PDA

View Full Version : Prairie Thunder Lease Terminated



mfosterftw
02-27-2009, 10:18 PM
The letter went out this week. CIAM has terminated the lease with the PT effective at the end of the season.

silvershoes
02-27-2009, 10:27 PM
If the city of Bloomington was smart, they'd terminate CIAM instead. Those boys are a piece of work.

hockey
02-27-2009, 10:36 PM
Bloomington Blades USHL Hockey?

mfosterftw
02-27-2009, 10:46 PM
My choice would be to call them the 66ers and use an old Corvette for a logo.

silvershoes
02-27-2009, 10:52 PM
And how do you get around CIAM's own deal with the city that requires them to field a pro team?

CIAM may find it's difficult to take on owners who are lawyers. Especially since CIAM has a history of leaking documents. :)

mfosterftw
02-27-2009, 11:00 PM
And how do you get around CIAM's own deal with the city that requires them to field a pro team?

I believe that requirement was fulfilled the day the PT first took the ice. They were responsible for making sure a team was established. They are not responsible for making sure the team is maintained. You cannot hold a management company responsible, especially long term, for something that is essentially out of their control.


CIAM may find it's difficult to take on owners who are lawyers. Especially since CIAM has a history of leaking documents. :)

Seeing as how CIAM is doing the City of Bloomington's business, and City representatives are copied on all actions, how are these not public documents?

QuackerBacker35
02-28-2009, 02:30 AM
That's too bad to hear. I personally liked going down to Bloomington to watch games.

silvershoes
02-28-2009, 04:34 PM
I believe that requirement was fulfilled the day the PT first took the ice. They were responsible for making sure a team was established. They are not responsible for making sure the team is maintained. You cannot hold a management company responsible, especially long term, for something that is essentially out of their control.

Seeing as how CIAM is doing the City of Bloomington's business, and City representatives are copied on all actions, how are these not public documents?

Out of their control? They whine about attendance falling and then immediately ask the PT to give up two - two - weekend dates for lesser weekday dates to accommodate them. Looking at CIAM's history dealing with the city, I can only repeat it would be smarter on the city's part to find a new management company.

And those aren't public documents when they find their way to bloggers before they find their way to the folks they're written to. Those are tactics. The USHL has a history of questionable deals, though, so it's no real surprise.

mfosterftw
02-28-2009, 05:33 PM
Out of their control? They whine about attendance falling and then immediately ask the PT to give up two - two - weekend dates for lesser weekday dates to accommodate them. Looking at CIAM's history dealing with the city, I can only repeat it would be smarter on the city's part to find a new management company.

Okay then, not completely within their control. To use a more extreme example of unenforceable contractual terms, if the sport of hockey were to be outlawed via legislation, then CIAM cannot be held in violation of the contract, since they hold no responsibility for the legislation.


And those aren't public documents when they find their way to bloggers before they find their way to the folks they're written to.

Well that would be an interesting trick. Let's use the letter published in the Pantagraph (http://www.pantagraph.com/art/2009/01/ThunderLetter.pdf) that went out to Leighton on January 7th as an example. Leighton appears to be getting his correspondence from CIAM initially by email, then a (presumably certified) hard copy. It's reasonable to assume this is the standard procedure used for all correspondence. Are you suggesting that CIAM is sending these out to third parties BEFORE they are sent to Leighton? The city manager and attorney are not, at least in this example, getting to preview the letter electronically at the same moment as Leighton. Still, I'm not sure that's even relevant, however, because it is clear that Leighton is getting the first/earliest notification.


The USHL has a history of questionable deals

Such as?

kyle1512
03-01-2009, 12:44 AM
And how do you get around CIAM's own deal with the city that requires them to field a pro team?

CIAM may find it's difficult to take on owners who are lawyers. Especially since CIAM has a history of leaking documents. :)

I have been wrong before, but I didn't think the contract said PRO hockey, it said they had to have a hockey tenant. It may be that the people reporting have either omitted that it is professional or added that it had to be professional.

silvershoes
03-04-2009, 11:43 AM
Are you suggesting that CIAM is sending these out to third parties BEFORE they are sent to Leighton?
This from the Pantagraph yesterday. (http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2009/03/03/prairiethunder/doc49acc8d71695e827322778.txt)


Bill Mueller, attorney for Coliseum managers Central Illinois Arena Management, had no comment about whether CIAM has sent Tim Leighton and the Prairie-Thunder a notice to terminate the hockey team’s lease at the Coliseum.

The lawyer won't comment, yet the letter's out there? That smells big time.

All you USHL backers should be asking yourselves if you'd be treated any better if you did get Bloomington. This may be a big case of "be careful what you wish for."

mfosterftw
03-04-2009, 02:51 PM
If there was no letter, it would be much easier for him to simply deny it. Mueller can't comment because the situation is in flux. He can't admit to the letter because the letter is not the final resolution of the matter. After the anti-climactic presser yesterday CIAM met with the PT. Somehow I don't think the parties were talking about Skalde's extension.

For what it's worth, I don't think CIAM is going to pull the trigger, letter or no letter. It's not as if they haven't sent a termination letter before. CIAM sent one last April as well.

