Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Balsillie ups ante $30m

Expand Messages
  • Craig Wallace
    From today s Hamilton, Ontario Spectator; With the money this is costing the NHL in legal fees I have to wonder why some owners (who are paying for this fight)
    Message 1 of 15 , Sep 8, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      From today's Hamilton, Ontario Spectator;

      With the money this is costing the NHL in legal fees I have to wonder why some owners (who are paying for this fight) don't quietly tell Bettman to "sue for peace." Talk off line to Balsillie, agree on a price and let him have his team in Hamilton. If nothing else that team will make money (although as I have said before I am not convinced it will be a "gold mine". But it will be profitable, unlike the basket case Phoenix team). Right now, the owners are paying to operate a team that is a financial disaster, with no signs it can ever turn around, and they are paying massive legal fees in an effort to keep funding the Coyotes. No win situation here.

      http://www.thespec.com/Sports/article/630443


      Craig





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • William Underwood
      For the owners there are three reasons why they support Bettman. 1-Some poor diluted souls are in the Westmoreland in Vietnam syndrome of denial that the
      Message 2 of 15 , Sep 8, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        For the owners there are three reasons why they support Bettman.



        1-Some poor diluted souls are in the Westmoreland in Vietnam syndrome of
        denial that the concept of the game being a huge US phenom is dead. But I
        think that their number is not what it once was, not all of these guys are
        stupid. These guys have gotten themselves into a real mess, I keep on making
        the US in Vietnam/Soviets in Afghanistan analogy for a purpose. They made
        this US national expansion their crusade in the 90's. They put the league's
        name on the line. And put a lot of chips on the table. Now there were shrill
        voices like myself who cried "STUPID" before it started but they had the
        blindness of the greedy. They were not happy with running a cost conscious
        tight operation that could make a profit ala the 80's they had to have
        more.Now withdraw loses them face, not with the people who really count,
        their fans, their biggest backers who are largely Canadian companies or
        firms who do a ton of business in Canada but with their answer to the "in
        crowd" the US media who mocks them, the US corporate world who laughs at the
        jokes and the great unwashed US public who changes the channel to football
        when the jokes start. It is like the high school nerd who asks out the home
        coming queen and when she laughs at him he simply can't just walk away while
        the jocks and cheerleaders bombard him with insults, they are the "in
        crowd". :-) It is pig headed pride and the sense of "we really were dumb
        enough to piss all that money away" syndrome.

        2-The Leafs and Sabres have their own war here of course. The Sabres fear
        for their survival right or wrong and the Leafs want this to come on their
        terms if it ever comes where they name the price and if lucky enough even
        end up landlords to get a bigger lump of flesh. For one, they see it as a
        fight for their life, the other sees it as a fight for the GNP of a Third
        World nation in their pocket! :-)

        3-I think this speaks for the bulk of them, Balsillie tried to circumvent
        the rules and they say "if a guy can do this and potentially invade somebody
        else's territory and I may be next. Jim B violated two rules in dealing with
        a pro sports league.one is not taking their by laws as seriously as
        something between Magna Carta and the Ten Commandments and two was taking
        them to court. Even an insider has issues when he does that, Al Davis is a
        pariah in the NFL but they are "stuck with him." Now they see this case as a
        legal test of NHL by laws. While it may not be that dramatic it is a test of
        their strength in court. They worry "what next"? Now you may say that
        prudence says "don't test it" because you may not like the answer which is a
        calculated gamble anyone takes in court. But they believe they'll win and
        more to the point, even if they don't they make future transgressors (not
        necessarily on this particular issue) realize that they will have to go
        through the wraths of hell to win.



        Number three is the biggest issue, I know people in the NHL who privately
        admit that more Canadian teams make sense. And they also know that the
        expansion has been less than a success they are not believers anymore. And
        #2 is an absolute crusade by two teams but that is all. Number three is the
        biggie and no doubt other leagues are even pushing them on it as it has
        implications for them too, it gets way past just hockey.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • epenaltybox
        I m not sure the Coyotes could not be profitable. Have you been to the arena Craig? Have you been to the neighborhood? Recently, since the completion six
        Message 3 of 15 , Sep 8, 2009
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          I'm not sure the Coyotes could not be profitable. Have you been to the arena Craig? Have you been to the neighborhood? Recently, since the completion six months ago of the "entertainment complex?" I think a lot of conjecture on this issue - both pro and con - is based upon a preconceived prejudice and not based on any fact whatsoever except for Gretzky's coaching contract and the losses that are now public record thanks to the hearings.

