HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Successful teams that might lose fans/money if they struggle on the ice too long (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1301141)

Dontdive 12-03-2012 11:52 PM

Successful teams that might lose fans/money if they struggle on the ice too long
 
Consider the opposite, Toronto. The Leafs haven't had a lot of success on the ice for quite a few years, but their fans are extremely dedicated, you don't have to worry about the Leafs losing significant amounts of fans or money soon, if ever. Their support is that good.

But what other financially and attendance-wise successful teams are there that might get into trouble attendance and money-wise if they went into a extended tailspin on the ice?

Note I don't consider the possibility of this happening to be a knock on the fans if they do that. I don't think fans should have to support a team in their city no matter what. I just give them additional kudos if they always do, even during the rough times.

wKetch22 12-04-2012 12:34 AM

Pittsburgh

Pyrophorus 12-04-2012 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wKetch22 (Post 56228545)
Pittsburgh

...but the best fans according to Forbes

JuniorNelson 12-04-2012 01:18 AM

Los Angeles.

Next year, if there is hockey, you'll be able to buy Kings tickets at the gate.

danishh 12-04-2012 02:04 AM

I believe there are only three teams that can succeed financially in the face of a decade of failure. Toronto, Montreal, and NYR. Edmonton's recent run might suggest that given the current valuation of the canadian dollar, any other canadian team might be able to survive as well (assuming they cut payroll accordingly as edmonton has done), but i believe that to be temporary as i dont see the canadian dollar maintaining it's current valuation long-term.

canuckster19 12-04-2012 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 56229537)
I believe there are only three teams that can succeed financially in the face of a decade of failure. Toronto, Montreal, and NYR. Edmonton's recent run might suggest that given the current valuation of the canadian dollar, any other canadian team might be able to survive as well (assuming they cut payroll accordingly as edmonton has done), but i believe that to be temporary as i dont see the canadian dollar maintaining it's current valuation long-term.

I think the season ticket waiting list in places like Vancouver and Calgary are enough to scare people into keeping their tickets in hopes of better times, something that didn't exist in the late 90s.

Gustavo Fring 12-04-2012 06:01 AM

C A P S, Caps, Caps, Caps!

I waited until Dec 1st, but I canceled my season tickets. I have only been a holder for 3 years, but there will never be a fourth.

If the Skins and Nats continue to be exciting and successful with RGIII, Strasburg, Harper, winning games, etc., the Caps are done in DC.

Figuratively of course.

JMROWE 12-04-2012 06:02 PM

The NHL. better not just asume that all the fans will come back & forget this lockout never happen because people still remember the lost season of 2004\2005 do to the lockout & if there is another lost season or even just lossing half the season it could be the last draw for NHL. fans especially in the some of the weak & fragile markets like Phoenix , Columbus , Nashville , Florida , St. Louis & Dallas .

I was once an NHL. fan of both the canadians as my favorite canadian team & the Flyers where my favorite american team up until 04\05 lockout which completely boycotted anything NHL. . Then fews years later I started to come back as a fan then the coyotes fiasco happend & when it looked like Hamilton was going land the coyotes & get an NHL. team we where screwed over again & ever since I boycotted anything NHL. & I will continue to boycott the NHL. unless some major changes happen .

Fishhead 12-04-2012 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuniorNelson (Post 56229167)
Los Angeles.

Next year, if there is hockey, you'll be able to buy Kings tickets at the gate.

Nah. The Kings won, and it's LA. Season ticket sales had to be cut off already (sold over 15K) and that's not taking into account partial ticket holders. There are only 2,500 available to the public per game, and they will have no issue selling those. The Kings will consistently sell out until the wheels fall off.

nabbyfan 12-04-2012 06:18 PM

San Jose. AFAIK the Sharks rely on getting to at least the 2nd round, if not the conference finals, to break even on any given year. Also, sports fans like winners. Hockey is growing greatly in the Bay Area, but if the Giants/A's/Warriors/Niners all continue to be good and get better like they have shown and the Sharks fall into a downward trend, which it isn't unreasonable to think they will, the Sharks will begin to feel it a bit. The same likely goes for any NTM that is generally a pretty good team.

saskganesh 12-04-2012 06:29 PM

Where's Jersey at with their rink/debt/ownership issues? Not playing games has to hurt.

Mightygoose 12-04-2012 08:06 PM

Was under the impression NJ has been able to fend off the banks thanks to the extra revenue from their unexpected trip to the finals.

It,s been a struggle filling the building during their best years. Hate to see what happens once they enter a long rebuilding phase.

RBR 12-04-2012 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 56229537)
I believe there are only three teams that can succeed financially in the face of a decade of failure. Toronto, Montreal, and NYR. Edmonton's recent run might suggest that given the current valuation of the canadian dollar, any other canadian team might be able to survive as well (assuming they cut payroll accordingly as edmonton has done), but i believe that to be temporary as i dont see the canadian dollar maintaining it's current valuation long-term.

