM fanboys jumping ship today buying the Samsung Galaxy III. crackberry.com has quite a feww of the faithful going to Android as well.

It's pretty obvious you're going to buy the better product if you can afford it. The SGS3 is one of the best smartphones ever made thus far. RIM has simply dropped the ball entirely. The writing was on the wall in 2007 when the iPhone came out and they refused to follow suit and innovate, although Samsung and Apple are the definite leaders in the market, with the others being minor players (surprising that HTC has dropped though!)

 

[jonlleafs]

So sad. I know a few RIM fanboys jumping ship today buying the Samsung Galaxy III. crackberry.com has quite a feww of the faithful going to Android as well.

It's pretty obvious you're going to buy the better product if you can afford it. The SGS3 is one of the best smartphones ever made thus far. RIM has simply dropped the ball entirely. The writing was on the wall in 2007 when the iPhone came out and they refused to follow suit and innovate, although Samsung and Apple are the definite leaders in the market, with the others being minor players (surprising that HTC has dropped though!)

HTC was dominating last year but Samsung has really stepped up their game.  Apple is blah.  Unless they revamp their OS, it's the same ol' shish diff pile.

 

[Bender]

So sad. I know a few RIM fanboys jumping ship today buying the Samsung Galaxy III. crackberry.com has quite a feww of the faithful going to Android as well.

It's pretty obvious you're going to buy the better product if you can afford it. The SGS3 is one of the best smartphones ever made thus far. RIM has simply dropped the ball entirely. The writing was on the wall in 2007 when the iPhone came out and they refused to follow suit and innovate, although Samsung and Apple are the definite leaders in the market, with the others being minor players (surprising that HTC has dropped though!)

HTC was dominating last year but Samsung has really stepped up their game.  Apple is blah.  Unless they revamp their OS, it's the same ol' shish diff pile.

Totally agree here. The OS is definitely stuck in 2009. The hardware is also kind of crap imo. The screen is outdated by miles these days. Retina, OOOOH, CATCHPHRASE!

 

[jonlleafs]

So sad. I know a few RIM fanboys jumping ship today buying the Samsung Galaxy III. crackberry.com has quite a feww of the faithful going to Android as well.

It's pretty obvious you're going to buy the better product if you can afford it. The SGS3 is one of the best smartphones ever made thus far. RIM has simply dropped the ball entirely. The writing was on the wall in 2007 when the iPhone came out and they refused to follow suit and innovate, although Samsung and Apple are the definite leaders in the market, with the others being minor players (surprising that HTC has dropped though!)

HTC was dominating last year but Samsung has really stepped up their game.  Apple is blah.  Unless they revamp their OS, it's the same ol' shish diff pile.

Totally agree here. The OS is definitely stuck in 2009. The hardware is also kind of crap imo. The screen is outdated by miles these days. Retina, OOOOH, CATCHPHRASE!

They better come out with a bigger screen for iPhone 5 or they will be left in the dust.  I think my next phone may be a Galaxy Note-sized one.  That screen is big!

 

[hockeyfan1]

Apple is blah.  Unless they revamp their OS, it's the same ol' shish diff pile.

I disagree.  What makes you say that? 

I own the iPhone 4s and find IOS 5 to be very very good.  When they upgrade to the next  version of IOS 6, it should be even better.

At the time, (before the IPhone 4s), I still owned the 3g.  Comparing that to the 4s was like comparing an old dinosaur to a fleet-footed gazelle.  Well, you get the idea.

Samsung phones (such as the Note) are probably refreshingly different for those who wish to switch phones.  I, too, like the Note, for example.  The screen for one is much larger (and better) than the still crappy 3.5" iPhone 4s screen. That is the one caveat I have about Apple's iPhones.  Once they change the screen size though.....

 

[jonlleafs]

Apple is blah.  Unless they revamp their OS, it's the same ol' shish diff pile.

I disagree.  What makes you say that? 

I own the iPhone 4s and find IOS 5 to be very very good.  When they upgrade to the next  version of IOS 6, it should be even better.

At the time, (before the IPhone 4s), I still owned the 3g.  Comparing that to the 4s was like comparing an old dinosaur to a fleet-footed gazelle.  Well, you get the idea.

Samsung phones (such as the Note) are probably refreshingly different for those who wish to switch phones.  I, too, like the Note, for example.  The screen for one is much larger (and better) than the still crappy 3.5" iPhone 4s screen. That is the one caveat I have about Apple's iPhones.  Once they change the screen size though.....

The user interface is kinda long in the tooth.  No animated backgrounds.  No widgets (these are like icons or bigger that simply give you data in real-time such as a scrolling stock quote or a button to turn on/off your camera light to act like a flash light).  Built-in memory management.  Just some of the things I like about android.

 

[bustaheims]

They better come out with a bigger screen for iPhone 5 or they will be left in the dust.  I think my next phone may be a Galaxy Note-sized one.  That screen is big!

The 5 will be about the same size as the Galaxy. As for the Note . . . it's too big to be a phone and not big enough to be a tablet.

What iOS 6 will really provide more than other platforms is social media integration. More apps will be able to post to Twitter and Facebook directly, which, for a large portion of the consumer market, is a nice selling point.

 

[jonlleafs]

They better come out with a bigger screen for iPhone 5 or they will be left in the dust.  I think my next phone may be a Galaxy Note-sized one.  That screen is big!

The 5 will be about the same size as the Galaxy. As for the Note . . . it's too big to be a phone and not big enough to be a tablet.

What iOS 6 will really provide more than other platforms is social media integration. More apps will be able to post to Twitter and Facebook directly, which, for a large portion of the consumer market, is a nice selling point.

Not sure how all this phone talk is related to the Coyotes staying in Phoenix, but...

I don't even use the FB app to post anything.  I typically use the browser on my phone anyways.  Integration with FB was already built into Android through widgets so it's nothing really new. 

And to take it a bit more off topic, I think the iPad will have a serious challenger with Microsoft Surface.  Being able to run a full PC on a tablet WITH a portable keyboard would allow you to do a lot more than an iPad.

 

[Kin]

So I might be stating the obvious here but even with the Jamison group being shaky on their financing and the legality of the whole thing still being an issue(or is it? I forget if the Goldwater group had said if they'd challenge it) we're definitely at a point where the Coyotes will be in Phoenix next year regardless, right? If so, is that another year on the city's dime or will it come out of the league's pockets?

I can't imagine a situation where logistically they could accommodate a change at this point.