HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Team 990 - Expect 2-3 more Canadians teams within 3 years

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-09-2010, 12:46 PM
  #76
Killiecrankie*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krautso View Post
You dont think that central canada is underserved? The nearest franchise is 1000kms away...
I'm dunno, I know that the Toronto area has way more demand for NHL hockey than the Leafs are filling; its smack dab in the middle of the east coast, easy travel.

I'm not sure what kind of corporate support is located in Winnipeg.

Killiecrankie* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 12:54 PM
  #77
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
dude, why are you bringing on-ice success with the issue on hand?

It has nothing to do with it. You don't keep a team in a market because they've won cups.

In New York, it's all rangers. Islanders are a distant 2nd. As for the Devils, think about what kind of crowds they'll be getting if lets say the Devils miss the playoffs for a few years in a row. It would be about the same as Atlanta, Phoenix and every other non-hockey market
On-ice success has everything to do with it. That's how most franchises have stapled themselves in certain cities and created history in said regions. People in Atlanta and Phoenix would not notice a thing if their teams left; people on Long Island and in New Jersey would. You can't just start relocating teams after a few years of losing money and having bad seasons.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the Isles and Devils to move. It will never happen.

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 01:09 PM
  #78
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
I suggest read them as there are more knowledgeable posters than I explaining in detail the situation presented by an out of date arena.
How many teams have gotten new arenas to only have them half empty almost half the time or more? People are overestimating the relation between ticket sales and having a new arena.

From wiki: " mediocre attendance and television ratings that continue to plague the franchise ( NJ ) (despite the organization having a perennially successful on-ice product) "

Sorry, too lazy to find specific references...

It's really not far fetched to suggest that if the Devils slide or miss the playoffs (post-Brodeur era) than the franchise is at risk. Their home games are littered with empty seats even when they're sitting in 2nd place in the conference. This is disturbing to watch... AND THAT is bad for the game of hockey, not the fact that Nashville fans have to watch 'oh no god for bid' a team from Winnipeg. So much of hockey story lines are derived from the crowd, its the fans in ARENAS not at home watching it on tv, that create the atmosphere of rivalry... Empty arenas do nothing in growing the game and rivalries, or sustaining it for that matter.

Look at the Blackhawks 5 years ago and they are an original six. If anyone thinks the Devils are safe in the long term they are DREAMING... and that's with their new arena.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
What do you define as a hockey market? I define it as any NHL city where an owner can spend above the cap minimum and produce a profit. The game will grow in those places, and has already grown.
A hockey market is a place where a team can survive the ups and downs of both good and bad seasons over the long term without discussion of relocation or threat of bankruptcy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
I'm sure Canada will get at least another team, it is just good business, however do not disparage other markets. After all, the proud Canadiens almost folded and Montreal lost their maroons.
Another team? Good business starts with being able to sell a large season ticket base and with the ability to sell-out games on a consistent basis.

The days of Canadian franchises not being able to sustain themselves are OVER. Hockey has entered a new socio-cultural level in Canada over the last 10-20 years... As proof of the willing investors and sponsors that exist today and not 10 years ago.


Last edited by coolasprICE: 05-09-2010 at 01:17 PM.
coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 01:16 PM
  #79
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
On-ice success has everything to do with it. That's how most franchises have stapled themselves in certain cities and created history in said regions. People in Atlanta and Phoenix would not notice a thing if their teams left; people on Long Island and in New Jersey would. You can't just start relocating teams after a few years of losing money and having bad seasons.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the Isles and Devils to move. It will never happen.
So the Islanders are sustainable today because of the Cups they won?
The Devils are only sustainable because they make the playoffs every year.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 01:16 PM
  #80
Klaus
Teemu!
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
Hell, your national game is lacrosse.
I'm so tired of always having to repeat this... we have 2 national sports. Lacrosse is our national summer sport, and hockey is our national winter sport.


