Page 1 of 7
League Business
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:24 am
by Topper
Last week the land auction for the space the Coyotes were hopeful of getting for a new arena site was abruptly cancelled. Reason, they didn't want the Coyotes.
Yesterday the Coyote ownership walked away from ownership of the Coyotes.
Dog Day Afternoons
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2024 11:37 am
by BoS
Good. The league can put the entire fiasco of that ridiculous franchise in the rear view mirror.
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2024 12:32 pm
by UWSaint
BoS wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 11:37 am
Good. The league can put the entire fiasco of that ridiculous franchise in the rear view mirror.
Let's try Atlanta!

Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 9:52 am
by Madcombinepilot
I read over the weekend something about the old Coyotes owner backing our of all land deals and stepping away from Hockey.
Looks like that shitshow is over, and the Utah Sister-Wives will be a long lasting franchise!
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 10:15 am
by Cornuck
Madcombinepilot wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 9:52 am
I read over the weekend something about the old Coyotes owner backing our of all land deals and stepping away from Hockey.
Looks like that shitshow is over...
Except that it opens up the territory to someone else wanting to plant a franchise there.
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 10:42 am
by Madcombinepilot
True, but I was referencing the actual old ownership opposed to location. From what I understand, most of the arena deals in Arizona fell through because nobody would do business with the guy as he is generally regarded as a scumbag
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 11:09 am
by rikster
Madcombinepilot wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 10:42 am
True, but I was referencing the actual old ownership opposed to location. From what I understand, most of the arena deals in Arizona fell through because nobody would do business with the guy as he is generally regarded as a scumbag
I think it fell through due to some red tape (ugh red tape) and him selling the franchise to Utah...
Take care...
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 3:40 pm
by donlever
The owner is (allegedly) a scumbag.
The league had to talk to them (allegedly) more than once about non-payment of things like hotel and airline bills or getting a bill for 100K and only paying 75% of it.
Classless.
Chiclets had a whole update on this a few weeks back.
Bissonnette claims to have a bunch of dirt on the guy that he won't divulge for fear of reprisal.
A couple of local media guys the same.
Another ex-player from the area who I won't name the same.
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 4:29 pm
by BoS
Hopefully they can put the State of Arizona to rest now. FFS, that has been one of the most financially draining franchises on the league for over two decades.
Onwards and upwards.
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 4:33 pm
by Cornuck
BoS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 4:29 pm
Hopefully they can put the State of Arizona to rest now. FFS, that has been one of the most financially draining franchises on the league for over two decades.
Onwards and upwards.
Don't count on it....
Re: League Business
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2024 5:54 pm
by donlever
Don't count Atlanta out either....
Re: League Business
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 9:57 am
by rikster
BoS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2024 4:29 pm
Hopefully they can put the State of Arizona to rest now. FFS, that has been one of the most financially draining franchises on the league for over two decades.
Onwards and upwards.
When you consider the Arizona media market is the 11th largest in the US and Utah is the 29th, it's understandable why they tried so hard to make it work there.
As someone who enjoyed taking in the odd game in Arizona in the winter,s I will miss it as many Canadians will....
Am I the only one getting more and more annoyed at headlines like this one from Sportsnet?
NHL free agency shows advantage teams in states with no income tax have
It seems every time I listen to a sports media person commenting on July 1st they are using higher tax rates to excuse some of the moves or lack of moves in Canadian markets...
With current exchange rates, Canadian teams can hand out just under $120 million CDN to its players and when the cap rises again next season they will be paying out over $125 million in salaries, assuming they are spending to the ceiling...
Fortunately for the NHl and Canadian owners, the HRR are strong and the sagging CDN dollar isn't having the negative impact as it did just over 10 years ago...
Take care...
Re: League Business
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 11:52 am
by Blob Mckenzie
Alex Mogilny gets snubbed again.
Maybe one of the ten most gifted players to lace them up
But Guy Cabonneau is in. Dick Duff
How bout Brindy?
Re: League Business
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:41 pm
by Strangelove
rikster wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 9:57 am
Am I the only one getting more and more annoyed at headlines like this one from Sportsnet?
NHL free agency shows advantage teams in states with no income tax have
It seems every time I listen to a sports media person commenting on July 1st they are using higher tax rates to excuse some of the moves or lack of moves in Canadian markets...
With current exchange rates, Canadian teams can hand out just under $120 million CDN to its players and when the cap rises again next season they will be paying out over $125 million in salaries, assuming they are spending to the ceiling...
Fortunately for the NHl and Canadian owners, the HRR are strong and the sagging CDN dollar isn't having the negative impact as it did just over 10 years ago...
Take care...
Here is a quick one minute clip of NHL financial guru Sean Packard with NHL agent Allan Walsh.
Packard explaining why Canadian teams are not really disadvantaged tax-wise:
https://x.com/ProducerDrew_/status/1807753962126242219
I've mention RCA a few times over the years in this forum...
Re: League Business
Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:52 pm
by rikster
Strangelove wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:41 pm
rikster wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 9:57 am
Am I the only one getting more and more annoyed at headlines like this one from Sportsnet?
NHL free agency shows advantage teams in states with no income tax have
It seems every time I listen to a sports media person commenting on July 1st they are using higher tax rates to excuse some of the moves or lack of moves in Canadian markets...
With current exchange rates, Canadian teams can hand out just under $120 million CDN to its players and when the cap rises again next season they will be paying out over $125 million in salaries, assuming they are spending to the ceiling...
Fortunately for the NHl and Canadian owners, the HRR are strong and the sagging CDN dollar isn't having the negative impact as it did just over 10 years ago...
Take care...
Here is a quick one minute clip of NHL financial guru Sean Packard with NHL agent Allan Walsh.
Packard explaining why Canadian teams are not really disadvantaged tax-wise:
https://x.com/ProducerDrew_/status/1807753962126242219
I've mention RCA a few times over the years in this forum...
Thanks for the link Doc, I had seen it before and thought of it when making my currency exchange argument but thought that the 73 cent dollar would be enough to put to rest the notion low tax American teams had a significant advantage with free agents this past July 1st...
Not to mention that wealth is transient so there are other ways than the RCA to bring effective tax rates down...
Take care...