FWKRTJ
03-05-2009, 02:37 PM
That letter is full of crap, btw. The Prairie Thunder have been competitive basically all year. They were the hottest team in the league until a week ago.

mfosterftw
03-05-2009, 03:27 PM
Nice deflection. What about the other items? Unpaid bills, under capitalized, under staffed?

But hey, at least we found out this week who really owns the team, right?

Lower32
03-06-2009, 01:54 PM
anyone have a link to this letter or perhaps can it be posted here?

Quacky
03-06-2009, 02:11 PM
anyone have a link to this letter or perhaps can it be posted here?

It was posted once and I think the whole thread got axed as a result. Guess a certified document isn't as reliable as a newspaper link.... :unsure:

Maybe since this thread is in Rumors, there's a bit more leeway and mfoster can post it again!

Quacky
03-06-2009, 06:34 PM
Nice deflection. What about the other items? Unpaid bills, under capitalized, under staffed?

But hey, at least we found out this week who really owns the team, right?

And from what I hear, it sure isn't Leighton who holds the majority ownership. Just a "mouthpiece" so to speak, eh??!

silvershoes
03-14-2009, 01:18 PM
Advisory group linking Coliseum managers, City Council dissolved (Pantagraph) (http://pantagraph.com/articles/2009/03/14/news/doc49bb101b78811022778526.txt)

Several interesting points in today's article.


The liaison group was formed two years ago so the City Council could have better communication with Central Illinois Arena Management.Needing to form a group specifically to communicate with CIAM is odd.


Nelson and Butler wanted to send a letter to Tim Leighton, the lead owner of the PrairieThunder, which would have terminated the team’s lease at the Coliseum.

Schmidt wrote that during the meeting, the liaison group agreed with Nelson and Butler to send the termination letter but that Stockton reversed that decision.So the letter was never actually sent, despite Marc Foster's claims. Which makes the leaking of the letter to him even more suspect. If it wasn't sent, it wasn't a matter of public record. And if it wasn't sent, no wonder the PT didn't respond; they never got it.


In the meantime, Leighton and Nelson said the financial situation of the hockey team has improved and the two continue to work together.If Nelson himself agrees, why push for the letter?

Quacky
03-14-2009, 03:31 PM
I read that article this morning and found more than one contradiction.


Nelson and Butler wanted to send a letter to Tim Leighton, the lead owner of the PrairieThunder, which would have terminated the team’s lease at the Coliseum.

Indeed, not majority owner, as the city and CIAM have discovered. Merely majority owner's mouthpiece.....

silvershoes
03-14-2009, 08:03 PM
Ah, but "lead owner" isn't the same as "majority owner" so I don't find that a contradiction. Leighton's the spokesperson, there's not much doubt of that.

If this thing goes to court - and it may - I suspect we'll see revelations on both sides. CIAM has issues I've not seen with other management companies - at least, not other management companies that kept the contract.

Quacky
03-15-2009, 02:40 AM
Revelations to the fans of the league as well, it seems....

I hadn't noticed before, but upon checking, I see that Leighton has always been called "lead owner" and that is usually in quotes. I wonder why....

Quacky
03-16-2009, 06:07 PM
Funny...not a single post from Wutsturm in the thread where some questions really should be asked!

Goalie Mom
03-16-2009, 11:10 PM
Funny...not a single post from Wutsturm in the thread where some questions really should be asked!

Probably still trying to find his way into a different thread area. :unsure:


:grin:

Quacky
03-17-2009, 02:56 AM
GM, I miss you when you're not around.... :buddy:

Goalie Mom
03-17-2009, 07:48 PM
Told the kid last weekend I got to get back to boards more. It's fun here. :angel:

Quacky
03-18-2009, 04:32 PM
That's certainly good news!!! :cheer:

wutsturm
03-18-2009, 10:31 PM
Funny...not a single post from Wutsturm in the thread where some questions really should be asked!
aww...it's nice to know that you care so much about me, Quacky. It is a bit creepy though.

Quit trying to stir the pot. Thanks.

wutsturm
03-18-2009, 10:32 PM
Probably still trying to find his way into a different thread area. :unsure:


:grin:
It's she, thanks.

maddog
03-19-2009, 02:57 AM
aww...it's nice to know that you care so much about me, Quacky. It is a bit creepy though.

Quit trying to stir the pot. Thanks.

No sources required here! :grin:

Quacky
03-22-2009, 06:06 AM
No sources required here! :grin:

True. But if you want to know who the majority owner in Bloomington is, all you really have to do is have one of you Komet buddies ask one of the Frankes where their Outlaw brother is investing his money these days..... That should be a pretty credible source! Even moreso if they tell you the truth!!

maddog
03-24-2009, 02:52 AM
True. But if you want to know who the majority owner in Bloomington is, all you really have to do is have one of you Komet buddies ask one of the Frankes where their Outlaw brother is investing his money these days..... That should be a pretty credible source! Even moreso if they tell you the truth!!

Do I care? Wait a sec....


Nope, I thought would but I really don't. I don't really care about this 'rumor' stuff. It's entertaining but so many of them have been proven wrong in the past...I, also, don't have time to make myself a tinfoil hat either so I will read them, occasionally comment on them but to take them seriously...that's another story.