Last edited by Klaus: 05-09-2010 at 05:23 PM.
Klaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 01:53 PM
  #81
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
So the Islanders are sustainable today because of the Cups they won?
Well yeah. That is how they built up there following. Don't you think the 24 Stanley Cups in Montreal have a bit to do with the hardcore fan base?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
The Devils are only sustainable because they make the playoffs every year.
As are most teams in every sport. A business does not make any money in sales if its product sucks. The same goes for sports, if your team sucks nobody cares.


By the way, I do not see why you are arguing sustainability when talking about two teams in the most heavily populated region of North America. You just don't make any sense, how does a team, that has already been moved once, do better in a small town like Winnipeg if it can't in New York?

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 02:09 PM
  #82
Dutchy
Registered User
 
Dutchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Montréal, Québec, Ca
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 3,408
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Dutchy
I truly believe that we will see new Canadian teams in the foreseeable future.

A few factors help me make this statement:

- The strength of the loonie;
- The end of hook & grab era which helped the recrudescence of Canadian fans interest;
- The salary cap;
- The new CBA which ensure parity through the league.

Owning and managing a viable hockey franchise is much easier now than when Quebec city and Winnipeg had franchises.

Although one thing still works against them: Buttman.

Dutchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 02:15 PM
  #83
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Well yeah. That is how they built up there following. Don't you think the 24 Stanley Cups in Montreal have a bit to do with the hardcore fan base?



As are most teams in every sport. A business does not make any money in sales if its product sucks. The same goes for sports, if your team sucks nobody cares.


By the way, I do not see why you are arguing sustainability when talking about two teams in the most heavily populated region of North America. You just don't make any sense, how does a team, that has already been moved once, do better in a small town like Winnipeg if it can't in New York?
1. The Islanders are not a healthy franchise financially speaking, which you seem to fail to address

2. New arenas have proved to NOT be the answer for dwindling attendance.

3. If a market is ONLY sustainable because they make the playoffs and are stellar in the standings, than they are NOT REALLY sustainable.... What's going to happen when the tide turns the other way, like it ALWAYS does eventually? Further to that, in a true hockey market, a team with the success of the Devils in the last 15 years would be financially HEALTHY. Read up on the Devils and you tell me whether or not they are considered a "success" / financially "healthy"

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 02:44 PM
  #84
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
1. The Islanders are not a healthy franchise financially speaking, which you seem to fail to address
Of course they aren't, they have been mediocre for many years and are going through a rough patch as I stated. That is not a reason for shutting down a team and bringing them elsewhere. If the league did that every time a franchise was in trouble teams would be disappearing and re-appearing every year. Not too long ago, Canadian teams were in trouble don't forget that. Canada is not always the answer to everything. Mending the teams is the solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
2. New arenas have proved to NOT be the answer for dwindling attendance.
Care to name some examples?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
3. If a market is ONLY sustainable because they make the playoffs and are stellar in the standings, than they are NOT REALLY sustainable.... What's going to happen when the tide turns the other way, like it ALWAYS does eventually? Further to that, in a true hockey market, a team with the success of the Devils in the last 15 years would be financially HEALTHY. Read up on the Devils and you tell me whether or not they are considered a "success" / financially "healthy"
Then what makes a team sustainable? There are probably 3-4 teams that could keep on making a profit despite missing the playoffs for a decade. Every team in the league could be affected by the turning tide thanks to the new found parity due to the cap.

You seem to be so sure that the teams in small market locations like Winnipeg would be way more sustainable, yet they were losing around 12-13 million dollars a year back in the 90s. Do you really believe a city of barely 700 thousand people will do better than a region of over 10 million people that has had 3 teams for almost 30 years? Those three teams have had more success than the Jets, Flames, Oilers, Canucks and Senators combined.

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:14 PM
  #85
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Of course they aren't, they have been mediocre for many years and are going through a rough patch as I stated. That is not a reason for shutting down a team and bringing them elsewhere. If the league did that every time a franchise was in trouble teams would be disappearing and re-appearing every year. Not too long ago, Canadian teams were in trouble don't forget that. Canada is not always the answer to everything. Mending the teams is the solution.
You're comparing the viability of Canadian franchises of today with that of 10-20 years ago, completely ignoring the influences that are making it more viable and realistic today.

Ask yourself, why are investors stepping-up with money today and not 10-15 years ago?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Care to name some examples?
Ok, I thought you would have known.