People having been saying that about the dollar for years. But the Canadian economy and banking system are stable and the country has a bounty of resources, skilled population and a far less polarized political system than the down-south neighbours. Even if the dollar drops, it won't go that low.

Riptide 12-04-2012 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canuckster19 (Post 56230139)
I think the season ticket waiting list in places like Vancouver and Calgary are enough to scare people into keeping their tickets in hopes of better times, something that didn't exist in the late 90s.

How many fans were there in the mid 90s? I remember Van wasn't doing so hot back then.

I agree with the above poster... there's actually very few teams who can support a massive attendance when the on-ice product sucks.

Mayor Bee 12-04-2012 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riptide (Post 56249607)
How many fans were there in the mid 90s? I remember Van wasn't doing so hot back then.

I agree with the above poster... there's actually very few teams who can support a massive attendance when the on-ice product sucks.

Philadelphia, NY Rangers, Montreal, and Toronto. That's basically the extent of the list.

Quebec would be in there as well, but we're obviously missing the years that caused a drop in Canadian teams' attendance during the 1990s...it's entirely possible that they would have continued on with extremely strong support, or that they'd have dropped to sub-75%.

Ringmaster316 12-04-2012 10:20 PM

San Jose

powerstuck 12-05-2012 07:24 AM

We've already seen empty seats at Devils games. Same has been seen at Wings games, tho that might be due to Detroit's economy.

Wingsfan2965* 12-05-2012 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerstuck (Post 56256993)
We've already seen empty seats at Devils games. Same has been seen at Wings games, tho that might be due to Detroit's economy.

Or it has to do with idiots buying season tickets to go to four days a year. Story of the last five years. Upper bowl packed. Lower bowl not.

HawksFan74 12-05-2012 08:10 AM

In before Chicago. If the team sucked and Toews/Kane were somehow launched for unknown reasons. It could return to the dark days.

No Fun Shogun 12-05-2012 09:16 AM

Every team except Toronto and Montreal, and that's not necessarily a positive thing for those fanbases. There should be negative consequences if a team fails to put a competitive product on the ice or is just generally managerially incompetent.

If any team other than those two had protracted periods of terrible play or had Bill Wirtz as an owner, attendance and revenues would dip in very big ways, on both sides of the border.

Even the Rangers.

Only possible exception would be Winnipeg, and that's only because they still have a new team smell and their fanbase is so deliriously happy to finally have a team back that they'd accept anything. Probably won't be like that in a decade, though.

Shakey Rustie 12-05-2012 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riptide (Post 56249607)
How many fans were there in the mid 90s? I remember Van wasn't doing so hot back then.

I agree with the above poster... there's actually very few teams who can support a massive attendance when the on-ice product sucks.

The Canadian dollar was brutal back then.

MoreOrr 12-05-2012 12:33 PM

It would be an extremely short list of franchises that wouldn't have a significant financial drop off if the on-ice product struggled for a lengthy stretch of Seasons. Toronto and Montreal are probably the only teams certain to keep their profit margins high. Alhough Edmonton has shown in recent years that fans can be fairly patient there, but it's a bit of a special case I think. The owners in Edmonton have at least kept the fans hopes up for something better on the horizon with all the supposedly great young talent the Oilers have been assembling. But still, I think that the Oilers need to start showing some results very soon.

Cities like Boston, Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, Vancouver... they can probably withstand a poor NHL product for a lengthy stretch, but profits would be minimal compared to what they are if the hockey is at least ocassionally good. Anyway, that's my thinking on the question.

IkeaMonkey* 12-05-2012 12:39 PM

This question is tailor made for the Nation's capital...

The Redskins have "their Ovechkin" in RGIII.
The Nats are starting to suck a lot less and are actually looking at spending money.
Basketball is stupid, but it's a more popular sport than hockey.

Riptide 12-05-2012 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shakey Rustie (Post 56258663)
The Canadian dollar was brutal back then.

And that relates to poor attendance how? The OP said that Van would sellout regardless of the on-ice product. I don't believe that's the case. So while the early/mid 90s was almost 20 years ago (and things may have changed), I don't believe the supported their team in such a rabid fashion that the on-ice product could suck and they'd still sell out.

Mayor Bee 12-05-2012 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riptide (Post 56263619)
And that relates to poor attendance how? The OP said that Van would sellout regardless of the on-ice product. I don't believe that's the case. So while the early/mid 90s was almost 20 years ago (and things may have changed), I don't believe the supported their team in such a rabid fashion that the on-ice product could suck and they'd still sell out.

During a good chunk of the 1980s, they were barely above 10,000 a game.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.