View Single Post
07-07-2013, 12:04 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,087
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
I was just responding to this same topic.

@ Bold
The city appears to consistently use the "per-ticket surcharge" methodology even when calculating "Without Team" scenarios. It's a completely fictional data set. The SMG response doesn't utilize per ticket fees. They divide total revenue so the city gets a much more equitable position in the performance of the arena.

When compared side-by-side, which of course Glendale would never do, the bids would end up direct revenue of somewhere around:

RSE ("With Team")
-$8MM per year

SMG ("Without Team")
+$2MM per year

It's roughly a $10MM swing on the direct. Also, separately and even though lockout numbers don't really show it, credit the Coyotes with $2.5MM indirect revenues that could not be recovered if the team left, the gap comes down to around $7.5MM per year. Plus you have to measure the intangibles somehow. In the end, IMO, if you squint, it's close. It's a heck of a lot better than JIG I or II.
CF - Thanks. This is the comparison that needs to be made:
With hockey vs without hockey.

I agree that it's much better that JIG.

However, what it does not factor is the FEAR-MONGERING about how Westgate dies without the hockey team.

I saw somewhere a description that said, roughly, 500K people come the games, 2M to Westgate. Now, we know that not all the hockey patrons go to Westgate, but even with that assumption, you have a huge number of people at Westgate with no hockey team, and the assumption the Arena is totally idle all those dates.

So, the real deal is:

Sherwood went rogue, because he can't stand the idea of the team leaving. He therefore arranged the serial meetings, in which Knaack, Chavira, and Martinez were convinced that "hockey must be saved, or Westgate dies."

After that, all presentations are skewed to show "Arena with hockeyteam" vs "Arena with no events but we still pay 6M/yr anyway."

MNNumbers is offline