These are franchises that are at risk and that HAVE a new Arena.

Atlanta
Tampa
Phoenix
New Jersey

Am I missing any others?

I could add few more franchises that have been struggling with attendance despite having a new arena, like the Avs and Ducks, but I doubt they'll move.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Then what makes a team sustainable? There are probably 3-4 teams that could keep on making a profit despite missing the playoffs for a decade. Every team in the league could be affected by the turning tide thanks to the new found parity due to the cap.

You seem to be so sure that the teams in small market locations like Winnipeg would be way more sustainable, yet they were losing around 12-13 million dollars a year back in the 90s. Do you really believe a city of barely 700 thousand people will do better than a region of over 10 million people that has had 3 teams for almost 30 years? Those three teams have had more success than the Jets, Flames, Oilers, Canucks and Senators combined.
Again, you're comparing the Canadian hockey market of 1995 to that of 2010...

Also, you should go to NY area and ask people if anyone cares about the Islanders... Sorry to break it to you all, but NY is NY Rangers town. The fact that there's 10 Million in population translates into very little for Islanders support. People have this weird illusion that because they have a nice history of cups back in the 80's that they are very well supported in the NY area. FALSE.

Sure, if the Islanders start becoming a beast in the East, get a new Rink, it's possible that they will survive... but why don't they have a new rink? And, what happens if they miss the playoffs for the next 2 or 3 seasons? lol ... They're very close to the end imo.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:18 PM
  #86
Killiecrankie*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
How many teams have gotten new arenas to only have them half empty almost half the time or more? People are overestimating the relation between ticket sales and having a new arena.

From wiki: " mediocre attendance and television ratings that continue to plague the franchise ( NJ ) (despite the organization having a perennially successful on-ice product) "

Sorry, too lazy to find specific references...

It's really not far fetched to suggest that if the Devils slide or miss the playoffs (post-Brodeur era) than the franchise is at risk. Their home games are littered with empty seats even when they're sitting in 2nd place in the conference. This is disturbing to watch... AND THAT is bad for the game of hockey, not the fact that Nashville fans have to watch 'oh no god for bid' a team from Winnipeg. So much of hockey story lines are derived from the crowd, its the fans in ARENAS not at home watching it on tv, that create the atmosphere of rivalry... Empty arenas do nothing in growing the game and rivalries, or sustaining it for that matter.

Look at the Blackhawks 5 years ago and they are an original six. If anyone thinks the Devils are safe in the long term they are DREAMING... and that's with their new arena.




A hockey market is a place where a team can survive the ups and downs of both good and bad seasons over the long term without discussion of relocation or threat of bankruptcy.



Another team? Good business starts with being able to sell a large season ticket base and with the ability to sell-out games on a consistent basis.

The days of Canadian franchises not being able to sustain themselves are OVER. Hockey has entered a new socio-cultural level in Canada over the last 10-20 years... As proof of the willing investors and sponsors that exist today and not 10 years ago.
Be careful, if your dollar falls say 20% of its value teams such as Calgary and Edmonton would struggle. After all, a low Canadian dollar is what helped bring about the end of the Jets and Nords.

Second, the Devils may not have the best attendance but as long as their 100 odd luxury boxes are sold they will be profitable. Corporate support ensures a franchise. Nashville has/had solid attendance, however their corporate support was not spectacular-hence their struggles.

New social-cultural levels? Give me a break. Hockey cures cancer in Canada!

Killiecrankie* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:26 PM
  #87
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
Be careful, if your dollar falls say 20% of its value teams such as Calgary and Edmonton would struggle. After all, a low Canadian dollar is what helped bring about the end of the Jets and Nords.



New social-cultural levels? Give me a break. Hockey cures cancer in Canada!
Well, anyone can tell you that the Canadian dollar has about an equal or greater chance of being 20 % more than the U.S dollar than it does for falling 20 % below.

At the end of the day, business goes to where there will be a market and demand. A market for tickets, for watching the product on TV, for buying merchandise, filling-up bars.... There's no way that in the long run that populations in Winnipeg and Quebec city go through winters without professional hockey.

