From The Rink: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Has Kentucky Improved Since the Non-Conference Season?

Bids and Betrayal: Coyotes now in hands of judge

"I think I did my part," Moyes said of his efforts to make hockey work in the desert. "I put plenty of money in it, I put a lot of time in it. I gave it the best try I could. Hockey will not work in the South. Mr. Bettman's plan is not working out."

Asked how he felt about the NHL, Moyes said, "I feel pretty poorly, to be right honest with you. I just don't think I've been treated right. I gave it 100 percent try and I feel betrayed by the NHL."

– The Associated Press

Thirteen years after the Winnipeg Jets franchise moved to Arizona, just one of nine expansions or relocations into warm weather American cities in a eight-year period between 1991 and 1999, Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes has offered the most damning opinion of the period we've ever had from an NHL owner.

And given what he's been through the past few years, it's no wonder he has such faint praise for his role in the movement.

But before I get into the details of what happened yesterday, I will offer this much of a defence of the league here: Eighteen years after the Sharks landed in San Jose and started this recent migration all off, this is the first bankruptcy of one of those nine teams. For all the turmoil and hand-wringing from here in Canada, this is – by far – as bad as it's ever been and as close as we've come to seeing a sunbelt franchise return to the north.

And it's still likely not all that close to happening.

With NHL training camps set to open, Judge Redfield T. Baum is now solely in control of this team's fate, something that will be determined within the next couple of weeks. Following the proceedings on Twitter the past two days, I don't get the sense that Jim Balsillie's made any real progress toward swaying the judge in his favour and bringing about a precedent-setting decision, and the smart money's on the league gaining control of the team in the near term.

What happens after that, however, is quite unclear.

Star-divide

Moyes, who has been trying to sell this team for years now, offered these thoughts on the future of the franchise: "With or without a $25-million [annual] subsidy from Glendale, which I don’t think [the city] can do, this team just is not going to be here."

Now that – for reasons well documented here and elsewhere all summer – rings true. How the NHL can possibly find another sucker to take on this franchise with out some guarantee that the losses won't continue to mount, I haven't the foggiest, and the most likely scenario a year from now is tales from training camp of whatever strange new market the league's decided to land this troubled team in. (Glendale's "enthusiastic" support for the NHL's bid makes me wonder if they are also as gleefully supporting the out clause the league's jammed into it.)

It's going to take a whole lot of work to save this team as is and where it is, especially once the season starts and the fact the already incredible losses have grown becomes apparent.

"You’ve got Phoenix, you’ve got Dallas, you’ve got Atlanta, you’ve got Tampa Bay all in trouble," Moyes added yesterday. "These teams have got to go north where everybody loves hockey."

For many here in Canada, the soon-to-be former owner of the Coyotes is preaching to the choir, reaffirming what so many column inches and television bits have been dedicated to saying over the years. Polls and comment boards in this country are all still overwhelmingly behind Balsillie's quest, whatever its flaws, and I expect there will be plenty of outrage online once a decision comes down.

I think if we've learned anything over the past four months it's that the NHL's prepared to fight Balsillie till the bitter end, and it's hard to shake the feeling that, no matter what happens in Phoenix this season, this isn't it.

Just another battle in the war.

0 recs  |  Comment 119 comments  |  Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

On Moyes' statement about Southern teams....

He includes Dallas in the list of “teams in trouble” – while it is true that the Stars are financially strapped right now, it has absolutely nothing to do with the hockey team’s operations nor the market for hockey in DFW. It is simply an issue of the bad business practices of the owner, Tom Hicks, who has spread himself too thin with several other ventures and is now seeing his two original sports holdings, the Texas Rangers and the Stars, suffer because of it. A sale of the Rangers is likely to happen this winter, which will supposedly alleviate Hicks’ financial problems and allow him to be a “real owner” of the Stars once again.

This is all a long way of saying that throwing the Stars in with the Thrashers, Preds, Lightning and Yotes is ridiculous. Hockey is in Dallas for the long haul.

On the Phoenix situation, you have to think the ultimate outcome will be an NHL takeover of the team and then a move to another market (not Ontario) in two or three years. I just feel really sorry for the players, team employees, and most especially the fans in Phoenix during this extremely turbulent process that can only end poorly.

by disposablehero on Sep 12, 2009 9:40 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Thank you.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. I can’t believe just threw Dallas in like that. It’s irresponsible and disgusting and it pisses me off to think what our hockey brethren up north think when reading something like that.

Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.

by Brandon Worley on Sep 12, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn’t worry too much about it. No one sees Moyes as the authority on the financial health of the other 29 NHL teams.

His general point, however, is one many hockey fans here would agree with.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 12, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

…and that’s really too bad, considering that the only thing separating Dallas from Phoenix, Nashville, and Atlanta is strong and competent ownership and a history of on-ice success.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think you can argue Dallas had and has a lot of good things going for it as a market. The metro area’s bigger than all three of those cities you mention, the rink’s downtown and shared with an NBA team and they’ve won a Stanley Cup.

Hockey interest in Texas also seems to be very high. If there was a motivated owner, I imagine a team in Houston would do just fine.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 12, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What's ironic is that Hicks has actually been a decent NHL owner...

Before this offseason, the team has consistently spent against the cap and has been one of the most consistent regular season teams over the past decade. The deep playoff run in 2008 really sparked things again in Dallas, and its unfortunate things fell apart the way they did last season.

Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.

by Brandon Worley on Sep 12, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

My point is...

…that hockey interest didn’t START high in Texas. A motivated, interested ownership created a hockey culture there where there wasn’t one to start with.

The downtown location is definitely something Phoenix can’t match, but good ownership and on-ice success could still turn around any of the “southern” franchises, IMO. Whether Phoenix in particular will get that good ownership, who knows. I have serious doubts about Reinsdorf and IceEdge, myself. But even if the team goes, I dearly hope that someone else tries the “experiment” again without the fetters and burdens that this franchise has carried with it for a decade.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Didn’t the Dallas Stars finish ranked 10th among NHL teams in revenues a year or two ago? That’s quite a “failure” Mr. Moyes.