          I've been to Glendale just a couple of months ago, and I was in Hamilton a few years back. When you want to talk potential, Phoenix has it. Hamilton has some pissed off Leaf fans who will jump right back on the bandwagon when Brian Burke turns the club around in a couple of years.

          Now, the GTA is large enough for two teams, and the NHL was forced to change one of its bylaws in the latest Balsillie go-round (Why do you really think the NHL hates him? He made them change a bylaw and took power away from people who don't take well to that sort of thing. Listen to the comments people like Melnyk state, "You just don't do that kind of thing. You learn how to play with these guys and take what they're offering.") So Torontonians and neighbors, you only need a simple majority on the Bd of Govs to get a new team, unlike the joke perpetrated by the Canadiens when the WHA wanted to join in 78 and 79 and 5 teams could force a veto.

          (As yet another aside, only L.A. had a legit excuse in 79. The Kings' owner, Jack Kent Cooke, a Canadian ex-pat who knew the geography well, didn't want to be stuck in a division with Edmonton and Winnipeg. Less than two months after the merger was negotiated, Cooke sold the Kings to Jerry Buss. The Canadiens wanted Wayne Gretzky (with the 1st pick in 80). The Bruins wanted the Hartford territory and everything in between. The Leafs wanted TV money (it was never about winning with Ballard, sorry). Chicago's Bill Wirtz was vengeful, and besides, he had his own beer monopoly in the Midwest.)

          Will Hamiltonians shell out of their pocket to rebuild Copps? If not, it's a moot discussion, especially if you see what the City of Glendale did for the Coyotes. Or are people just fed up the the Teachers' Union and want someone else to root for on TV. That's where I need convincing...

          Morey







          --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "Craig Wallace" <craigw@...> wrote:
          >
          > From today's Hamilton, Ontario Spectator;
          >
          > With the money this is costing the NHL in legal fees I have to wonder why some owners (who are paying for this fight) don't quietly tell Bettman to "sue for peace." Talk off line to Balsillie, agree on a price and let him have his team in Hamilton. If nothing else that team will make money (although as I have said before I am not convinced it will be a "gold mine". But it will be profitable, unlike the basket case Phoenix team). Right now, the owners are paying to operate a team that is a financial disaster, with no signs it can ever turn around, and they are paying massive legal fees in an effort to keep funding the Coyotes. No win situation here.
          >
          > http://www.thespec.com/Sports/article/630443
          >
          >
          > Craig
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • William Underwood
          It would be a hell of a lot more people than just pissed off Leaf fans Morey.no more than a Jets fan in the 70 s was a pissed off Giants fan ! First of all,
          Message 4 of 15 , Sep 9, 2009
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            It would be a hell of a lot more people than just "pissed off Leaf" fans
            Morey.no more than a Jets fan in the 70's was a "pissed off Giants fan"!
            First of all, you can't get Leaf tix.it doesn't matter HOW bad they are they
            are just not there, and that is not likely to change. This is a market with
            a HUGE amount of excess demand. You are thinking like you would about an
            American city "there are only so many hockey fans so if a new team comes in
            they will only watch them out of spite."Think more like an American market
            would for the NFL. IF Chicago got a second NFL team for example would only
            "pissed off Bears fans" watch it then discard it? And forget about the old
            Cards they were in the Windy City back before pro football is what it is
            today. Does anyone really think that there are not excess NFL fans in that
            area? Now if we were talking about a second CFL t4eam in Toronto I'd say
            that you were DEAD on.but this is HOCKEY, not just the national game but the
            national passion/mania that is so in way that makes football in the US look
            like a passing fad. Frankly Morey if they brought both Hamilton AND a second
            TO team I have the feeling it could work and not even kill the Sabres! :-)



            As for Phoenix.honestly I feel badly that of all of the stupid places that
            the NHL put teams in, one that was not so stupid may be the one to go. They
            put the rink in the wrong place.and that cost Cleveland the NHL in the 70's.
            It may well do the same here.