And you should accept the fact that Hockey is Canada's game, and you should perhaps accept that it's even more part of our society today than it was 20 years ago.... laughing at this only makes you look like a biased american in denial, sadly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
Second, the Devils may not have the best attendance but as long as their 100 odd luxury boxes are sold they will be profitable. Corporate support ensures a franchise. Nashville has/had solid attendance, however their corporate support was not spectacular-hence their struggles.
Dude, 100 or so luxury boxes sold will not guarantee them profitability. There's a reason why there's 18,000 SEATS in a stadium. Hockey relies HUGELY on ticket sales - and we all know, if the Devils hypothetically have a bad year or two, there will be nobody at the games (as opposed to half), and all that corporate support (which is there because of the success in the last 15 years) will slowly disappear too.


Last edited by coolasprICE: 05-09-2010 at 03:31 PM.
coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:36 PM
  #88
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
there will be nobody at the games (as opposed to half), and all that corporate support (which is there because of the success in the last 15 years) will slowly disappear too.
This happens to every team, including Canadian teams. Why do you think only American teams are victims to this?

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:44 PM
  #89
CanadienErrant*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Cook Islands
Posts: 4,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post
I'm dunno, I know that the Toronto area has way more demand for NHL hockey than the Leafs are filling; its smack dab in the middle of the east coast, easy travel.

I'm not sure what kind of corporate support is located in Winnipeg.




If you are so ignorant, why don't you S T F U ?

CanadienErrant* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:44 PM
  #90
keslehr*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Culloden View Post

One thing I hate about *SOME Canadians, its not your game, it never was and it never will be. Hell, your national game is lacrosse.
New level of dumbass right here, folks.

keslehr* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 03:45 PM
  #91
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
This happens to every team, including Canadian teams. Why do you think only American teams are victims to this?
No it doesn't man, anyways.... I'm not going to spend my day debating if the sky is blue or not.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 04:01 PM
  #92
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
You're comparing the viability of Canadian franchises of today with that of 10-20 years ago, completely ignoring the influences that are making it more viable and realistic today.

Ask yourself, why are investors stepping-up with money today and not 10-15 years ago?

Well of course I am, it was a time when ticket prices were far cheaper than they are now. They were averaging around 12 to 13 thousand in attendance over their 6 last seasons. You said so yourself that ticket sales are important, but the team was not selling tickets because the market did not sustain them. That is why the team got moved and why the NHL is reluctant to move back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Ok, I thought you would have known.

These are franchises that are at risk and that HAVE a new Arena.

Atlanta
Tampa
Phoenix
New Jersey

Am I missing any others?

I could add few more franchises that have been struggling with attendance despite having a new arena, like the Avs and Ducks, but I doubt they'll move.
When did Atlanta change arenas?

Tampa played 3 seasons in a baseball stadium and moved into a proper arena.

Phoenix was doomed from the start, bad example.

New Jersey is not a franchise that is at risk

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Again, you're comparing the Canadian hockey market of 1995 to that of 2010...
And you have yet to tell me what a "sustainable" franchise is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Also, you should go to NY area and ask people if anyone cares about the Islanders... Sorry to break it to you all, but NY is NY Rangers town.
Like you now so much better, have you ever set foot out of Montreal? I have been to Islander and Ranger games, have you? The Islanders have a fan base despite what you believe, the casual and poser fans just don't show up to games because the team sucks. They have a loyal following due to their past successes whether you think so or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
The fact that there's 10 Million in population translates into very little for Islanders support. People have this weird illusion that because they have a nice history of cups back in the 80's that they are very well supported in the NY area. FALSE.
Just goes to show how much you know about running a business. So far potential fans and past success are not important to you. Tell me what is the key to a team being acceptable to you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Sure, if the Islanders start becoming a beast in the East, get a new Rink, it's possible that they will survive... but why don't they have a new rink? And, what happens if they miss the playoffs for the next 2 or 3 seasons? lol ... They're very close to the end imo.
This has been said countless times for numerous franchises and yet a team has not relocated since 1997. Much ado about nothing.