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 12, 2009 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Heh. Yep. Gives you a bit of insight into Jerry Moyes’ understanding of the league, eh?

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Aeros

Houston did okay for themselves in the WHA as far as interest goes.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Sep 12, 2009 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Roadrunners

So did the Roadrunners back in the day in Phoenix… but to say that either Dallas or Phoenix were prime locations for NHL franchises would be stretching it rather far.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Moyes is patentedly dishonest about Dallas

Hicks’s problems centre around his partnership with Gillet in Liverpool.
Simple as that.
They took a gamble on what is a very lucrative sports venture in England and when push came to shove, Gillet had to sell the Canadiens and Hicks is in trouble in Dallas due to extenuating circumstances not related to hockey interest in Dallas Fort Worth.
To suggest otherwise is completely dishonest.
Sort of like Gillet attacking Balsillie at the BOG meeting blaming him for the Habs demise last season after the rumours of the team’s sale went public.
The fact the Habs sucked had more to do with a lack of professional organizational structure in supervising the players off ice conduct than it did with any newspaper story.

by Exit716 on Sep 12, 2009 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

…that hockey interest didn’t START high in Texas. A motivated, interested ownership created a hockey culture there where there wasn’t one to start with.

I may be wrong because the landscape has changed somewhat, but didn’t Texas recently have the largest number of minor-pro hockey teams of any state in the US? There has been a large pro hockey presence there for a long time and a large interest in hockey in Texas. Maybe saying NHL interest would be more appropriate.

by Bosc Ulrich on Sep 13, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah I think hockey in general’s grown quite a following in Texas for quite a while, even pre-Stars.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 12:50 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

“You’ve got Phoenix, you’ve got Dallas, you’ve got Atlanta, you’ve got Tampa Bay all in trouble,” Moyes added yesterday. “These teams have got to go north where everybody loves hockey.”

To be fair, Dallas and Tampa have shown the ability to survive and even thrive until ownership started screwing thing up.

by mc keeper on Sep 12, 2009 9:41 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, while there is a lot of truth in Moyes general sentiment, when he paints Dallas and Tampa Bay with the same brush, it kind of reinforces his image as a just another clueless owner who admittedly got into this “by accident.”

He sounds like he’s combining Balsillie talking points with his own myopic experience falling into ownership amid an Arizona land deal gone wrong, and concluding: “Blleeaargghh…hockey no work where sun shine so much. Must move north…bleeeargh.”

I can buy that he wanted to do right by this club when he bought in, but he didn’t know what he was getting into — and that’s something that will be a major problem for a sports franchise almost regardless of where it’s located.

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 12, 2009 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

(I should add that I don’t doubt Moyes has reason to feel betrayed, though. It’s not a stretch to imagine what the NHL told him when suckering him into buying in the first place. … But I bet that betrayal and resentment fuels his declaration that sport can’t work anywhere it is not already in the local DNA.)

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 12, 2009 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Moyes is a Balsillie puppet right now.

He’ll say anything the Balsillie/Rodier team feeds him that won’t get him cited for contempt of court — it’s the only way he gets any money back from his screwup, so I can’t blame him for it either. This is just one line off that script.

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 13, 2009 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

Agree 100%

2009-2010 Colorado Avalanche: Nothing Inspirational Comes to Mind

by Mike @ MHH on Sep 14, 2009 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Re: Dallas and Tampa

Overall it just seems that Moyes is looking strictly at the current financials. Dallas has done a great job of building it’s fan base and is in it for the long haul, unless something completely unexpected happens because of the owner over-extending himself.

On Tampa, the current owners have screwed things up royally. However, iirc the only season the Lightning ever made money was the year they won it all.

Tampa badly needs committed ownership that is willing to put up with modest losses (that can be offset by the leagues revenue sharing (not unlike Nashville). This was the case until I’m assuming Bill Davidson decided he needed to do some estate planning and sold them to the current clowns.

by oilerdago on Sep 12, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

As noted above, Dallas is in trouble because Tom Hicks has built a bit of a financial house of cards. Phoenix is in trouble in part because of the ridiculous real estate machinations of their owners. And Atlanta and Tampa Bay have suffered because of inept ownership.

There seems to be a pattern there…

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Sep 12, 2009 9:57 AM CDT reply actions   1 recs

There seems to be a pattern there…

Crooked idiots bleed large quantitites of money.

I just want to know why none of them ever bleed over around me. I could use some of that cash they leak all over the place. :)

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 12, 2009 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

A large part of the pattern is that there has been a trend to seeing sports teams not as stand alone businesses, but as a piece of a real estate business, or a broadcasting business, or something else. It was a way to increase revenues, and create businesses that had greater appeal within the corporate community.

It had several not necessarily obvious consequences. One of them is that it exposed sports franchises to downturns in the real estate market. Any argument that could be made that, as entertainment, sports were immune to recessions went out the window with this. Even setting aside the reliance on corporate purchasing of high end tickets, the business was directly exposed to a decrease in the value of real estate.

Welcome to the largest real estate bust in US history.

What also happened is that the expansion into the real estate business attracted real estate people, and their methods. Sports teams got highly leveraged. We’re likely to see more team bankruptcies, because bankruptcy seems to be a part of the business plan of most people in commercial real estate. They have silly amounts of debt, and are desperately dependent upon the projected cash flows.

This is not just a problem for the NHL, or even small market teams. Witness the chaos that ensued when the Tribune Company tried to sell the Chicago Cubs.

My guess, and it is worth what you pay for it, is that you are going to see this business model decline. Sports teams and commercial real estate is not an obvious marriage, and I don’t see it being such a consistent business model going forward. The de-leveraging is going to be painful, though.

by J. Michael Neal on Sep 12, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

Great analysis. Real estate is going to be a crappy business for the next 10 years (at a minimum) in the US. The credit bubble has burst and financing for the kinds of lavish sports leagues we’ve enjoyed during the credit expansion of the past ~35 years is gone.