            Incidentally did anyone see that Nashville's Anti Balsillie plug just got
            sent to the slammer and his interest is now up for grabs.we can only hope
            that Judge Baum noticed the sort of sick desperation Mr. Bettman has when
            dealing with the Sun Belt issue."better a fraudulent con man who would say
            "I'll sign a lease through 2267 because it is all crooked paper money as we
            owe it to all of those fans who are not watching the games than a-gulp
            CANADIAN who wants to put a team in that hockey wasteland called CANADA
            (said with disdain) ". Yet another black eye for the league and talking
            point for pundits to mock it and the sport, a crook brought in to keep a
            team in a market where it doesn't belong and a guy who has the money,
            passion and where with all to buy one and put it into a market that would
            embrace it sits waiting.gee Bettman seems to like court rooms, seeing con
            artist/owners (the only folks who really want some of these teams enough,
            then again the sky is the limit on money that isn't yours isn't it) getting
            sentenced and good honest Canadians who's only crime is wanting to put teams
            where fans give a darn battling in civil suits to convince folks of the
            obvious. Now let's see, which team will we see next in this situation.:-)



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Michael Levin
            William, I like your Westmoreland analogy. Dead on as far as Bettman guiding the NHL. To address William s other two points. I think the impact on the Buffalo
            Message 5 of 15 , Sep 9, 2009
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              William, I like your Westmoreland analogy. Dead on as far as Bettman
              guiding the NHL.

              To address William's other two points. I think the impact on the
              Buffalo market is a over blown because of the US' stepped up border
              crossing procedure. Once up a time, it was pretty easy to drive across
              the border. No longer. Who wants to go through the hassle of crossing
              the US border to watch the Sabres? I could understand for the playoffs
              or even for a Cup game, but not for a Tuesday night game against
              Miami. The Sabres should get a pat on the head and told to go to sit
              quietly before anyone mentions the word, Adelphi.

              As to the issue of control, I suspect William's point holds great
              validity. Judge Baum has a major problem on his hand. Except for
              Balsillie's bid, no other bid pays off the creditors. Under US legal
              precedence (i.e., Supreme Court ruling), Baum has to do what is in the
              best interest of the creditors, not the NHL. owners. That is, Baum's
              role remains to protect the creditors. Balsillie's bid most likely
              pays the creditors dollar for dollar, which is unusual in bankruptcy
              cases. I also suspect, but do not know for sure, that Balsillie's bid
              pays the unsecured creditors, which is huge.

              However, Baum remains up against a different US legal precedence
              regarding sports league membership. The courts have ruled fairly
              consistently that sports league have a lot of autonomy in deciding who
              does and does not get to own a club. Heck, a sport league can even
              force its members (i.e., owners) not to own a team in a different
              league (i.e., cross ownership). If the NHL does not want Balsillie,
              then Baum has a gigantic legal mess on his hand.

              Balsillie's bid, I think, is not the issue per se. If Balsillie made
              the same bid but offered to keep the team in Glendale, the NHL would
              probably award him the franchise. If for no other reason, then to
              appease Baum and reduce the legal fees this fight is generating and
              will generate.

              By moving the franchise, put aside the target city for a moment, the
              bonds issued to pay for that hockey arena have to be in jeopardy.
              Without those 40 dates, I cannot imagine that arena generates
              sufficient direct and indirect revenue for Glendale to meet the debt
              obligation. Without the Coyotes, Glendale will surely default on those
              bonds. Even with the Coyotes, Glendale could still default given the
              lease arrangement. However, without the Coyotes, the probability of
              default increases greatly.

              How many other cities face a Glendale scenario where the city would
              default on the bond without the primary tenet? Miami for sure.
              Nashville? Tampa? If those teams declare bankruptcy, break the lease,
              and the franchise moves to another market, will the vacated market
              have the financial wherewithal to meet the debt obligations?

              This action could be Bettman's fear. How can he garner support for a
              new arena in Long Island or Edmonton? How could he convince Kansas
              City to upgrade its facility and/or make a sweetheart lease to attract
              a relocated NHL franchise? How could he spark interest in Houston,
              Seattle, and/or Portland to construct an arena to serve as a
              destination for a misplaced team like the Predators or the Bluejackets?
            • epenaltybox
              ... Absolutely correct. However, the twist on this is that the company will be leaving the United States, and so future revenues to one governmental entity
              Message 6 of 15 , Sep 9, 2009
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, Michael Levin <milevin@...> wrote:

                > As to the issue of control, I suspect William's point holds great
                > validity. Judge Baum has a major problem on his hand. Except for
                > Balsillie's bid, no other bid pays off the creditors. Under US legal
                > precedence (i.e., Supreme Court ruling), Baum has to do what is in the
                > best interest of the creditors, not the NHL. owners. That is, Baum's
                > role remains to protect the creditors. Balsillie's bid most likely
                > pays the creditors dollar for dollar, which is unusual in bankruptcy
                > cases. I also suspect, but do not know for sure, that Balsillie's bid
                > pays the unsecured creditors, which is huge.