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 04:02 PM
  #93
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
No it doesn't man, anyways.... I'm not going to spend my day debating if the sky is blue or not.
Please tell me which teams are immune to mediocrity over long periods of time.

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 04:21 PM
  #94
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
You're comparing the viability of Canadian franchises of today with that of 10-20 years ago, completely ignoring the influences that are making it more viable and realistic today.

Ask yourself, why are investors stepping-up with money today and not 10-15 years ago?




Ok, I thought you would have known.

These are franchises that are at risk and that HAVE a new Arena.

Atlanta
Tampa
Phoenix
New Jersey

Am I missing any others?

I could add few more franchises that have been struggling with attendance despite having a new arena, like the Avs and Ducks, but I doubt they'll move.




Again, you're comparing the Canadian hockey market of 1995 to that of 2010...

Also, you should go to NY area and ask people if anyone cares about the Islanders... Sorry to break it to you all, but NY is NY Rangers town. The fact that there's 10 Million in population translates into very little for Islanders support. People have this weird illusion that because they have a nice history of cups back in the 80's that they are very well supported in the NY area. FALSE.

Sure, if the Islanders start becoming a beast in the East, get a new Rink, it's possible that they will survive... but why don't they have a new rink? And, what happens if they miss the playoffs for the next 2 or 3 seasons? lol ... They're very close to the end imo.
Here's a list of arenas in the NHL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._League_arenas

You will find that the "New" rinks are in NJ '07 PHX '03, Dallas '01, and The Wild and Jackets in '00. The Oldest rink ( Mellon in p'burgh '61) gets replaced next season

19 teams got rinks built in the 90's. Saddle dome was built in 83 but got a large reno job in 95

The remaining rinks The Joe in detroit '79; MSG in NY '68; Nassau on Long Island '72 and Rexall in Edmonton '74

You can't really call the Honda centre in Anaheim a new rink given that 22 buildings are newer in the league (soon to be 23). having said that I thought the facility is okay having visited in this season

But I can also tell you that the Nassau Coliseum is dreadful. When the Pens move to their new rink, nassau becomes second oldest after MSG. It has the lowest capacity, badly dated and is in awful condition. Clearly a new rink benefits this team a lot. The fact that Rangers are #1 in Ny really does not mean that NYI cannot succeed. Huge population base to draw on. Wang has been a good owner and deserves a shot

Interesting that so many are in favour of putting a team in Hamilton in a building that would be 5th oldest soon. Hockey support in that area has never been good. Buffalo and the Leafs are nearby already

Winnepeg and Quebec sound like good ideas to me. They should have never lost those teams

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 04:25 PM
  #95
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Well of course I am, it was a time when ticket prices were far cheaper than they are now. They were averaging around 12 to 13 thousand in attendance over their 6 last seasons. You said so yourself that ticket sales are important, but the team was not selling tickets because the market did not sustain them. That is why the team got moved and why the NHL is reluctant to move back.
Again, I asked you, why are Canadian investors stepping up to the plate TODAY and not 15 years ago? For some reason , you fail to address this question... I guess you would say they're making a mistake ?

The fact that you find it valid to compare the hockey market 15 years ago suggests you should evolve your opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post

When did Atlanta change arenas?

Tampa played 3 seasons in a baseball stadium and moved into a proper arena.

Phoenix was doomed from the start, bad example.

New Jersey is not a franchise that is at risk
Having a new arena means that a team is playing in a modern facility. Stop trying to stupidify the conversation please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
And you have yet to tell me what a "sustainable" franchise is.
I've addressed it , perhaps you should read my posts...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Like you now so much better, have you ever set foot out of Montreal? I have been to Islander and Ranger games, have you? The Islanders have a fan base despite what you believe, the casual and poser fans just don't show up to games because the team sucks. They have a loyal following due to their past successes whether you think so or not.
Yes, I have traveled and lived abroad, let alone attended games in NY. I am not saying there aren't Islander fans buddy, I'm saying that the Islanders are a very very very far 2nd in terms of popularity; that NY is basically all Rangers. Just because they have some following doesn't make it significant enough for the team to stay there. That goes without saying... I'm sure Phoenix has some very loyal fans as well .... lol



