Balsillie's prickly olive branch
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 6:00 AM CDT
21 comments
What I called Jim Balsillie's "impossible goal" a few weeks ago — to move the Coyotes for the 2009-10 season — has finally been put to rest. After making a concession we should have long expected, one that would see him own the team in Phoenix for a year while eating some of the losses, it strikes me as likely that Balsillie doesn't continue to fight that fruitless battle given there are several more significant wars being waged.
Here's how the National Post summed up yesterday's events in court:
The hearing featured a number of twists. The NHL began the day by announcing that, if its bid were successful, it would turn over all profits of the eventual sale of the Coyotes to the team's creditors. The league's offer is US$140-million.
Balsillie has offered to buy the team from owner Jerry Moyes for US$212.5-million, and offered a deal to the NHL midway through the day. A lawyer representing the co-CEO of BlackBerry maker Research In Motion suggested his client would be willing to play a season in Phoenix, if the NHL split half the losses and pledged not to bog the process in appeals.
The league did not respond favourably.
A shocker for all, I'm sure.
On the whole, we learned very little, other than the fact that Judge Baum may be with us for a while past a Sept. 10 auction. There are new hints that that day may come and pass without any real resolution and that the real meat of his decision will wait until after everyone's played their hands.
Even so, you can expect drama a week from today as the bids are plunked down. I think it's highly likely, for example, that both the NHL and Balsillie continue to up the ante, even with some of the major issues unsettled, and the dollar figures are quite likely to continue to grow.
If Balsillie's willing to eat half the losses in Phoenix, then why not the whole shebang? And that purchase price, it could come up a little, couldn't it?
And then the NHL will respond in turn.
That may make for compelling theatre, but in the end, it at some point comes back to the little ol' judge from Arizona. And given what we've seen so far, I doubt we see any Baum shells from him down the line.
0 recs |
21 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
And given what we’ve seen so far, I doubt we see any Baum shells from him down the line.
Groan …
"For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Winston S. Churchill
by Baroque on Sep 3, 2009 6:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It had to happen. At least it wasn’t a headline.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both sides seem to be upping the ante/bids as we get closer. Real life game of Texas Hold em’. So who is gonna go “all In”, first?
I find sometimes it's easy to be myself
sometimes I find it's better to be somebody else
by Fauxrumors on Sep 3, 2009 7:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Really every Balsillie story could be summed up with:
Balsillie has offered to buy the team.
The league did not respond favourably.
This is astute work by the National Post.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
by Chemmy on Sep 3, 2009 8:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
While reading about this I had to look at how far Balsillie has pushed the NHL here.
While I still don’t think Baum will rule in his favour, Balisillie can now suggest that not only is the NHL in a conflict of interest but has also opened the door to the team moving at the end of the season.
by yrmom on Sep 3, 2009 10:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Giving up something that is impossible for about 100 different reasons is fairly disingenuous, and not much of a concession at all.
My wife doesn’t view my concession that I won’t sleep with Scarlett Johansson as much of a comprimise.
The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Sep 3, 2009 11:46 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
This is where I wish we had an edit button, generous in place of compromise is probably a better word (and spelled correctly too!).
The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Sep 3, 2009 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
whether its impossible or not, he should at least have said from Day 1 that he would be willing to work with the League to assist the support of the franchise for one year. For the additional costs involved, its at least a minor PR move with the other owners. Moving the team before the 2009 season was almost never a realistic possibility.
I wonder, from the legal side though – how does this affect this argument on the lease. He’s trying to get the lease cancelled and convert Glendale into an unsecured creditor, right? Does his willingness to accept the lease for a year (or even 1 day) affect his position?
Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.
http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo
by poploser on Sep 3, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that the league’s bid only guarantees one year in Phoenix, so they’re obviously pretty certain that the current lease will be vaporized by the bankruptcy proceeding.
by BleedBlue42 on Sep 3, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This hasn’t been decided yet.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is a case of “Ask for something completely absurd, so your true desire looks reasonable”
The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Sep 3, 2009 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bingo.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
in law school, this is taught as “Negotiations 101”
Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.
http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo
by poploser on Sep 3, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
And any negotiator worth his salt will see that.
The 2009-10 Colorado Avalanche: Aiming for the Charity Point
Jibblescribbits: C'mon over and waste some time
by Jibblescribbits on Sep 3, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Judge Baum doesn’t seem like a nitwit – so I bet he’s seen all these shenanigans before and is having a good chuckle in his chambers.
Glen Sather is a Hockey Genius.
http://glensathersucks.com/
http://twitter.com/ThGeneralissimo
by poploser on Sep 4, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a reason why that would be called “Negotiations 101”, though. It is because it is used only by those who have rudimentary knowledge of negotiating. It is the negotiating equivalent of rubbing two sticks together to make a fire to cook one’s brontosaurus burgers while other parties are working with high-powered computer-assisted ranges.
by Gerald on Sep 5, 2009 11:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is a case of "Ask for something completely absurd, so your true desire looks reasonable"
Much like his oft-repeated “offer” to assume half of the losses if he buys the team and keeps it in Phoenix for a year. Wha-wha-what?
I’m going to trash your home on a bender, but I hereby offer to pay for half the alcohol I consume in the process.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
by Dominik on Sep 3, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m curious, Assuming that…
A: Balsillie’s bid wins,
B: NHL appeals it and is granted a stay,
C: Balsillie is ultimately victorious,
Who pays the bills and accres the debt from the interim period? Does the interim debt get tacked onto the current debt (meaning it’s due from the auction bid) or is it new debt?
by Parallex on Sep 3, 2009 3:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That’s the problem with this scenario — it likely hurts the creditors big time as the losses grow considerably every month the situation’s unresolved.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be honest I think that’s the problem with every scenario. I don’t believe for a second that someone (Be it PSE, the NHL, Moyes, or the City of Glendale) isn’t going to launch an appeal regardless of the outcome. There’s just too much money and too much bad blood involved at this point.
But really who is stuck with the bill from the interim period? Would it be Balsillie? the NHL? the Vendors?
How long does it take a case to get to the U.S. Supreme Court anyways?
by Parallex on Sep 3, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The NHL likely continues to run the team as it is now, with the debts on the Coyotes continuing to rise until the team is moved or the city caves.
Seems to me Balsillie can potentially keep things pretty ugly for a while if the appeal process is open to him.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Sep 3, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