                Absolutely correct. However, the twist on this is that the company will be leaving the United States, and so future revenues to one governmental entity will be 0.

                > How many other cities face a Glendale scenario where the city would
                > default on the bond without the primary tenet? Miami for sure.
                > Nashville? Tampa? If those teams declare bankruptcy, break the lease,
                > and the franchise moves to another market, will the vacated market
                > have the financial wherewithal to meet the debt obligations?
                >
                > This action could be Bettman's fear. How can he garner support for a
                > new arena in Long Island or Edmonton? How could he convince Kansas
                > City to upgrade its facility and/or make a sweetheart lease to attract
                > a relocated NHL franchise? How could he spark interest in Houston,
                > Seattle, and/or Portland to construct an arena to serve as a
                > destination for a misplaced team like the Predators or the Bluejackets?

                Probably dead on, except for the self-dealing. The Kings' owners own the KC arena. And the Flyers and Bruins have their hands in arena management.

                Morey
              • epenaltybox
                ... You missed my point - in agreement with yours - about the Greater Toronto Area being able to support two teams. I m just not convinced that downtown
                Message 7 of 15 , Sep 9, 2009
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "William Underwood" <wausport@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > It would be a hell of a lot more people than just "pissed off Leaf" fans

                  You missed my point - in agreement with yours - about the Greater Toronto Area being able to support two teams. I'm just not convinced that downtown Hamilton is the place to locate the team. You alienate a good chunk of the GTA by going that far west. Yes, you have an arena already built. But I don't see Hamiltonians stepping up to rebuild or expand Copps since they have already been burned, and Canadians are geenrally much more reluctant to spend their tax money helping billionaires employ millionaires than we are.

                  Morey
                • William Underwood
                  It is not that far Morey for the entire West End Morey not to mention other communities in the area. Add on that the road there is great and it is not a trip
                  Message 8 of 15 , Sep 10, 2009
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    It is not that far Morey for the entire West End Morey not to mention other
                    communities in the area. Add on that the road there is great and it is not a
                    "trip to nowhere" as we see with a lot of suburban barns.



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • William Underwood
                    One thing that can come into play in the judge s decision about the NHL owners vote is did he feel that the reason was personal not business. The NFL actually
                    Message 9 of 15 , Sep 10, 2009
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      One thing that can come into play in the judge's decision about the NHL
                      owners' vote is did he feel that the reason was personal not business. The
                      NFL actually got burnt on one of these with Al Davis when they were seen as
                      a being "vindictive". Some quotes that were made about him could be
                      interpreted that way. If an individual is to be turned down by a league they
                      have to point to reason especially with discrimination suits these days. Now
                      they will play the by laws card which could work also pointing out that he
                      was accepted in the past. So there is no real way to say how this one will
                      go on that basis.



                      It will be interesting.



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Karkoski James
                      ... In the prior brief Baum wrote he stated that Glendale claims it is the creditor which has been harmed the most by the bankruptcy (and if the team leaves)
                      Message 10 of 15 , Sep 10, 2009
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 2009/09/09, at 23:50, Michael Levin wrote:
                        >
                        > As to the issue of control, I suspect William's point holds great
                        > validity. Judge Baum has a major problem on his hand. Except for
                        > Balsillie's bid, no other bid pays off the creditors. Under US legal
                        > precedence (i.e., Supreme Court ruling), Baum has to do what is in the
                        > best interest of the creditors, not the NHL. owners. That is, Baum's
                        > role remains to protect the creditors. Balsillie's bid most likely
                        > pays the creditors dollar for dollar, which is unusual in bankruptcy
                        > cases. I also suspect, but do not know for sure, that Balsillie's bid
                        > pays the unsecured creditors, which is huge.
                        >













                        In the prior brief Baum wrote he stated that Glendale claims it is the
                        creditor which has been harmed the most by the bankruptcy (and if the
                        team leaves) and he lamented the fact that he didn't get the
                        documentation to rule if this is true of not. He also wrote that
                        Glendale had legal precedent to claim this. Glendale's postion has
                        been with the NHL and that it doesn't want the team to move and
                        Balsillie's new offer gives the city 50 million to move them from this
                        position. Is it enough to persuade them?
                        .