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Just goes to show how much you know about running a business. So far potential fans and past success are not important to you. Tell me what is the key to a team being acceptable to you?
So, market changes are not an influence for you? core support, cultural significance, evolution of a market over time, nothing matters to you... You're saying that a business that did not find it viable to invest in Quebec city 15 years ago should STILL ignore this market 15 years later? LOL ok there buddy...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kezia View Post
Please tell me which teams are immune to mediocrity over long periods of time.
If you are trying to sell a sport to a market that is just not passionate to the sport, than the risks of mediocrity are great. In a market where there is an extreme passion, following and participation for a sport, the risk of mediocrity is greatly reduced.

If you can't see this, I guess there's no hope in informing you either.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 04:27 PM
  #96
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan View Post
....
I should clarify - a new rink is an arena that is fit to serve the team for years to come and in no need of replacement, renovation or extensive upgrade.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 05:01 PM
  #97
Killiecrankie*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienErrant View Post
[/B]


If you are so ignorant, why don't you S T F U ?
right.... yawn

If its such a huge corporate center then why haven't I heard of a single corporation doing business there? I've dealt with corporations in Edmonton and Calgary; both mid sized Canadian cities. Yet I have never come into contact with any business based in Winnipeg. And I admit as much, I know nothing, its a small city in the middle of nowhere. Edmonton and Calgary are mid sized cities in the middle of nowhere with extremely strong corporate ties, and calgary is a particularly nice place to run a business.


Yet on a site populated seemingly by a bunch of 13 year old girls, that's not enough. A lack of knowledge prompts such stupid comments as S T F U (wow, we can all circumvent the profanity filter). Then we have Canadian culture experts, economic experts (really, the Canadian dollar is tied to energy-do you realize how volatile the energy market is?) trying to rationalize their warped and twisted view of reality.

Pathetic. All the twelve year old's run along to school now.

Killiecrankie* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 05:03 PM
  #98
Killiecrankie*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Again, I asked you, why are Canadian investors stepping up to the plate TODAY and not 15 years ago? For some reason , you fail to address this question... I guess you would say they're making a mistake ?

The fact that you find it valid to compare the hockey market 15 years ago suggests you should evolve your opinion.



Having a new arena means that a team is playing in a modern facility. Stop trying to stupidify the conversation please.



I've addressed it , perhaps you should read my posts...?



Yes, I have traveled and lived abroad, let alone attended games in NY. I am not saying there aren't Islander fans buddy, I'm saying that the Islanders are a very very very far 2nd in terms of popularity; that NY is basically all Rangers. Just because they have some following doesn't make it significant enough for the team to stay there. That goes without saying... I'm sure Phoenix has some very loyal fans as well .... lol





So, market changes are not an influence for you? core support, cultural significance, evolution of a market over time, nothing matters to you... You're saying that a business that did not find it viable to invest in Quebec city 15 years ago should STILL ignore this market 15 years later? LOL ok there buddy...




If you are trying to sell a sport to a market that is just not passionate to the sport, than the risks of mediocrity are great. In a market where there is an extreme passion, following and participation for a sport, the risk of mediocrity is greatly reduced.

If you can't see this, I guess there's no hope in informing you either.
The only potential canadian investor that is/was actively trying to bring a team to Canada is Jim Balsillie; and I doubt that every happens.

Killiecrankie* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 05:13 PM
  #99
ILuvLucic*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Location Location
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Again, I asked you, why are Canadian investors stepping up to the plate TODAY and not 15 years ago? For some reason , you fail to address this question... I guess you would say they're making a mistake ?

The fact that you find it valid to compare the hockey market 15 years ago suggests you should evolve your opinion.
Because they can purchase teams failing in non-traditional markets (Phoenix) for a ridiculously low price and move them to a new market. That fresh start will generate interest in the team causing the organisation to increase in value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Having a new arena means that a team is playing in a modern facility. Stop trying to stupidify the conversation please.
Then stick to the point. I was talking about arena upgrades over existing arenas, what the Islanders are trying to do. They can't invest more money into a team when there arena is too small to back up their investments. You cannot spend money like a team selling 19 000 when you can only sellout to 16 000.

