HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

5 of top 6 teams in ticket Revenue are Canadian...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2012, 01:13 PM
  #76
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
Actually, I think the Golden Horseshoe would be a much better comparable than the GTA.

The Greater Toronto Area had a 2006 population of 5,555,912, but only covered 2,750.6 sq mi. No metropolitan area above (New York-Miami) or immediately below (Detroit-Seattle) have an area less than 5,000 sq mi, double what Toronto covers.

The Delaware Valley (Philadelphia) is the smallest (covering (5,118 sq mi), while Phoenix (16,573 sq. mi.) and Los Angeles (33,954 sq mi, larger than Ireland!) are the biggest.
I saw your earlier posts about area vs population density, however I don't believe those are the criteria used by the official compilers of the stats. You made the point that Canadian towns are more densely populated, but if you consider metro Phoenix, often cited as one of the most sprawled (as are many newer and western cities), you'd lose any semblance of a central or binding factor. You also wouldn't be able to say these are 4-5 distinct communities within what was earlier called metro Phoenix.

Thus I don't know that your Horseshoe argument really is applicable.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 01:44 PM
  #77
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I saw your earlier posts about area vs population density, however I don't believe those are the criteria used by the official compilers of the stats. You made the point that Canadian towns are more densely populated, but if you consider metro Phoenix, often cited as one of the most sprawled (as are many newer and western cities), you'd lose any semblance of a central or binding factor. You also wouldn't be able to say these are 4-5 distinct communities within what was earlier called metro Phoenix.

Thus I don't know that your Horseshoe argument really is applicable.
Even with these distinct communities, Toronto is still the cultural center of the region. Where do people in Niagara Falls go when they want to see concerts? Toronto. Professional sports? Toronto (and to a lesser extent, Buffalo). Live theatre? Toronto.

While there may not be much commuting going on between the two cities, communities in the Golden Horseshoe are still very much part of Toronto's sphere of influence so-to-speak.

And really, is the relationship between Toronto and Hamilton (considered separate markets) all that different than Baltimore and Washington (counted as one market)?

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 02:38 PM
  #78
Timmy
Registered User
 
Timmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,729
vCash: 500
The other thing stats don't necessarily reflect is accessibility. One sprawling metro may be better serviced by public transportation and good feeder routes to venues, while a more densely populated metro could be a traffic nightmare with no LRT and/or limited bus service to a stadium or arena, increasing travel times and decreasing convenience and accessiblity.

Somebody living further away (as the crow flies) from an arena in Market A than somebody in Market B, but is able to get there more quickly, may be more inclined to attend an event. The geographical size of the footprint of a metro shouldn't be the only consideration for comparative purposes.

Timmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 04:28 PM
  #79
peter sullivan
Winnipeg
 
peter sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Of course it is consistent with the salted-earth theory.

Tampa Bay drops because of the Koules-Barrie fiasco
Dallas falls as the NHL took control of the day-to-day operations as Hicks goes to bankruptcy
Phoenix somewhat respectable in last place in '07-'08 can't lift up from their ownership problem
Islanders fans long-suffering continues at the gate
Atlanta becomes decimated...

Teams with the same revenues on '07-'08:
Washington, where Leonsis committed to build a winner and signs superstars to long-term contracts
Chicago, who shakes the chains of Dollar Bill as Rocky apparently knows how to run a franchise.

It's funny how those upticks occur with ownership that attempts to field a good team.
well, you could also look at it from the other side.....ownership issues happen because the market wont buy the product....why dont we ownership instability in calgary, edmonton, toronto and ottawa?.....they dont appear to be 'attempting to field a good team'.

as for ASG and atlanta....they made the playoffs and finished first in the division the year between the 2 years shown with $488 and $550 per game revenues.

peter sullivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 04:39 PM
  #80
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
Even with these distinct communities, Toronto is still the cultural center of the region. Where do people in Niagara Falls go when they want to see concerts? Toronto. Professional sports? Toronto (and to a lesser extent, Buffalo). Live theatre? Toronto.

While there may not be much commuting going on between the two cities, communities in the Golden Horseshoe are still very much part of Toronto's sphere of influence so-to-speak.

And really, is the relationship between Toronto and Hamilton (considered separate markets) all that different than Baltimore and Washington (counted as one market)?
I understand your point, but mine is that you're attempting to redefine metro per your own definition, not by the official criteria (which I'm too lazy and limited in time to look up). I do believe that the commuting to/from work aspect is one general consideration, where the growth happened outwards from the financial center. The Horseshoe is more like a distinct group of cities (on the outward edges) that grew towards the center, as that grew outwards. A filling in happened between the spaces, if you will.