                        >
                        > Balsillie's bid, I think, is not the issue per se. If Balsillie made
                        > the same bid but offered to keep the team in Glendale, the NHL would
                        > probably award him the franchise. If for no other reason, then to
                        > appease Baum and reduce the legal fees this fight is generating and
                        > will generate.
                        >








                        This was brought up in the brief, Baum found no malice by the NHL
                        towards Balsillie except that he wanted to move the team.

                        >
                        > By moving the franchise, put aside the target city for a moment, the
                        > bonds issued to pay for that hockey arena have to be in jeopardy.
                        > Without those 40 dates, I cannot imagine that arena generates
                        > sufficient direct and indirect revenue for Glendale to meet the debt
                        > obligation. Without the Coyotes, Glendale will surely default on those
                        > bonds. Even with the Coyotes, Glendale could still default given the
                        > lease arrangement. However, without the Coyotes, the probability of
                        > default increases greatly.
                        >











                        Which probably is the argument Glendale will use to claim it is the
                        creditor which has been harmed the most.


                        > How many other cities face a Glendale scenario where the city would
                        > default on the bond without the primary tenet? Miami for sure.
                        > Nashville? Tampa? If those teams declare bankruptcy, break the lease,
                        > and the franchise moves to another market, will the vacated market
                        > have the financial wherewithal to meet the debt obligations?
                        >







                        I just read that the city of Nashville is due 50 million if the team
                        relocates. Interesting that it is the same amount that Balsillie has
                        decided to offer to Glendale.


                        This an arena issue for the NHL. Whether of not it wants the team to
                        stay in Phoenix is a moot point. It is legally bound to abide by the
                        contract that states that the franchise must play all of its home
                        games in Glendale.

                        >
                        > This action could be Bettman's fear. How can he garner support for a
                        > new arena in Long Island or Edmonton? How could he convince Kansas
                        > City to upgrade its facility and/or make a sweetheart lease to attract
                        > a relocated NHL franchise? How could he spark interest in Houston,
                        > Seattle, and/or Portland to construct an arena to serve as a
                        > destination for a misplaced team like the Predators or the
                        > Bluejackets?
                        >




                        >
                        >





                        Another angle on why this is an arena issue for the NHL.



                        James
                        >
                        >



                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • epenaltybox
                        But you can forget about the entire East End and northern suburbs, especially in the winter, and you are cutting off a huge amount of the GTA population.
                        Message 11 of 15 , Sep 10, 2009
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          But you can forget about the entire East End and northern suburbs, especially in the winter, and you are cutting off a huge amount of the GTA population.

                          --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "William Underwood" <wausport@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > It is not that far Morey for the entire West End Morey not to mention other
                          > communities in the area. Add on that the road there is great and it is not a
                          > "trip to nowhere" as we see with a lot of suburban barns.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                        • Michael Levin
                          If Baum rejects both bids, and it is within his right, then the bankruptcy court will oversee the administration of the hockey team. The administrator will
                          Message 12 of 15 , Sep 11, 2009
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            If Baum rejects both bids, and it is within his right, then the
                            bankruptcy court will oversee the administration of the hockey team.
                            The administrator will balance the books. The Great One's Great Salary
                            will get cut. Anyone want to hazard what the various scouting budgets
                            will look like? The promotions budget? A bankruptcy administrator will
                            run the firm, not in what is the best interest of the NHL or hockey in
                            Phoenix, but how much revenue is being generated compared to how much
                            expenses are being incurred. How long can the Coyotes function based
                            on the revenue they generate?

                            With this announcement, I suspect Baum is telling Bettmen to figure
                            out how to work with Basillie, and Basillie to appease the city of
                            Glendale.

                            Basillie has the easier row to hoe because the contract between the
                            city of Glendale and the Coyotes no longer exists. How much will
                            Basillie offer for the accrued debts owed to the city? Dollar for
                            dollar, or cents (pennies?) on the dollar? Bettman has to tell the
                            Maple Leaf owners that the party is over. Based on the comments from
                            this listserv, I would rather negotiate with Glendale officials rather
                            than those form the Maple Leaf organization.

                            The NHL's bid is laughable. I cannot believe the owners of Nashville,
                            Atlanta, Miami, Columbus, and other struggling franchises have the
                            desire and the wherewithal to support a literally bankrupt team.

                            Basillie, and not the NHL or a court-appointed administrator,
                            represents the city of Glendale's best chance to collect on any money
                            owed.