Expect revenues, salaries, ticket prices and everything else associated with sports to start that great downward slide as people’s spending patterns change. My bet is for, at best, stagflation for the next 5 to 10 years, which means flat revenues with rising inflation. The cap may stay at ~$55 million, but it’ll buy the equivalent of 35-40 million once this plays out. 1

Give or take a potential collapse of the US Dollar, of course.

Ta,

1 In my long view, the NHL will either split into 2 leagues (large and small markets) or contract to 24-26 teams.

by Tom Luongo on Sep 12, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Contrary to Mr. Moyes Phoenix Coyotes, the Atlanta Thrashers were not bought on credit.
They have had their ownership squabbles and on ice problems, but they are not a leveraged entity.
They play in a market nearly as large as Dallas with no debt.
Give us a team to cheer.

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 12, 2009 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I for one hope you guys turn it around soon and have some success. We “southern” market fans have to stick together.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 9:37 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I guess we do, but I can’t for the life of me figure out how Don Effin Waddell still has a job. Good luck!

by Rage6878 on Sep 12, 2009 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Probably inertia… that’s why a lot of people who aren’t qualified keep their jobs (coughgretzkycough).

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 9:46 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who wants to be known as The Man Who Fired Gretzky ?

I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.

by Smoboy41 on Sep 14, 2009 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Can it be worse than The Man Who Traded Gretzky?

Hell, at least when he was traded he was one of the best in the world. As a coach? I’ve seen better coaches get the axe for much less.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 14, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, I agree. Based on what the Great One has accomplished as a coach, he most definitely should get the boot.

I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.

by Smoboy41 on Sep 14, 2009 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

PPP you hit the nail on the head… real estate. At the end of the day watch the markets where the US housing situation is the worst. That’s where the worst financial issues are going to come from for the NHL (and other sports) going forward. We ain’t even seen the collapse of commercial real estate. Glendale has a bigger problem than the Yotes.

They built an enormous boat anchor during a housing bubble. It burst and the fall out has been documented nicely here by The Mirtle.

Why the NHL wants to continue in a shrinking market I don’t know. It kills me to watch the NHL turn themselves inside out trying to keep Balsillie out of the league when a well-moneyed, motivated owner is exactly what this league needs while the US teeters on the verge of a complete collapse of their banking system.

Of course, these are men that have profited heavily from the expansion and their actions here tell me they haven’t shifted their thinking towards the different paradigm that’s in the process of happening.

Ta,

by Tom Luongo on Sep 12, 2009 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hoe is Phoenix a Shrinking Market???

While you can debate whether or not hockey can florish in hot weather markets it’s really not up for debate where the population is going – the US Census does a pretty good job of tracking population movement trends and none of the markets cited by Mr. Moyes are shrinking population bases.

Leverage, credit market conditions, and a host of other "etc’s contribute to the challenges the markets mentioned have. In fact I am a Caps fan but from what I’ve read things are looking pretty good and well managed in Nashville these days so I wouldn’t bet against any of these teams if the issue is growing or shrinking markets - in that regard they are all looking better then several “Original Six” cities….

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 9:40 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just say Detroit

That’s the team you are referring to.
To suggest that Montreal, Toronto, New York, Chicago and Boston are struggling in terms of hockey popularity that’s incredibly misleading.
Besides your team was a welfare recipient for many years despite Mr. Billionaire Leonsis owning the club.

by Exit716 on Sep 13, 2009 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Until Bill Wirtz died, hockey was damn sure struggling in popularity in Chicago.

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 13, 2009 11:57 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

The unfortunate thing about the Southern expansion is that it could have worked very well if it were paced more moderately. So many teams added so fast was nice for the existing owners’ wallets, but if the league has showed restraint (yeah, right) and added a couple teams one year, a couple more after another three years or so, and not thrown around new teams until the existing teams were at least semi-stable, they wouldn’t be in such a mess. Just sad.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 12, 2009 10:02 AM CDT reply actions   1 recs

There’s a lot of truth to that but I also think that what we see as the “Southern expansion” was expidited by the timely vulnerabilities of several franchises, including both the North Stars and the Jets. That’s not to say that the 6 true Southern expansion teams (SJ, ANA, TB, FLA, ATL, and NSH) weren’t rushed into, but I don’t think Dallas, Phoenix, and Raleigh were necessarily premeditated.

by Arenacale on Sep 12, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Those three would have been expansion markets if you hadn't gotten moves.

Dallas and Phoenix were obvious top-10 national markets for the NHL to get into, and Raleigh had an arena under construction and two prospective expansion ownership groups fighting over it before Karmanos snaked it out from under them. If Raleigh had gotten to 1999 and the ESA (now RBC Center) opening without an NHL tenant, they’d have been in the same position as Kansas City now. Karmanos didn’t know North Carolina and thus didn’t understand quite how bad the two years in Greensboro would be, but he was definitely aware he was taking two years in a sub-par facility some distance from his identified fan base in order to lock that market down.

The only potential difference I think we’d have seen in the NHL map would have been if New Jersey hadn’t won that 1995 Cup. They probably would have wound up in Nashville without the Cup to anchor them, and the league would either have skipped Atlanta or found another expansion partner for them.

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 13, 2009 10:05 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly. Pace, restraint and due diligence would’ve been the better route to southern expansion. Instead of taking Blockbuster’s (haha, remember when that was a growing business model?) and Disney’s money at the first chance they were offered.

I suppose part of the urgency was the whole “national footprint” effort for a TV deal back when people thought the NHL would have an NBA-like resurrection. Though everyone agrees that was a failure in retrospect, it’s dishonest to pretend there weren’t many people — TV execs among them — thinking that was the way to go back in the late 80s/early 90s.