You named 1 team which has been the most succesful over the past decade and a half as well as 3 expansion teams in non-hockey markets.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
I've addressed it , perhaps you should read my posts...?
You haven't. Unless the same old "hockey is Canadian" rambling translates to only teams in our country can work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Yes, I have traveled and lived abroad, let alone attended games in NY. I am not saying there aren't Islander fans buddy, I'm saying that the Islanders are a very very very far 2nd in terms of popularity; that NY is basically all Rangers. Just because they have some following doesn't make it significant enough for the team to stay there. That goes without saying... I'm sure Phoenix has some very loyal fans as well .... lol

Of course the Islanders are a far second, the Rangers are an Original Six team. That does not mean every person in and around New York is a Rangers fan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
So, market changes are not an influence for you? core support, cultural significance, evolution of a market over time, nothing matters to you... You're saying that a business that did not find it viable to invest in Quebec city 15 years ago should STILL ignore this market 15 years later? LOL ok there buddy...
I never said nothing matters to me. The market in Quebec City may have changed for the better. It all depends on what the market has evolved into. Can the residents afford to attend games regularly and buy memorabilia? Are the newer generations Canadiens' fans? Has immigration increased (they probably don't care for hockey)?

All of these come into play for both existing markets and potential markets. All 30 teams in the league presently have cultural significance and core support. And their markets are evolving also, more people are being exposed to the sport and younger generations are growing up to be future fans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
If you are trying to sell a sport to a market that is just not passionate to the sport, than the risks of mediocrity are great. In a market where there is an extreme passion, following and participation for a sport, the risk of mediocrity is greatly reduced.

If you can't see this, I guess there's no hope in informing you either.
Way to avoid answering the question. Anyways, I don't seem to get where you are trying to go with this. Calling New York a non-traditional market for both hockey and sports just means you must be delusional.

ILuvLucic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-09-2010, 05:20 PM
  #100
dmacin2*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrCoffea View Post
I'm not Gary Bettman, I come from one of the only 3 real cities in Canada, Montreal

Winnipeg is a joke, as a city it's horrible. It's boring, it's ugly, it's in the middle of nowhere, no one in the world knows anything about Winnipeg. Giving Winnipeg a franchise devalues the image of the NHL to the outsider looking in

Canada doesn't need to "grow" Hockey. People in cities without franchises are going to watch Hockey regardless. I'd rather another success story of building a hockey scene in the San Jose's and Dallas' of the world than put a team in a city that once lost it because it was too poor and hasn't shown anything since then to make us believe they deserve the franchise again

It's easy for people from Winnipeg to say they were amazing fans, but they didn't even sell out all of their games. You give the team to Winnipeg or another small Canadian city, it's just a matter of time before they risk losing it again. All it takes is for the American economy to be strong again really...

You're kidding right?

Calgary has more people than San Jose, Detroit, Columbus, Boston, Denver, Nashville, Washington, Atlanta, Miami, Raleigh, St Louis, Tampa, Anaheim, Pittsburgh ect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population

Winnipeg even has more population than many of these cities.

I understand that many of the cities in the USA that I listed have much more people living in surrounding cities. In many cases those people live way to far away from the arena for a casual sports fan to go when hockey is so far behind pretty much every other major sport. Would you drive 2 hours in rush hour traffic to watch a CIS Basketball game?

By your logic Edmonton having a team is bad for the league.

Do you really think that just because you don't like Winnipeg and you don't want to live there that them having a team is bad for the league.

Many Canadian teams did have an issue with attendance before the lockout, there is no denying that. How could a team in Winnipeg get less fans that Phoenix does now?

Dallas is one of the biggest cities in the USA and has a great history of being a dominant team for 10 years and they were giving seats away and still not selling out this year.

If having a team in Winnipeg devalues the league as you suggest, what about cities that don't give a **** about hockey and never sell out. Besides, who really cares what an outsider thinks of the NHL as long as the quality of play is good and teams are making money. (which many AMERICAN teams aren't)

dmacin2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.