Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Apr 24

13

Coyotes moving

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 13, 2024
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City of Glendale • City of Phoenix • City of Tempe • Desert Diamond Arena • Phoenix Metro issues • VAI Resort • Westgate • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Yesterday, April 12, the Arizona Republic reported (“Arizona Coyotes Relocating to Salt Lake City, reports say”) that it appears that the Coyotes will be moving to Salt Lake City, Utah. The General Manager, Bill Armstrong, advised players of the impending move on Friday night.

I am sharing my thoughts on the news. The move was inevitable, but I thought Houston would be the team’s new home. I was wrong.

Leaving Glendale was the beginning of the end. Alex Meruelo sent this team down this path with his arrogance and stubbornness. He could have and should have been more reasonable and negotiated a deal in Glendale that was mutually beneficial to the city and to the team.

Guess what? Sometimes it’s better to stay with the person that brought you to the dance.

 For all the naysayers about Glendale as a viable location, there were several factors overlooked. When the Coyotes put a winning team on the ice, the arena was packed. Witness their one and only play-off season. It’s not where you play but the quality of the team that determines attendance. When a team is winning, fans will come from everywhere. With the completion of Route 202, travel time from the East Valley was substantially reduced. The Coyotes were successfully building a fan base in the West Valley. The Westgate area with 15 new apartment complexes and the construction of the VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park adds a whole new dynamic that would have helped to grow the fan base.

Personally, I’m glad that the Coyotes left the Glendale arena. Since their departure revenues to the city from events have skyrocketed. With the addition of the Rattlers football team, the revenue picture for Glendale looks even brighter.

When the Coyotes were unable to relocate to Tempe and instead ended up playing in the 5,000 seat Mullett Arena, many sensed that a move was going to happen sooner or later. Muerelo had to be bleeding money. Many of his costs were fixed and the revenue from 5,000 seats could not possibly cover those fixed costs, no matter the price point of the tickets. Add to that dynamic, the head of the players union’s demands to know where the players would be long-term.

As for the bid on state land in north Phoenix, who advertises what they are willing to bid? I suspect there are other types of developers out there that would have outbid the Coyotes. That scheme was certainly not a done deal. When Mayor Ortega of Scottsdale publicly voiced Scottsdale’s objections, sentiment about yet another location not making surfaced quickly. Realistically, had the Coyotes been successful, the hurdles they were about to face guaranteed that it would be years before a hockey arena could be built at that location.

I feel sorry for the fans. They have been steadfastly loyal to this team and have proven it many times. They are sad, angry, and upset. Rightfully so. For the fans and the players to learn of the relocation through social media shows how little respect Muerelo and management has for the fans and their players.

After all the assurances that they committed to stay in the Valley, it appears that the reported $1 billion that Meruelo is asking for the team, outweighed any promises of staying. It’s all about the money, baby.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Mar 16

1

Coyotes want another short term lease

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 1, 2016
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

It has been 18 years and 75 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On February 26, 2016 Arizona Sports ran a story on Anthony LeBlanc’s reaction to Mayor Jerry Weiers’ remarks at his State of the City address. Here is the link:  http://arizonasports.com/story/566510/arizona-coyotes-ceo-glendale-may-want-us-to-stay-but-not-being-realistic/ .

In his prepared remarks with reference to the Coyotes the Mayor said, “I need to be clear about this. I want the Coyotes to stay in Glendale. The city wants the Coyotes to remain in Glendale. We have, since day-one, invited them to remain engaged in this process.”  In his recent remarks Mr. LeBlanc said this about the Coyotes’ refusal to engage in the bid process to manage Glendale’s arena, “…the team did not submit a bid to manage the arena because it refused to participate in a ‘flawed process’.” LeBlanc did not elaborate on his characterization of a “flawed process.”

Mr. LeBlanc went on to say, “I think they do want us to stay, but I don’t think they’re looking through a realistic lens of what that means.” Translate this statement to read that in his view “a realistic lens of what that means” is the Coyotes would only stay if Glendale continues to subsidize a portion of their annual loss. LeBlanc, et. al., may have retired their Fortress loan by adding additional owners but don’t forget they still owe a boat load of money to the NHL for another loan that covered buying the team.

What governmental entity is not only going to build a new hockey arena but also subsidize the Coyotes’ annual loss? It’s Glendale all over again. Tempe? Scottsdale? Probably not. Phoenix? Perhaps it can bury its subsidization of the Coyotes within possible plans to build a new facility for joint use by the Suns and the Coyotes.

The Coyotes want to manage their own facility. Then they collect all of the revenue generated by non-hockey events and they can claim a management fee that not only covers their cost to manage but off-sets their annual loss.

LeBlanc praised a recently approved deal between Broward County, Florida and the NHL Florida Panthers. The deal allows the Panthers to get nearly all of the arena revenue and reduces any profit-sharing between the Panthers and the county. Since the Panthers first season in 1993-94 the Broward county’s public subsidy of the team has been $342 million (an estimated $14 million a year). It should be noted that the Panthers lost $36 million last year and another $27 million the previous year. Of course LeBlanc would think that’s a wonderful deal. Reality is that the majority of NHL teams can’t survive without public financial support. That has been the model for years but many governmental entities are under financial pressure and can no longer afford this type of model. It is a model destined to die in the future as the public clamors for sports franchises to pay their own way.

LeBlanc said three options are still being discussed. They are a shared arena with the Phoenix Suns in downtown, a partnership with Arizona State University or an arena in Scottsdale’s Loop 101 corridor. Hey, if the City of Phoenix wants to pony up and pay the Coyotes to play downtown, congratulations to all. Previously the Suns and the Coyotes shared an arena downtown and it was the fans who suffered with terrible sight lines while watching the games.

Is the Arizona State Legislature delusional? It has budget problems. Will it allow a portion of its allocation of state public money to be used to pay for a new hockey arena instead of educational purposes? It seems doubtful that Scottsdale will wish to pay the Coyotes to play in their town. It would be déjà vu as they refused to do so in 2001.

LeBlanc said if a new arena is built it will take at least three years. He went on to say they would “rather not move twice in five years.” Here is where the situation becomes problematical. Glendale and IceArizona currently have a two year agreement that allows IceArizona to manage the arena for $6 million per year. The first year of that agreement is nearly up leaving only one more year of IceArizona’s management. After that it is assumed AEG, the presumed new arena manager, and IceArizona will have to negotiate short-term tenancy for two more years. Will they be able to craft a mutually satisfactory tenancy arrangement? Then the question becomes if IceArizona can live with the deal for two years, why can’t it live with the deal permanently? Can LeBlanc and company afford to rebuild its fan base in another part of the Valley while it continues to rebuild the team?

No matter what the outcome I continue to have greatest respect and admiration for the players. They have endured a great deal since Jerry Moyes put the team into bankruptcy in 2009. They are a great group of men who certainly deserve more stability than they have had. They deserve better. Let’s see if cooler heads can prevail and a deal that benefits all entities can be achieved permanently. Isn’t it time?

© Joyce Clark, 2016

 FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.