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 12, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

And at the time, who could have seen that it was possible for a sports fan to possibly find ESPN largely irrelevant in terms of highlights and updated scores. I know I’ll watch if there is a baseball game I’m interested in seeing (although often turn it off before stabbing myself in the ears to stop the horrid, inane, ignorant commentary of some of their talking heads), but as for highlights and updates and other news, I use the internet as my source because they I get the information in a timely fashion and I see clips in the order I want, when I want, without anyone else’s spin as to what I SHOULD BE interested in imposed on them.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 12, 2009 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Heh, I’ve never met such a person, but there must be tons of people out there who like their sports highlights delivered with someone shouting BOO-YAH/JUMANJI at them.

(Sorry for the dated references, but that was the last time I ingested ESPN highlights.)

Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.

by Dominik on Sep 13, 2009 12:50 AM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

So you are familiar with Stuart Scott, then. :)

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 13, 2009 6:28 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

San Jose is a southern expansion team?

by Hawerchuk on Sep 12, 2009 11:21 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

You do not find ice under natural conditions in San Jose.

by J. Michael Neal on Sep 12, 2009 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hamilton Canucks!

You don’t find it very often in Vancouver either.

by yrmom on Sep 12, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But you can see some snow...

for a few days every winter on Mt. Hamilton and in the Santa Cruz Mountains. And I had to scrape my car—once.

I had to look this up, SJ is slightly geographically south of Denver, Pittsburgh, DC. So if Northern CA is the new South, so be it.

by bison on Sep 14, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don’t use those terms.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 12, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I should have put “Southern expansion” in quotes – but I wasn’t thinking about San Jose specifically, they have been doing fine on the ice (and I guess they are drawing well, too), but thinking more of the strategy of expanding further south of the Canadian-US border than professional hockey had been routinely played at the time. I guess you could call it “southern and western expansion” for that matter.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 12, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps with their performance last season and their previous financial troubles the Sens are an argument against Northern expansion as well.

by yrmom on Sep 12, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Baroque’s point is not an anti-southern one. It’s an anti-“expanding wildly in whatever market you can regardless of long-term consequences” one.

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 12, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

So you never heard of the California Golden Seals??

I.E. the San Jose Sharks are not the first NHL hay proximity to San Francisco Bay….

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd feel more sympathy for Moyes...

…if he had gone to more BoG meetings and involved himself in the team a bit more. Given that he was something of an absentee owner, I find it hard to take his comments as anything other than the words of a Balsillie hand puppet since Moyes barely knows what goes on in the league anyway.

I feel bad for him that he got roped into NHL ownership, but given his performance over the past couple of years and his exceedingly questionable practices as a businessman, I have to say I’d sooner listen to Bettman than him on hockey matters.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 12:29 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Im not necessarily on the NHL’s “side” in this mess – I think the NHL does a horrible job of due diligence in its ownership analyses, and I question its long-term business planning. However, I dont think Moyes is saying he was misled or duped by the NHL – I think he’s saying that even with his efforts, the NHL’s plans are not going to work.

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Sep 13, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure Moyes is saying that he was actively duped. However, I bet he thinks he was at least misled. He bought the team basically as a favor. It should have been clear to everyone right then that he wasn’t a committed owner. There were probably a lot of people saying that he would make money, and some of those people are currently in court arguing that he isn’t a creditor, and should be left out in the cold.

by J. Michael Neal on Sep 13, 2009 8:43 PM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

Well, if the NHL duped Moyes into buying the team (which is incredibly unsubstantiated – more likely, he was duped into it by Ellman), then Moyes got duped again by Balsillie and Rodier, who apparently promised that Moyes would be bathing in bathtubs full of dollar bills by now.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 13, 2009 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

Ugh, reminds me of the Commodore pic.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 1:00 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, God, no. I had just stopped having flashbacks…

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 14, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What does how many BOG meetings he went to have to do with whether or not you feel sympathy towards him, the guy spent a fortune trying to make hockey and other things work there – personally from a business perspective looking at the numbers, etc. he should hae went bankrupt between 12 and 24 months sooner than he did with the ‘yotes – just sayin’

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 9:46 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Because if he had actually involved himself in the ownership of this team instead of holding onto it hoping it would become an asset while he used it to shuffle his finances around, maybe he’d have figured out a couple of strategies to make the team (and, for that matter, the sport itself) more appealing.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 13, 2009 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

where does this feeling that he was an “absentee owner” come from?

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Sep 14, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

It comes from Moyes’ own deposition.

by Gerald on Sep 14, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

His own admission that he wasn’t involved in virtually any of the league functions, for one. For another, he literally wasn’t anywhere near the team last year while the NHL was paying his bills for him.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 14, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Gary Bettman’s southern strategy may have worked, but he could only find narcissistic fools to participate as owners of those franchises.

Hamilton was always backed by capable business people with adequate means. Ron Joyce, the first time, and Balsillie this time.

The NHL has to stop inviting fools to the party.

The best solution now is for the NHL to make a deal with Balsillie. Split the losses this year in Phoenix, with a $50 million dollar relocation fee. Half to the Leafs, and half to fund the other southern disasters to come.

by godot10 on Sep 12, 2009 1:38 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Best solution for whom?

Balsillie, IMO, is as much of a narcissistic fool as anyone in the current ownership ranks. For being such a savvy businessman, he has shown a surprising lack of said savvy in his dealings with the league since Pittsburgh.

It’d be nice if, for a change, Phoenix had an owner that WANTED to own the team as a hockey team and not a land grab. The last good owner this franchise had was in Winnipeg.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

That seems to be the real problem here: no one seems to be able to find that owner.

by yrmom on Sep 12, 2009 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Unfortunately, you’re right. Reinsdorf certainly isn’t “the guy,” and who the hell knows what Ice Edge’s plans are.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m gonna risk getting flamed here, but who the Coyotes need to be successful where they are, is an owner like…well…Jim Balsillie. I hate the guy’s methods, but no one can say he isn’t passionate about the game of hockey and reasonably intelligent. There is no doubt in my mind that he could take a team to Winnipeg and make it successful…or even Saskatoon(as I saw suggested elsewhere). He could take over Atlanta, Nashville, even Phoenix and turn them around where they are. Like I said, I hate his methods and his single-minded determination to play match-up with the Leafs no matter what the cost, but I bet he could pull it out. That’s part of my frustration with the guy. He could be so good for the NHL and hockey, but it seems like he doesn’t care about either. Do I have that wrong? Am I missing something here?

by Rage6878 on Sep 12, 2009 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree, but not for the reason you might think.

