Skip to content

Report: Jamison has funds together for Coyotes purchase

Sep 5, 2012, 10:59 AM EDT

Greg Jamison

Plenty of chatter about the Phoenix Coyotes on the series of tubes:

Late Tuesday, ESPN reported that prospective buyer Greg Jamison had secured the financing that would allow him to close on the $170 million purchase. (This would seem to confirm last week’s article in the Arizona Republic that actually quoted Jamison as saying, “We have the funds together.”)

Also according to ESPN (and Phoenix Business Journal), Ice Edge Holdings is among Jamison’s investors.

Ice Edge, of course, tried to buy the club out of bankruptcy before the NHL purchased it in 2009.  The same plucky group made an attempt to purchase the Coyotes from the league in 2010.

The fly in the ointment – oh yes, there’s always a fly in the ointment – could be the City of Glendale’s desire to tweak the 20-year, $324 million lease at Arena with Jamison and company.

Phoenix Business Journal reports that Jamison isn’t keen on any changes to deal, but the “city is skittish over the fate of a $125 million, five-year sales tax increase that could be reversed” by voters in November.

That sale tax increase is intended in part to fund the arena-management fee. If it’s reversed, the city’s got a problem.

Related: Shane Doan will sign by Sept. 15, says agent

  1. sjsharks66 - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:04 AM

    No one cares

    • mattryannolan - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:09 AM

      You must have mistaken this article for a Sharks article.

      • lostpuppysyndrome - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:50 AM

        No, he’s right. No one cares.

  2. sjsharks66 - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:14 AM

    What does that even mean?

  3. revansrevenant - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:49 AM

    I call his bluff.

  4. ballistictrajectory - Sep 5, 2012 at 12:31 PM

    Leave the city with an empty arena to manage and see if they like that better.

  5. x50cal - Sep 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM

    That means get off the post and don’t read it if you don’t care. Sorry the coyotes made it further then SJ last year. Go yotes!

  6. sjsharks66 - Sep 5, 2012 at 12:48 PM


    I hope you enjoyed the conference final. To bad your team is going to be in Canada soon.

    • wisbadgers - Sep 5, 2012 at 9:15 PM


      I’d be bitter too if my team was the Atlanta Braves of the NHL. The Sharks are great during the regular season. Sh**ty during the playoffs. It’s gotta kill you that a team with all this doubt surrounding them is actually better than the Sharks.

      • ron05342 - Sep 6, 2012 at 12:38 AM

        Atlanta actually won a World Series. If you are going to compare the Sharks to a baseball team, I would say they are the Dodgers of the 1970s or the Indians of the 1990s.

        Except at least the Dodgers and Indians made it to the World Series…

  7. guitarmy204 - Sep 5, 2012 at 12:52 PM

    It’s nice of him to cover the losses of the team while Quebec builds its arena.

  8. semin28 - Sep 5, 2012 at 1:33 PM

    Sjssharks66 is an idiot

    • ron05342 - Sep 6, 2012 at 12:41 AM

      I’m going to disagree with calling him an idiot…I don’t think I have ever called sjsharks66 a moron, but I could be mistaken. He is right on that edge, though…his hatred of the Kings kind of clouds his opinion, which is driven by too much emotion.

      And you should care, sjsharks66. While I am not in love with the Coyotes, the important factor in keeping them in Phoenix rather than elsewhere is less travel for teams in the division. The Kings, Ducks, Sharks, and Stars have to face this team three times each in Phoenix and during the course of a long season cutting down travel for road games is a plus.

      Phoenix provides that relief.

  9. sjsharks66 - Sep 5, 2012 at 1:59 PM


    What exactly makes me an idiot?

  10. atwatercrushesokoye - Sep 5, 2012 at 4:02 PM

    So let’s say he finally completes the deal and buys the team, how many years do you think he’ll want to lose $25 million…oh wait with his arena deal it might end up only being $20 million. If it took him this long just to get the financing together to purchase the team (and if they pay $170 million and have to keep it there in Glendale long term he’s being ripped off) does he have the money or even desire to sustain year after year of heavy financial losses? 18-24 months from now they’re going to be in the exact same spot, why are they moving heaven and earth to keep a team in a location where they’re guaranteed to lose money year after year?

    • wisbadgers - Sep 5, 2012 at 9:16 PM

      You must really not like seeing the Monster Truck rally’s in that shiny new stadium in Quebec, huh?

      • lostpuppysyndrome - Sep 5, 2012 at 10:57 PM


      • atwatercrushesokoye - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:26 PM

        Quebec has a new “stadium?”. I must have missed the part where they actually started and completed construction. Besides that I live about as far from QC as the people of Glendale do from NYC, and I have zero interest in where this team ends up, but I’m looking at facts, so let’s go through them and you tell me where I’m wrong:

        -The Coyotes have lost money every single year they’ve been in the Phoenix area
        -In 2010-11 the Coyotes losses were just under $25 million
        -the Coyotes average attendance in 2011-12 was 12,400
        -The Coyotes ownership mess has been going on for years and they can’t find an owner without him either getting the team for free, getting massive subsidies from the city of Glendale or being able to move the team within 5 years.
        -The Arizona Republic did a study that found even if the Coyotes went to the Stanley Cup Finals every year for the next 20 years and the arena hosted 30 sold out concerts every year in those same 20 years the city of Glendale would still lose $9 million per year.

        Please tell me where I’m mistaken and why keeping the Coyotes in Glendale is in the best interests of the NHL, the team and anyone other than 12,400 in the Glendale area?

  11. chiadam - Sep 5, 2012 at 5:00 PM

    Whenever it takes someone a year to scrape together the money needed to make a major purchase, nothing could ever go wrong once the sale is completed. This can only end well.

  12. fiddytucker - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:28 PM

    I like how these outsiders say: it took him this long to raise the financing”. Duh, you must have it real good Jerry Jones Jr. 170mil. Mr Gates 170mil. Shesh

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:57 PM

      Well he initially had billionaire Jim Treliving, who’s son works in the Coyotes front office, ready to invest but one look at the books and he backed out of the deal, that might be the real reason he couldn’t get financing, it’s a bad investment!

  13. sjsharks66 - Sep 5, 2012 at 11:43 PM

    Sorry but you want to say the coyotes are better than the sharks and we suck in the playoffs? Must be a bandwagon fan since the sharks have made it to the playoffs the last 5 years and won the pacific division 4 of those 5 years in a row.

  14. scrouch - Sep 6, 2012 at 12:43 AM

    Anyone else see a problem here? It’s actually news that Jamison’s group has found enough money to buy the team. Even with a good deal with the city you need really deep pockets to have stable long-term ownership of the Coyotes. How many years could he sustain losses before needing to sell? if getting money to buy the team is a problem, my guess is he doesn’t have a couple hundred million kicking around to keep the team stable long-term. The team has been performing really well the last few seasons and losing tons of money, what happens if they are terrible for a few seasons in a row? Even in more traditional markets that can be really rough.

  15. sjsharks66 - Sep 6, 2012 at 12:57 AM

    You might have me confused with another sharks fan. I actually don’t hate the kings at all. I think doughty is annoying with the tantrums he threw in the playoffs. Other than that I was cheering for the kings to beat the Canucks, blues and coyotes.

    The bandwagon kings fans on the other hand, yes I do not like them.

    Sorry you are misinformed about me hating the kings and it clouding my judgement.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1585)
  2. P. Kane (1517)
  3. M. Richards (1322)
  4. P. Datsyuk (1173)
  5. N. Backstrom (1062)