HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   OT: NBC & Versus win the NHL TV rights bidding war vs. ESPN - 10 years, $2BN (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=905475)

TonySCV 04-19-2011 10:17 AM

NBC & Versus win the NHL TV rights bidding war vs. ESPN - 10 years, $2BN
 
The negotiating is over. NBC came out on top. 10 year deal valued at 2 billion dollars. At $200MM per year, that's a $122.5MM more per year than what the NHL makes from Versus and NBC presently.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...urn=nhl-wp2944

Versus will be re-branded NBC Sports later in the year.

No details yet on any programming changes. That'll be announced later today.

Mully12 04-19-2011 10:20 AM

So what you are REALLY saying is there still will be no Kings on national TV?

Quattro 04-19-2011 10:23 AM

$200B! Oh, $2B - lol. Need to change that title....

Quattro 04-19-2011 10:27 AM

Anyway, the first priority needs to be getting that **** JR off the air.

TonySCV 04-19-2011 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quattro (Post 32493899)
$200B! Oh, $2B - lol. Need to change that title....

Whoops. Fixed. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quattro (Post 32493973)
Anyway, the first priority needs to be getting that **** JR off the air.

Absolutely.

Capn Brown 04-19-2011 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quattro (Post 32493899)
$200B! Oh, $2B - lol. Need to change that title....


Sybil227 04-19-2011 10:53 AM

Hey! That reminds me of a great joke I know:
NHL more than doubles TV revenue: Ticket, concession, and parking prices drop!
:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

Julius Caesar Milan 04-19-2011 10:55 AM

The real prize is hockey not going back to ESPN. **** them

jimmy1100 04-19-2011 10:57 AM

For those with more CBA knowledge than myself - does this mean the cap will go up because of higher league profits? Is the $120 million increase in yearly TV revenue enough to see a significant jump?

I'm almost hoping it doesn't affect the cap too much as I've rather enjoyed watching how teams have to deal with crappy contracts that they irresponsibly gave out.

DIEHARD the King fan 04-19-2011 10:58 AM

So, assuming its split up evenly amongst the 30 teams, it amounts to a little more than 6.5mm a year to each? Aint exactly NFL money, but thats more than they are getting now. I think the length of the term might be regretted by the league down the road, but who can tell the future?

Capn Brown 04-19-2011 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy1100 (Post 32494544)
For those with more CBA knowledge than myself - does this mean the cap will go up because of higher league profits? Is the $120 million increase in yearly TV revenue enough to see a significant jump?

I'm almost hoping it doesn't affect the cap too much as I've rather enjoyed watching how teams have to deal with crappy contracts that they irresponsibly gave out.


IMHO, this will not affect the salary cap. Why? Because the salary cap was instituted primarily for the sake of "small market" teams (Edmonton, Florida, Nashville, etc.) who had a difficult time attracting "big money" stars. Those teams would lose out to teams like the Rangers & Wings who would nonchalantly chuck $7-$10 million at big stars. The salary cap was meant to level the playing field and, IMHO, it's actually achieving its intended result.

driller1 04-19-2011 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capn Brown (Post 32494665)
IMHO, this will not affect the salary cap. Why? Because the salary cap was instituted primarily for the sake of "small market" teams (Edmonton, Florida, Nashville, etc.) who had a difficult time attracting "big money" stars. Those teams would lose out to teams like the Rangers & Wings who would nonchalantly chuck $7-$10 million at big stars. The salary cap was meant to level the playing field and, IMHO, it's actually achieving its intended result.

Ummm, I think the salary cap levels are set based on league revenue; hence, more revenue equals higher salary cap.

Capn Brown 04-19-2011 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by driller1 (Post 32494852)
Ummm, I think the salary cap levels are set based on league revenue; hence, more revenue equals higher salary cap.


That's *part* of it. But adding $6.5 million to every team's cap isn't going to entice individuals to suddenly have a great yearning to play in Edmonton!

jimmy1100 04-19-2011 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by driller1 (Post 32494852)
Ummm, I think the salary cap levels are set based on league revenue; hence, more revenue equals higher salary cap.

Which is what I was thinking. I'm curious to know how much of an impact this will have on the cap. I know it will cause it to go up (more than it was already planned to) I just don't have any idea by how much.