The thing struggling markets need are competent owners who are invested in and love the market they’re in.

Balsillie couldn’t turn the Coyotes around in Phoenix because he doesn’t give a shit about Phoenix. He’s made that very very clear in every court filing he has ever made. He also doesn’t have any particular love for Winnipeg or Saskatoon, either, so I doubt he’d do much better there.

Balsillie would make a great owner for Hamilton, and that’s about it – because that’s his only interest. It’s essentially his home (well, Waterloo, but it’s close enough) and he’d be mightily invested in making the team a success so that his city would succeed.

What the Coyotes, Lightning, Thrashers, etc. need are owners who understand not only how to run a business successfully but how to make that business an integral part of the community surrounding it. The Maple Leafs can be successful as bottom feeders because they are inextricably woven into Toronto’s cultural fabric. Same with the Dallas Stars, a team in a big metro area, sure, but definitely not a “traditional” one.

As has been mentioned before, though, those types of owners are very rare.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 9:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, if no such great owner for Phoenix exists, and you even admit that Balsillie would make a great owner for Hamilton, then for the long-term health and success of the franchise, isn’t Balsillie/Hamilton the better choice?

I mean, it sucks for you and the other Phoenix fans, but I think that seems fairly self-evident.

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 12, 2009 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No. The fact that I think Balsillie would be a great owner for Hamilton does not mean I want him to steal a team to do it.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 12, 2009 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But it is incredibly clear that no one in Phoenix wants to provide the ownership necessary, so the franchise is going to dissolve or relocate anyways. It sucks, but if there is a viable option in Hamilton, and there are no viable options in Phoenix….

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 12, 2009 11:47 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

… if no such great owner for Phoenix exists, …

I think that is the key point. What Phoenix needs is a wealthy owner who cares about hockey enough to want to own a team not just as a lever to get real estate, creative and inventive enough to promote the team appropriately in the market, and wants to keep the team in Phoenix and build the fan base there – and it seems as though no such animal actually exists. So if the thing the team needs is impossible to find, what else is there to do?

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 12, 2009 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed. It honestly is unfortunate, and I would wonder how hockey might do in PHX with competent management, but if that just isn’t forthcoming, or even new ownership, regardless of competency… Like I said, it sucks for Phoenix, but isn’t the answer obvious?

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 12, 2009 11:45 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

It may be obvious to you but not to me. I don’t think that the best thing for the league is to give in to Jim Balsillie. The best thing for the franchise might be to move to Hamilton but that might also be the best thing for other franchises too. At the moment the focus has gone from the health of one team to the health of the whole league and Balsillie is threatening the health of the league.

As far as ownership goes, there are two parties that are interested in buying this franchise. Whether they are competent or not is anyone’s guess. But Reinsdorf and IceEdge are still in play if the NHL wins the bid – they simply didn’t have time to negotiate given the deadlines imposed by the auction process.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 13, 2009 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Unfortunately with the players permitted a fixed percentage of league revenues and the salary cap for each team based on same, what happens regarding one franchise affects all the others. Montreal for example makes a metric butt-load of money, but their salary is capped at the same level as a team like Phoenix. They could easily afford to spend a lot more for players, but aren’t permitted to do so and thus must take extra money as profit instead of spending it on payroll. I think that’s why the focus has shifted from one team to the league.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 13, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

But....

Given the choice of equal dollars in Phoenix or Montreal, most players would choose Phoenix.
The only reason Gainey was able to sign players this off season was because most of the usual suspects in the free agency game were capped out.
If you believe what Steve Simmons wrote in the Toronto Sun today, the Florida Panthers are in a world of hurt too.

by Exit716 on Sep 13, 2009 8:53 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps

The language issue and the “playing in a fishbowl” issue are large ones, for some players more than others, but I’m not even speaking to individual players so much as the entire roster. Some players prefer a team that has notoriously rabid fans and a long history, while some would prefer a more low-key environment where there is less attention. Personal tastes vary.

But skip Montreal and Phoenix specifically – maybe think the New York Rangers and the Nashville Predators instead. The point is that a team such as Montreal could financially sign a bunch of players at $4 million a year and still be profitable, while a team with the revenues of Phoenix could not sign as many players at a given price point, despite the fact that Montreal could afford it. The lower revenues of some teams suppress the payroll options of teams that are in the opposite conference even. This is why the financial health of a suffering team is of interest to the fans of other teams as well – when a team does poorly, it limits the options for their own team, too.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 13, 2009 9:13 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

The best thing for the franchise might be to move to Hamilton but that might also be the best thing for other franchises too.

I 100% agree, Hamilton may be a better option for a couple of other franchises as well. Thing is, none of those other franchises are in the middle of a horrendously ugly bankruptcy process, nor has it been shown that there is not an owner interested in keeping those other franchises in their current locations. There’s no point in worrying about hypothetical problems, when we have a very real problem sitting right in front of us. Furthermore, the moving of the Coyotes to a more stable and successful market (presumably) could help prevent some of those hypothetical problems down the road. Maybe it’s just bad luck that Phoenix happened to be the first one of those problems that couldn’t be fixed locally, maybe its just that the Phoenix situation is worse than any other in the league, maybe it’s just “shit happens”, but it seems negligent to refuse to fix a very obvious problem in Phoenix, because you’d rather keep that easy fix in your back pocket for a hypothetical problem down the line.

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 13, 2009 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

You keep talking about a relocation to Hamilton as if it were an easy fix. I think if this process has shown us anything, it’s shown us that you can’t just uproot a team and plop it into Hamilton on a whim and expect little birdies to start singing, rainbows to appear, and money to show up in stacks in the team’s coffers.

