Skip to main content

Documents filed in court yesterday have turned up the heat in advance of Tuesday's showdown between the NHL and Phoenix Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes over his right to sell his club to Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie.

Among those weighing in were the NFL, the NBA and Major League Baseball, which argue that allowing the $212.5-million (all currency U.S.) sale to Balsillie would damage the very structure that has allowed professional sports to flourish in North America.

"[The NFL, NBA and MLB]support the NHL's position that any franchise sales procedure prescribed by the court should respect the National Hockey League's rules and procedures regarding transfers of ownership and relocation and not set precedent that has the potential to undermine the business of professional hockey and other major-league sports," the document states.

Story continues below advertisement

The leagues argue that allowing Moyes to sell to Balsillie through a bankruptcy proceeding would encourage professional sports franchises to enter bankruptcy protection as a means of avoiding league rules and governance.

The leagues argue "this court should not pursue such a course, which would encourage financially challenged franchises to enlist the aid of the bankruptcy courts in an effort to circumvent established league rules that govern such league decisions."

The legal briefs filed by the three leagues were among those put before the federal bankruptcy court in Phoenix yesterday, preceding Tuesday's hearing before Judge Redfield T. Baum on whether the Phoenix Coyotes may be relocated. Balsillie has offered $212.5-million to purchase the NHL franchise on the condition that it be moved to Southern Ontario, with plans to play out of Copps Coliseum in Hamilton this September.

On the specific issues of relocation, the three leagues argue that owning a franchise does not entitle relocation to another territory at the discretion of the owner under any means.

"A league franchise reflects a licence to serve the league's fans and to play league games in a prescribed geographical area for the benefit of the league. The franchise is the means by which the league creates a relationship with a particular community, subject only to change by league decision," the leagues argue.

They also backed up the NHL's right to keep out prospective owners deemed to present a risk to league governance - a characterization the NHL has made repeatedly about Balsillie - stating, "assessment of the potential owner's likely compliance with league rules is especially important."

In documents filed by lawyers for Moyes, it is argued that creditors, including Moyes, would undoubtedly be better served if the court allows the team to be relocated to Hamilton.

Story continues below advertisement

"As demonstrated by the analysis provided by the debtors, relocation does not prejudice any of the creditors of the estates. In fact, that analysis shows that creditors - especially unsecured creditors - are better served if relocation is a permitted feature of the auction procedures."

Moyes's lawyers also argue that he is being intentionally discounted as a creditor by the NHL and the City of Glendale despite having extended himself financially to keep the team afloat through loans to the club. The document claims Moyes is the Coyotes' single biggest unsecured creditor, having lent the team $104-million beyond his equity in the team.

"It is not uncommon for parties, particularly in a large and hotly contested Chapter 11 proceeding, to argue that the debtor and its owners and affiliates are acting purely out of self-interest and to the detriment of creditors of the estate," states a document filed by Moyes's lawyers. "It becomes convenient to vilify the owners and gloss over the true economic realities. Plainly, that has happened to Mr. Moyes, who will undoubtedly lose over $200-million in equity in this process. The expedited nature of these proceedings has given free rein to several of the creditors - notably the City of Glendale (the "City") and the National Hockey League ("NHL") - who have portrayed Mr. Moyes as an owner intent on subverting the claim priorities set forth in the Bankruptcy Code. And, in this portrayal of Mr. Moyes, these parties attempt to disregard Mr. Moyes's stake as a legitimate creditor who, separate and apart from his equity investment, loaned nearly $100-million to the team to keep it operating."

The City of Glendale took issue with Moyes's claim that $104-million of his investment be characterized as unsecured debt and not equity, demanding the NHL be allowed to work through a process that would keep the team in Glendale without treating Moyes as a creditor.

"The City's right to specific performance of the team's covenant to play all of its home games at the Arena should be respected," the City of Glendale argued.

Professional sports leagues weren't the only ones filing documents that warned of a dangerous precedent being set if the Balsillie sale goes through.

Story continues below advertisement

Aramark Sports and Entertainment Services also expressed concern in a court filing about the Coyotes. Aramark manages concessions at the Arena and many other sports facilities. It says it paid $8-million for the contract and would be owed more than $5-million if the team moved. In its court filing last night, Aramark said the court's decision on whether the Coyotes can move will impact "the relationship that Aramark has with other teams in major sports leagues."

Adding to the debate about whether the Coyotes could ever become financially viable in Phoenix, a file from Gerald Sheehan of Beacon Sports Capital Partners concludes it is possible to cut $15.1-million from the Coyotes' operating expenses. Included in that is reducing the compensation of head coach Wayne Gretzky to $2-million from $8-million. According to the document filed by Sheehan, Gretzky has been receiving $1.6-million in salary, $5.8-million in annual deferred money and a bonus of 75 basis points of total team revenue.

The battle between Moyes's right to sell to Balsillie without NHL approval through the bankruptcy proceeding is the latest in a long series of battles fought by leagues to keep the courts from having a say in how they operate their businesses.

"It's the battle that has been fought for almost 100 years," said Gabe Feldman, director of the sports law program at Tulane University. "It's about the ability to control their teams, make their own business decisions and not be second-guessed by the courts.

"Whether it was the reserve clause or anti-trust challenges, in each step, leagues have argued that a challenge is improper because they have a right to make all these decisions, without getting into the merits of them. The leagues have sought to insulate themselves from the courts, and [the Coyotes']situation is another challenge. They do their best to seal off loopholes so they can run their businesses without interference and not have their decisions overruled by the courts."

Judge Baum has sounded leery of setting a precedent when the sides are heard on Tuesday.

During a hearing on May 30, when Baum reluctantly agreed to decide the issue, he referred to it as "the 10,000-pound elephant in the room." He also wondered about the ability of a bankruptcy court to decide whether an NHL club can relocate because it is also an anti-trust case.

However, given the value to creditors of Balsillie's offer, Baum has no choice but to consider it. And it is the bankruptcy element of this case that has legal scholars debating an outcome.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct Licensing Options
As of December 20, 2017, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this resolved by the end of January 2018. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to