                            As to the lease, it died with the bankruptcy filing.

                            If I were a creditor to an NHL franchise, then I would politely ask
                            for all account receivables be reduced to zero and for all payments to
                            be made in cash. The NHL and its paltry bid shows its lack of interest
                            in paying the creditors.
                          • epenaltybox
                            The Maple Leafs TV deal, which came out yesterday at $42 million annually, is more than enough to support the losses of the Coyotes, which are inflated thanks
                            Message 13 of 15 , Sep 11, 2009
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              The Maple Leafs' TV deal, which came out yesterday at $42 million annually, is more than enough to support the losses of the Coyotes, which are inflated thanks to depreciation and The Great Salary.

                              OTOH, one other option that Baum hinted at, which could happen, is that we have 29 teams this season.

                              What I don't get is why doesn't the NHL let Balsillie have an expansion team in Hamilton for $250 million, since that what it appears he is willing to pay (and much more than they should get), have him drop out of the bidding, have the NHL buy the club for $180M, and then the league can do what it wantsd/needs to. There must be something in the negotiations with Glendale that is cantankerous.

                              Morey

                              --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, Michael Levin <milevin@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > If Baum rejects both bids, and it is within his right, then the
                              > bankruptcy court will oversee the administration of the hockey team.
                              > The administrator will balance the books. The Great One's Great Salary
                              > will get cut. Anyone want to hazard what the various scouting budgets
                              > will look like? The promotions budget? A bankruptcy administrator will
                              > run the firm, not in what is the best interest of the NHL or hockey in
                              > Phoenix, but how much revenue is being generated compared to how much
                              > expenses are being incurred. How long can the Coyotes function based
                              > on the revenue they generate?
                              >
                              > With this announcement, I suspect Baum is telling Bettmen to figure
                              > out how to work with Basillie, and Basillie to appease the city of
                              > Glendale.
                              >
                              > Basillie has the easier row to hoe because the contract between the
                              > city of Glendale and the Coyotes no longer exists. How much will
                              > Basillie offer for the accrued debts owed to the city? Dollar for
                              > dollar, or cents (pennies?) on the dollar? Bettman has to tell the
                              > Maple Leaf owners that the party is over. Based on the comments from
                              > this listserv, I would rather negotiate with Glendale officials rather
                              > than those form the Maple Leaf organization.
                              >
                              > The NHL's bid is laughable. I cannot believe the owners of Nashville,
                              > Atlanta, Miami, Columbus, and other struggling franchises have the
                              > desire and the wherewithal to support a literally bankrupt team.
                              >
                              > Basillie, and not the NHL or a court-appointed administrator,
                              > represents the city of Glendale's best chance to collect on any money
                              > owed.
                              >
                              > As to the lease, it died with the bankruptcy filing.
                              >
                              > If I were a creditor to an NHL franchise, then I would politely ask
                              > for all account receivables be reduced to zero and for all payments to
                              > be made in cash. The NHL and its paltry bid shows its lack of interest
                              > in paying the creditors.
                              >
                            • William Underwood
                              Yes the North and East ends of TO are out but there is a lot of money in the west and then you have the other communities to the west of Hamilton to tap into.
                              Message 14 of 15 , Sep 11, 2009
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Yes the North and East ends of TO are out but there is a lot of money in the
                                west and then you have the other communities to the west of Hamilton to tap
                                into.



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • William Underwood
                                James there is no question that the arena plays a role in it.this is a multi faceted issue.no one says otherwise. To TO and Buffalo it is all about turf.
                                Message 15 of 15 , Sep 11, 2009
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  James there is no question that the arena plays a role in it.this is a multi
                                  faceted issue.no one says otherwise. To TO and Buffalo it is all about turf.
                                  Detroit may be thinking the same.what if someone wanted to move into
                                  Detroit? To others this arena thing is an issue, and that may well include a
                                  number of Canadian teams in smaller markets. Some smaller markets may fear
                                  it could happen to them somehow ala Winnipeg and Quebec. But the by laws are
                                  what it really comes back to, a fear of anarchy of sorts. The NHL by laws
                                  are there to protect arena issues as you discuss or turf as I discuss. Then
                                  there are those who just will not admit failure.who would say that any plan,
                                  no matter how stupid, if it is done by the league warrants their protection.
                                  Simply put the arena issue is just one of several that come up if the
                                  validity of the by laws comes into question or if a hole is found in them.



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.