As far as Phoenix goes, I think the reason the franchise is in the spot it’s in is because of a “perfect storm” of circumstances – turbulent and incompetent ownership, a relocation from Phoenix to Glendale, Gretzky’s slow and painful transition from a guy using the team as his personal country club to a guy thinking that maybe he ought to show up for practices once in a while, and an assload of political and financial intrigue that has saddled the franchise in massive debt.

I’ll be honest with you. If I could get a guarantee from the NHL that they would open Phoenix up for an expansion team headed by IceEdge or Reinsdorf or whoever in two or three years’ time, then I would say, “Send this team to Hamilton post-haste.” Canada would have their seventh team, Balsillie would be satisfied (I’d hope), and we here in Phoenix could have a team that was home-grown. Hell, maybe we could even grab Doan in the expansion draft and keep Don Maloney on as GM (one of the dumbest things about Balsillie’s bid is him getting rid of The Don, IMO).

Failing that, there’s no way on this planet you’re going to get me to meekly bow my head and say, “The greater good must be satisfied – please divest me of my hockey team,” no matter how much sense it makes to everyone else.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 13, 2009 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

You keep talking about a relocation to Hamilton as if it were an easy fix. I think if this process has shown us anything, it’s shown us that you can’t just uproot a team and plop it into Hamilton on a whim and expect little birdies to start singing, rainbows to appear, and money to show up in stacks in the team’s coffers.

Actually the opposite. The issue of getting a team into Hamilton is only complicated by the fact that the NHL doesn’t want that team to be owned by the guy with the money in Hamilton. If anything, the NHL’s actions in determining relocation fees, etc. for Hamilton shows that even the NHL believes that Hamilton is a viable market, that stands to at least be considerably stable, if not downright profitable. The NHL has been forced to do an awful lot in this case in the way of demonstrating the desirability of a franchise in Hamilton, despite the fact that they don’t want to put this franchise in Hamilton. Further, previous relocations (nearly every NHL one in the 90’s, Cleveland Browns → Baltimore is a famous one as well) have shown how quickly and easily a relocation can be done, if the league doesn’t try to hold up the process.

I’ll be honest with you. If I could get a guarantee from the NHL that they would open Phoenix up for an expansion team headed by IceEdge or Reinsdorf or whoever in two or three years’ time, then I would say, "Send this team to Hamilton post-haste." Canada would have their seventh team, Balsillie would be satisfied (I’d hope), and we here in Phoenix could have a team that was home-grown.

The thing is, while its certainly possible that down the road, particularly as the economy bounces back, a viable owner could appear with an interest in keeping the team in PHX. But that’s at best, a few years away, as it takes time for the economy to recover, and consequently, for people to start making money and feeling comfortable again. The NHL will only hold onto the Coyotes for a year, at most two, after which point the team will likely be sold off to a relocator anyways. Might as well get them out of there now, let the healing process begin, and worry about an expansion franchise in 5-10 years. There won’t be any sort of quick fix here.

Failing that, there’s no way on this planet you’re going to get me to meekly bow my head and say, "The greater good must be satisfied – please divest me of my hockey team," no matter how much sense it makes to everyone else.

I definitely get where you’re coming from. I don’t necessarily think its letting go for the greater good, as much as it is letting go and gearing up for another (hopefully competent) try down the road. If Phoenix is vacated by the NHL, you can be sure that it’s going to look like a very tempting target down the road, especially if Jobing.com Arena needs someone to play inside.

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 14, 2009 12:18 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Having a lot of money does not equal being a successful owner. The truth is we have no idea what if Jim Balsillie is the next Mike Illitch or just a richer version of the Len Barrie. Balsillie has the pockets to absorb a lot of losses, that’s about all we know for certain.

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 12, 2009 9:45 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well we do know that Balsillie has better hair than Len Barrie.

by yrmom on Sep 12, 2009 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Point taken :)

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 12, 2009 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think it’s a pretty good assumption that Balsillie would make a better owner than Len Barrie….hell…I’D be a better owner than him.(Which is not because I think I’d be a great owner, either) The guy is extremely passionate about hockey in general, though, and I’m sure he follows the NHL teams religiously

by Rage6878 on Sep 12, 2009 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Further to your initial point a few posts above, exactly why would Balsillie’s alleged “passion” make him a great hockey owner anywhere? How does “passion” lead to success? If he can run a good business, what difference does it make whether he is “passionate” (which, in Balsillie-speak means “I am allowed to be as disreputable as I want, ’cuz i am PASSIONATE”)?

by Gerald on Sep 13, 2009 7:54 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

When I say passionate about hockey, I mean he grew up loving/playing the game, and by all accounts still plays the game on a semi-regular basis now. I am not now, nor have I EVER been a JB fan, but I’ll give the man his due. I never said he was a good person. I’m saying that (generally speaking) if a guy has a TON of money, actually loves/knows the game, and is committed to his team/market, then you have to think he will have some success. I also stated above that if he showed the same commitment to a team in it’s current market that he obviously does to putting any team he can get his hands on in Hamilton, I think he could make that team a success.

by Rage6878 on Sep 13, 2009 8:19 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

None of that goes an inch to demonstrating that passion is connected to success. Owners do not run teams on a day to day basis. He will make no hockey decisions, or at least he should not.

The onyl thing that matters for success is making good decisions. Passion does not help that one way or the other. Astuteness does; passion is optional. As a matter of fact, I thik one could easily argue that passion would be an obstacle to success, as it frequently is in business.

by Gerald on Sep 13, 2009 9:59 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dead on here. At the same time, “passion” for the underlying business could lead to a willingness to risk more personally (financially or otherwise) to see the business succeed.

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Sep 14, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair point, as it relates to capitalization of a business.

by Gerald on Sep 14, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

If the Los Angeles Kings have taught us anything, its that PRIDE = PASSION = POWER

http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.

by IAmJoe on Sep 13, 2009 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

…and that what looks terrific on paper may not translate to the ice… :P

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 13, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

And that all marketing slogans are just different degrees of lame.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 13, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dan Snyder is passionate about NFL football.

