Questioning the 'coalescing' in Phoenix
Lost in all of the free agency talk on July 1, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly had the following comments in an Arizona Republic article:
The NHL initially said it had four prospective buyers willing to keep the team in place. Daly said there was a "coalescing of that interest behind Reinsdorf's bid as the best chance (to keep the team in Arizona)."
Ten days later, that one word — "coalescing" — could create some serious problems for the NHL:
A United States trustee has expressed concern over the bidding process for the Phoenix Coyotes and wants to know if the NHL "encouraged" potential bidders to drop their pursuit of the team in favour of Jerry Reinsdorf's bid.
And a little further down in the Toronto Star piece:
At the heart of trustee Lashinsky's concerns are previous statements from the league that four potential buyers had expressed interest in the Coyotes. That was followed by a statement from deputy commissioner Bill Daly in a July 1 newspaper article that there has been a "coalescing of interest behind Reinsdorf's bid."
"This begs the question... `Why have these parties left the table?'" she wrote. "Without full disclosure the integrity of the bankruptcy system is lost."
The full excerpt, which is technically written by a lawyer for Lashinsky, reads as so: "Without full disclosure, the integrity of the bankruptcy system is lost. Who were these prospective bidders? Did these parties have a legitimate intent to purchase the team? Why did these local bidders step away from the sale process? Were they encouraged by the NHL to do so?"
In other words, will the phantom bidders please stand up? (And soon, maybe, they'll have to.)
There is going to be a court hearing at 10 a.m. today in Phoenix over a series of disclosure motions, although we don't know precisely what new ground will be covered. The auction deadlines, however, are creeping closer, and what is clear is that both the NHL and the City of Glendale are in more difficult positions than previously due to multiple new enquiries and lawsuits from various watchdogs related to the bankruptcy.
Whereas past sales in places like Nashville and Tampa have been carried out behind closed doors, this one suddenly has an awful lot of eyes on it, potentially making things far more challenging for the league to get its preferred ownership candidate into the owner's seat.
Where this road leads, who knows? But the plot is certainly thickening...
2 recs |
16 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Skeptical of the other "bidders" myself.
I may be a Coyotes fan but I’ll readily admit that I’m skeptical about the other “parties of interest” that the NHL touted as competitors for Balsillie. If you want my honest opinion, I think that outside of Breslow and Reinsdorf there wasn’t anyone else interested in a non-relocation scenario for the team, and once Breslow saw that Reinsdorf was going to bid I think he pulled back (his “interest” being a desperation move when it appeared that Reinsdorf might not renew his bid offer).
The unknown quantity in this is the US/Canada investment group that has been rumored to be making a bid on Aug 5th. Are the the league’s insurance policy if the judge doesn’t like the Reinsdorf bid? Or are they legitimate?
I think basically the only thing we DO know is that if Balsillie wins in September, most likely the NHL will play with 29 teams this season because I can’t for the life of me see the NHL and the BoG greenlighting Balsillie if they lose.
Sucks to think that the Coyotes’ rookie camp might be the last hockey I see in this city.
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
I think that if the NHL tried to suspend the Coyotes rather than let Balsillie win the team (with rights to move, of course), there would be an injunction slapped against the league in a matter of seconds. There will be a 2009-10 Phoenix Coyotes season.
What I don’t think, however, is that Reinsdorf will be the white knight that saves the NHL in Phoenix. I would bet my Flames season tickets that as part of any sale, that massive penalty for breaking the lease with Glendale would be renegotiated, such that if things don’t improve over the next couple years, Reinsdorf, or whoever, would be given leave to relocate.
As far as this story goes, it’s nice to see the league has been caught with its foot in its mouth again.
I'll take that bet.
Glendale is not going to renegotiate anything that would allow the team to move within a couple of years. Are you kidding me? They’re going after WAYNE GRETZKY in order to save $8 million or so in creditor claims. Why on earth would they open the door to the team leaving in a year or two with no contractual penalty when it was that contract that has given them the only lifeline they possess at the moment to keep the team here?
