View Single Post
02-13-2013, 11:08 AM
Join Date: Dec 2010
Originally Posted by
I thank to VladNYC to sum it up. I wrote this milion-times here, pointless to repeat the same idea/vision every second day.
Far-East can become high-developed hub of Russia. Therefore you need Amur. KHL is not only about bussiness, to colect teams to make money. KHL is also about growing the game in Russia (mainly). And? Where is hockey under/not-developed in Russia? Far East. You need LA Kings to develop hockey in California, Dallas to develop Texas hockey, Amur to develop Far East hockey. Maybe we can find another reasons for Amur, but these are basic.
If you look to the future, there is every basis to conclude that the Far East, specifically on the Pacific rim, will be a real growth area for the Russian economy. Vladivostok will be the host of the upcoming Asia-Pacific Economic Conference. The economic power of the Asia-Pacific region is now emerging as one of the World's real growth areas. I see no reason why Vladivostok, a city of more than 600,000, couldn't be a contender for a KHL franchise. The benefit would be that if a team is making the trip to Khabarovsk, it is not much further to go to Vladivostok. They could get in two games for not much more than the price of one. Kind of like Los Angeles and Anaheim in the NHL. I know Vladivostok has no particular hockey history, but it is my understanding that there has been some rink-building going on there. In a city of 600,000, it shouldn't be that difficult to get 8,000-9,000 spectators per game.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Yakushev72