Ask a Redskins fan how well that’s worked out.

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 13, 2009 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

That seemed to be an issue about 14-15 years ago for a team in Canada. The team was for sale and everyone wanted to see it stay in it’s original home, but no one wanted to take a chance on owning the team in that city. Instead, it was bought by out-of-town interests and moved elsewhere. What was that team, anyhow? Not Toronto, not Edmonton, not Calgary…

Oh, right, the Winnipeg Jets.

by Arenacale on Sep 12, 2009 9:20 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting you get to a sound answer with IMO flawed logic..

The issue at hand in the Tampa Bay situation as well as the situation that created the current problem in Nashville was and is the poor business poractices and ethics of the current and/or prior ownership. In the case of TB it was and is accepted an under capitalized ownership group; in the case of Nashiville it’s the ethics of the PRIOR majority owner.

In both case proper “due diligence” and heeding what it unearthed would have said don’t sell to these guys, instead that wasn’t done and now the NHL and it’s owner/partners must deal with the reults. In actuality, the Phoenix situation is more complex than that – when Moyes bought the franchise and relocated it he was actually a responsible owner by all business metrics, the situation in Phoenix today is the result of multiple mis-steps and one wonders what and how both Moyes and the NHL would have been better served by a different approach on both their parts…

As far as additional “Southern Disasters” I really can’t understand you’re point; the TB situation will get worked out, even if it means the Davidsons have to get involved again; the Florida stuff is IMHO overblown; Atlanta doesn’t have a huge debt load and their rebuld approach seems sound; if anybody can pull Nashville out of the fire then the current ownership can; Dallas IMO not a problem at all. While actually I support Balsille’s efforts and even his motives, I can’t see myself going to see a Caps away game up in Saskatchewan any sooner then I see myself going to see a Flin Flon Bombers game in February anytime soon….on the other hand I do plan to catch a few Caps – Panther Games in South Florida this winter if the oppt’y presents itself from a personal schedule POV and I’m a Caps Season Ticket Holder -

Give it time….

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 10:06 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Jerry Moyes is about as objective as

asking Norm Green how he felt about Minneapolis-St. Paul as a NHL market in the 1990s. It is a lot easier to throw everyone else under the bus than just admit “I was part of the failure here.” Moyes defense is basically “I worked hard and lost a lot of money”—they give out gold stars for extra credit for effort in 2nd grade not in business. How do you buy a multi-million dollar business and not spend time learning the business model? How do you take on so much debt without a plan?

He lost a lot of money. He got taken in by a secretive real estate mogul and now he’s bitter. Fine. I understand that. But to suggest that every market is just like his and every “southern” owner is just like him is specious. The Carolina Hurricanes play in a market that is a faction the size of Phoenix with almost no Fortune 500 corporations and yet because they are well managed they have survived and even flourished in a non-traditional setting.

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 12, 2009 9:43 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Speaking of Norm

That reminds me of one of the greatest quotes in sports business history:

(Paraphrasing here):

“You’d have to be an idiot to lose money on hockey in Minnesota.” – Norm Green

Yes, Norm, you were quite the idiot. Thanks for my Stars though.

by VA Libertarian on Sep 13, 2009 1:32 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions   0 recs

Bingo.

Jerry Moyes’ bias isn’t hard to find — he’s lost a lot of money, he’s thrown his lot in with a guy who is a longshot to win the court case, and he consequently stands to lose (in his eyes) even more money in the next couple weeks. He’s angry and bitter, and would rather vilify the NHL than accept responsibility for his part in the current fiasco.

I think there are lessons for the NHL to learn here — the importance of grassroots fan-building programs, the need to find owners who will view the team as a long-term investment and not merely a real-estate development accessory, the strong correlation between playoff appearances and fan support. But I don’t see one of the lessons as being “hockey doesn’t work in the South”.

by BleedBlue42 on Sep 13, 2009 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not arguing with your overall conclusions but

“Almost no Fortune 500 Corporations”? not just as a base for HQ’s but also as a major location RTP (Research Triangle Park is a great market and the fact they, like the Carolina Panthers, were smart enough when they relocated from hartford to brand themselves as the whole State’s team …. suggest you take another look at that statement – in actuality the Washington Capitals and Washington Redskins have more obstcles to luxry box sales than either of their Carolina counterparts….

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Um, not really.

Caniac here who lived in Reston 2004-2007 and owned Nats partial season tickets 2005-2006, just for background.

Corporate sales have always been a major problem for the Hurricanes. The RTP has/had plenty of major operational sites for companies (IBM/later Lenovo, now-bankrupt Nortel), but few large companies actually made their headquarters there. Raleigh and Chapel Hill’s largest employers are various units of the state government, and Durham is a dying tobacco town with a love-hate relationship with the private university anchored there. The Canes have squeezed as much money as they can out of the healthcare and biotech industry, but they still have to sell way more of their lower-level seats to private individuals than do most clubs.

The Caps’ problem pre-bandwagon was the huge club level and the deal with Abe Pollin that made it impossible to sell those seats individually for hockey games. They did fine on suite sales, unless you think that all those defense contractors were just buying up advertising signs and not entertaining clients/Congresscritters within view of said signs, which seems unlikely.

And you can’t be seriously suggesting that the Washington Redskins have a harder time selling luxury boxes than the Hurricanes, can you?

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 13, 2009 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Or the Panthers.

My comment still stands. Charlotte’s a banking town. Who do you think was buying all those suites at Bank of America Stadium?

That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.

by JoshCVT on Sep 14, 2009 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I used Fortune 500 List in this post: http://www.birdwatchersanonymous.com/2009/6/16/902277/how-to-build-a-stanley-cup

Carolina is tied for last in the NHL in terms of Fortune 500 HQ. I’m not trying to be mean, in fact I think it is all the more impressive that they generate revenue without companies with huge entertainment budgets purchasing tickets.