It'll be interesting to see, but I hope this doesn't help bail out teams that have strapped themselves with poor cap management. Though, if it did so, one could argue that perhaps it wasn't bad cap management in the first place.

driller1 04-19-2011 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capn Brown (Post 32494906)
That's *part* of it. But adding $6.5 million to every team's cap isn't going to entice individuals to suddenly have a great yearning to play in Edmonton!

I thought the original question was "Will the salary cap go up?"

The answer is yes.

Next question, which I believe you're answering (which wasn't explicitly asked earlier), is "Will it matter for small market perennial losers in cold climates who don't spend to the cap anyways?"

The answer is no.

Tikkanen 04-19-2011 11:23 AM

Versus only shows the same 4 or 5 teams, not sure if this deal helps grow the sport. I understand keeping travel expenses down is important but Versus needs to be in more homes, people need to know what the heck it is and they need to show the entire NHL during the course of a season. According to Versus the NHL is still an original 6 league.

KINGS17 04-19-2011 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tikkanen (Post 32495025)
Versus only shows the same 4 or 5 teams, not sure if this deal helps grow the sport. I understand keeping travel expenses down is important but Versus needs to be in more homes, people need to know what the heck it is and they need to show the entire NHL during the course of a season. According to Versus the NHL is still an original 6 league.

Were the Pittsburgh Penguins and Philadelphia Flyers in the original six?

But yeah, I get what you're saying.

Tonellisghost 04-19-2011 11:50 AM

And again hockey will remain a largely obscure sport in the eyes of the media market that it needs to make it not only prosperous but also vial.



Good job GB

TonySCV 04-19-2011 01:10 PM

A few other tidbits are floating in:

"NEW YORK (April 19, 2011) – The National Hockey League and the NBC Sports Group have reached agreement on a landmark 10-year television and media rights deal, taking the partnership through the 2020-21 season. The expanded partnership, under which NBC remains the exclusive network home and VERSUS the exclusive cable home of the NHL® in the U.S., is highlighted by the first-ever national distribution of all Stanley Cup® Playoffs contests, including, for the first time, exclusive coverage starting with the Conference Semifinals."

Cliff's notes:

1. ALL playoff games will be televised nationally across the NBC family of networks (NBC, Versus, USA, etc, etc,). Center Ice will no longer be needed to catch all playoff games.

2. NBC/Versus exclusive playoff coverage will now start with the Conference semifinals. That means less Bob and Jim. :(. Currently, only two of 7 conference semifinal games are exclusive to Versus. Starting next year, they all will be.

3. Versus will air 90 exclusive games next year. They aired 77 total this year. Exclusive = no separate regional broadcasts, such as FSN.

4. Versus will be renamed within 90 days to NBC Sports, or some variation of that with NBC in the name.

Live in the Now 04-19-2011 01:41 PM

All those things are good besides #2, which sounds like a load of #2 to this fans ears.

Not having all playoff games televised nationally made no sense, the NBA is the same way with the first round and I don't get it.

ShattStar03 04-19-2011 01:44 PM

I read 200 million for 10 years not 2 billion.

driller1 04-19-2011 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShattStar03 (Post 32497990)
I read 200 million for 10 years not 2 billion.

200 million per year X 10 years = $2 billion

Tikkanen 04-19-2011 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KINGS17 (Post 32495179)
Were the Pittsburgh Penguins and Philadelphia Flyers in the original six?

But yeah, I get what you're saying.

It's a revised Original 6. Pittsburgh, Detroit, Washington, Philly, Chicago, Boston.

TonySCV 04-19-2011 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy1100 (Post 32494544)
For those with more CBA knowledge than myself - does this mean the cap will go up because of higher league profits? Is the $120 million increase in yearly TV revenue enough to see a significant jump?

I'm almost hoping it doesn't affect the cap too much as I've rather enjoyed watching how teams have to deal with crappy contracts that they irresponsibly gave out.

A hell of a read that does as good a job as any I've seen so far of answering your question: http://www.ontheforecheck.com/2011/4...ille-predators

jimmy1100 04-19-2011 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonySCV (Post 32499941)
A hell of a read that does as good a job as any I've seen so far of answering your question: http://www.ontheforecheck.com/2011/4...ille-predators

Nice find! Much thanks!

EDIT: Quick note - the article says that the $57 million beer sponsorship and the TV deal together could raise the cap by $3.36 million alone (If I understood that correctly).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 AM.

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.