Now, as to whether Reinsdorf will be the guy who wins the bid has a great deal to do with this new investment group that’s talking about bidding. From what I have heard from various sources (including on XM this morning), if they do submit a bid it will be less of a debt assumption like Reinsdorf’s and more an actual cash bid like Balsillie’s. The thing I have liked about what this new group has been saying is that they mention nothing about the market but do mention that the Coyotes might be “under-managed,” which it seems increasingly clear through court filings and discoveries has been the case. The more we learn about Jerry Moyes, the more incredulous I feel about why anyone at all should be on his side in this matter.
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
What would Glendale prefer?
Hypothetically: a Balsillie bid that takes the team out of Phoenix, but buys out the lease deal first? Or a Reinsdorf deal where the team is to stay in Phoenix but only if the lease is renegotiated to become much more ‘breakable’ in the future?
I’m asking because I don’t know, and you might.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Jul 13, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions
That’s like asking whether you want to get shot in the heart or the face with a 12-gauge. You die either way.
Balsillie is not buying out the lease deal. To do so would push his bid up to nearly a billion dollars. I don’t think even Jim Balsillie is going to do that. Balsillie’s argument is that the team is bankrupt, ergo the lease is broken and nobody has to pay Glendale a cent.
And I can guaran-damn-tee you that Glendale, while desperate to make a deal with Reinsdorf, isn’t going to negotiate away their one lifeline just to do all of this over again two years from now.
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
Balsillie’s argument is that the team is bankrupt, ergo the lease is broken and nobody has to pay Glendale a cent.
I’d forgotten that point. Yeah, Glendale’s in a tough spot here.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Jul 13, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions
I understand your point, Res, but I would consider your proposition doubtful. That would entail the City making concessions in every respect. I would more expect that it is an either/or thing with respect to monetary concessions vs. exit rights.
I could see the liquidated damages being negotiated downward, but not below the principal+interest levels on the arena 9in other words, eliminating the “future revenues” aspect of the LD’s), but that should be it in that regard. Commercially it seems nonsensical to offer concessions for the express purpose of allowing a team to be viable AND to offer an out. The concessions need to be addressed to be sufficient to allow the team to be viable in the hands of competent management.
The problem, of course, is that if this team continues to lose gobs of money (whatever one things the real amount is), there will come a time where the team is truly untenable in the Phoenix market. I expect that the league knows that whoever owns this team next may well be the last owner of the Phoenix Coyotes, and will begin the work to make a relocation possible some time in the future.
Of course, finding a way to turn this franchise around is the top priority from the league’s POV, and it should be. But its time the league began to plan an exit strategy should plan A fail. This bankruptcy proceeding and the pressures on all sides to make the asset valuable enough to own offers the ideal chance to mitigate the cost of breaking the lease.
I think I see what you are saying.
The league obviously wants to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix and not appear to be abandoning a market, but if they plan ahead with the idea that it might be needed for the team to move in the future, an orderly process set out now would make it look less like a haphazard move and more like a planned move, enabling the league to save face if nothing else.
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle." -- Philo of Alexandria
With the exception of actual hitmen and a bar called The Bada Bing, this whole thing is playing out like an organized crime deal. Thickening plot is putting it mildly. I’m nominating Bettman for the role of Ralph Cifaretto.
Well, good thing it wasn’t a serious statement.
by ChicoMaki on Jul 13, 2009 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Damned if they do......
1) Evidently there are no easy answers. Its a damned if they do.. situation for sure for the Glendale folks. Just enjoying the judge not taking crap from anyone here. Bettman can’t sweep this one under the rug like the Nashville/“Boots” Del Biaggio fiasco
I find sometimes it's easy to be myself
sometimes I find it's better to be somebody else
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by 
