All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com

by The Falconer on Sep 15, 2009 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bettman: “What’s happened to this team is crystal clear. That is it needs new ownership.” As for Moyes’s sense of betrayal, Bettman said, "considering the NHL has been supporting this franchise for the past year when Mr. Moyes was supposed to be, it is quite disappointing."

I think that’s a little misleading too – Didnt Moyes pump in some ridiculous $$ ($300 million is the number I remember but don’t feel like confirming"). Isn’t that “supporting the franchise?” And the financial realities of the Coyotes are not make “crystal clear” that what it needs is “new ownership”. Doesn’t the League’s bid recognize that the team also needs lease relief?

Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.

http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo

by poploser on Sep 13, 2009 6:39 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Exactly my point...

A smarter businessman would have cut and run some time ago – after all that’s why the US Civil Code has both Chapter 11 and Chapter 7…..

I’m surprised the Moyes group hasn’t bropught into evidence a bunch of emails from the NHL pressuring him to NOT go bankrupt and stuff… just goes to the point that all along the NHL has had smarter, better lawyers then the trucking magnet that bought the Winnipeg Jets and tried through power of ego to makle all this work … the reality from a business perspective is it seems somewhere along the line Jerry Moyes forgot the KISS principle; KISS = Keep It Simple “Sir”…..

by markbona-capsfan99 on Sep 13, 2009 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

A trucking magnet bought the Jets? That would explain how the moved so quickly: just turn that sucker on and the entire team gets stuck there, and then truck ’em on over to Phoenix.

(Hint: It was Steven Gluckstern and Richard Burke. Moyes didn’t get involved until 2001.)

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there)

by Doogie2K on Sep 14, 2009 9:08 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Probably because such e-mails don’t exist.

And FYI, Moyes let himself get roped into team ownership by his business partner Steve Ellman five years after the Jets moved to Phoenix. Ellman, a real-estate developer, partnered with Moyes to build the Westgate City Center where Jobing.com Arena currently resides alongside the new Cardinals’ stadium. Ellman then convinced Moyes to take over all of the hockey ownership while he moved to the real-estate side, and then left Moyes holding the bag.

Moyes didn’t try “through power of ego” to make the team work – I think he literally believed that he could use the team to shuffle some of his money around for a while. Plus, owning a sports team – at least initially – is a nice conversation piece to trot out to your pals. But don’t kid yourself – Moyes did very little to try to “make this team work” outside of being the guy signing the checks. Bobby Fischer was easier to find than Jerry Moyes was for most of his tenure.

You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.

by zyllyx on Sep 14, 2009 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sunbelt teams

The sunbelt teams are sitting on the areas with the highest job growth outlook in the US for the next 10 years, if that is worth anything. Yes, hockey culture is the most important thing but where the jobs are going is also important.

by ThrashersRecaps on Sep 14, 2009 8:05 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Unless the water runs out. Which in the coming decades is a very real possibility (especially with respect to agriculture). The American West is particular is going to go through a pretty wrenching readjustment in 10 to 20 years.

"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill

by Baroque on Sep 14, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

So

If I am understanding all this correctly (and please correct me if I’m wrong):

The NHLs bid is backed by:
• Most of the secured creditors
• The largest unsecured creditor (Glendale)
• & The Board of Governers

Jim Balsille’s bid is backed by:
• An unsecured creditor who is that way because he essentially loaned money to himself.

I don’t see how Mr. Balsille is going to win this if what I’ve said above is the case.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 14, 2009 8:36 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

You have it correct, except that the League’s bid is in fact backed by all of the secured creditors (SOF and NHL), as well as 99% of the unsecured creditors (in fact, every single unsecured creditor save for Gretzky and Moyes.

by Gerald on Sep 14, 2009 9:57 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm I’m having a really hard time seeing how Balsille’s going to win this one, given those circumstances.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 14, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who said he was going to win?

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well he certainly thinks he is going to.

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 14, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not so sure about that.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I guess I was under the impression that some people/media were under the impression that Balsille had a good chance at winning, because he had the best bid moneywise (i.e they know $200M+ > $140M). For some reason all that talk had me thinking the odds were about 66.6%-33.3%, mainly because that’s how it was presented elsewhere. I guess maybe giving Balsille equal time to the sotry made it feel like he had a much better chance.

In reality it’s more like like 99.5%-0.5%. I

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 14, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’d give him about 3 or 4 per cent. And there may be more litigation in the future that slightly increases those chances.

Balsillie probably thinks he’s going to get a team eventually. So maybe in the end he “wins.”

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

With all the legal fees he’s racking up, I wonder how much that eventual team is going to cost him?

It doesn’t seem far fetched to imagine he’s going to end up spending $750M trying to acquire a team (if he gets one).

The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time

by Jibblescribbits on Sep 14, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Heh, I wouldn’t be surprised.

Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com

by James Mirtle on Sep 14, 2009 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure anyone’s going to win here. Maybe friendship?

by yrmom on Sep 14, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs


User Tools

Welcome to SBN's blog on all things hockey

Start posting on From The Rink »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

One_lindsay05_small
Getzlaf injured; Olympics in question?
Small
Lightning sale imminent-what about PHX?
Small
Dave Tippett for the Jack Adams award!
Small
Raffle
Small
Collective Intelligence or Popular Delusions:Visualizing NHL Trade, Award Rumors
Small
Phoenix sale?
Gary_bettman_s_nightmare_small
Developing Player Value: Defensive Value per 20 Minutes (DV/20)
One_lindsay05_small
Kings GM & Johnson at odds over University of Michigan
Img_0706_small
Penguins scouting heavily Maple Leafs’ Alexei Ponikarovsky
Img_0706_small
Georges Laraque’s demise as an NHL enforcer

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Blog extras


Bloggers-in-chief

Awkwardmarleau_small Mike Chen

Editors

Penguins_cup_08__small FrankD

Canes-country-logo_small Bob Harwood Waeghe

Cc_cory_small Cory Lavalette

Gabby_small Joe Fortunato

Moderator(s)

Calvin_small PPP

643c0d9c_small saskhab