View Single Post
12-18-2012, 02:42 PM
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
Problem is you run out of viable markets, and need willing buyers to take that risk. You also need someone with around $150+ million to buy the franchise, $150+ million relocation fee, and ~$300 million to build an arena (or convince taxpayers to do it). Not a lot of people out there with half a billion burning a hole in their pockets... Not so easy to accomplish.

From a completely unscientific perspective, I looked at the lowest attendance (as percentage of filled seats according to ESPN) as well as the Forbes #'s for Franchise Values and Operating Losses and made a list of ten teams for each of those criteria. These teams are:

NY Islanders
Tampa Bay

Phoenix/Arizona might improve if they ever get through their saga - questions being "how much?" and "is it enough". The NHL has too much time/effort/money invested here to simply walk away via relocation.

Columbus Badly managed - used to draw fairly significant crowds. My guess is they're facing the same problem teams like Calgary faced during the "young guns" era - perpetual rebuilding with no end in sight, and fans get tired of that after a few years.

Islanders situation should improve with their new digs.

Carolina / Anaheim / Tampa Bay - just suffer from being in non-traditional hockey markets, but winning teams have historically drawn fans.

The one common denominator is that increased revenue sharing among the teams (and the reduced players' share of HRR) will help all of these teams.
Apparently the "risk" is to the players. If teams lose money the owners just lockout and demand more from the players in a never ending cycle.

It seems to me that the salary cap has resulted in every team being in constant rebuild. They draft players, develop them, lose them to the cap, repeat...

Actual Thought* is offline