Washington DC is a bad example any way you slice it though. It's like no other in that it's a city and counted as a state, but certainly is very strictly defined land-wise. Most people who work in DC don't live there. The growth probably happened outwards from that center too, as there really was no other. It can't really be like a 'real' city anyway.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:35 PM
  #81
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I understand your point, but mine is that you're attempting to redefine metro per your own definition, not by the official criteria (which I'm too lazy and limited in time to look up). I do believe that the commuting to/from work aspect is one general consideration, where the growth happened outwards from the financial center. The Horseshoe is more like a distinct group of cities (on the outward edges) that grew towards the center, as that grew outwards. A filling in happened between the spaces, if you will.

Washington DC is a bad example any way you slice it though. It's like no other in that it's a city and counted as a state, but certainly is very strictly defined land-wise. Most people who work in DC don't live there. The growth probably happened outwards from that center too, as there really was no other. It can't really be like a 'real' city anyway.
The official definition clearly isn't a universal thing though. It varies from region to region, and especially, from country to country.

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 05:38 PM
  #82
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawker14 View Post
What's the problem in St. Louis and Nashville ?
among the lowest ticket prices in the league, for Nashville. the ownership and front office have made getting people in the door a priority-- and from that regard, it's working. They're on track for their seventh straight sellout tomorrow night, and are reportedly giving away fewer tickets than ever...but rather than letting seats go completely unsold, they discount the lower-demand games just to get people in the door and hooked. It's a strategy that seems to be working, little by little.

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 07:24 PM
  #83
blues10
Registered User
 
blues10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrytrotzsneck View Post
among the lowest ticket prices in the league, for Nashville. the ownership and front office have made getting people in the door a priority-- and from that regard, it's working. They're on track for their seventh straight sellout tomorrow night, and are reportedly giving away fewer tickets than ever...but rather than letting seats go completely unsold, they discount the lower-demand games just to get people in the door and hooked. It's a strategy that seems to be working, little by little.
It is certainly a great strategy to get butts in the seats but having those butts return when ticket prices are raised to a sustainable business model level is a different story.

Quote:

$10 Game-Day Special | Daily's Super Tuesday | College Nights | Military Discount | McDonald's Family Four Packs
http://predators.nhl.com/club/page.h...9230#DayOfGame

Season tickets are a great deal! tickets can be had upstairs for $19 a game but the best option is for $55.00 a ticket - sit in the mezzanine-the adult option is all you can eat popcorn, hot dogs, nachos an entree item and BEER!

Who owns the concessions in Nashville?

http://predators.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=67956

I hope this model works for the Preds and is sustainable over the long term.

blues10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 07:53 PM
  #84
jigglysquishy
Registered User
 
jigglysquishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
The GTA (Toronto and Oshawa CMAs) was 6,100,000 in 2010.

The GTHA (Toronto, Oshawa and Hamilton CMAs) was 6,850,000 in 2010.

The Golden Horseshoe (all of Southern Ontario) was 8,500,000 in 2010. 9,000,000 if you want to include Windsor.

My source is Stats Can

The thing we need to consider about the Golden Horseshoe is that it really supports three teams. I think we underestimate the support Detroit and Buffalo get.

I have a cousin who lives in London and she has Buffalo season tickets. She guess that probably 40% of Buffalo season ticket holders are from north of the border. I'd love to see some stats for both Buffalo and Detroit on Canadian ST holders.

jigglysquishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 08:29 PM
  #85
blues10
Registered User
 
blues10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigglysquishy View Post
The GTA (Toronto and Oshawa CMAs) was 6,100,000 in 2010.

The GTHA (Toronto, Oshawa and Hamilton CMAs) was 6,850,000 in 2010.

The Golden Horseshoe (all of Southern Ontario) was 8,500,000 in 2010. 9,000,000 if you want to include Windsor.

My source is Stats Can

The thing we need to consider about the Golden Horseshoe is that it really supports three teams. I think we underestimate the support Detroit and Buffalo get.

I have a cousin who lives in London and she has Buffalo season tickets. She guess that probably 40% of Buffalo season ticket holders are from north of the border. I'd love to see some stats for both Buffalo and Detroit on Canadian ST holders.
If I recall correctly the stat for Buffalo was 6000-8000 STH with Canadian adresses.

blues10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 08:30 PM
  #86
DungeonK
Love Thy Neighbor
 
DungeonK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 5,617
vCash: 500
Sky-high demand = customer ****

DungeonK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 08:33 PM
  #87
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I understand your point, but mine is that you're attempting to redefine metro per your own definition, not by the official criteria (which I'm too lazy and limited in time to look up). I do believe that the commuting to/from work aspect is one general consideration, where the growth happened outwards from the financial center. The Horseshoe is more like a distinct group of cities (on the outward edges) that grew towards the center, as that grew outwards. A filling in happened between the spaces, if you will.

Washington DC is a bad example any way you slice it though. It's like no other in that it's a city and counted as a state, but certainly is very strictly defined land-wise. Most people who work in DC don't live there. The growth probably happened outwards from that center too, as there really was no other. It can't really be like a 'real' city anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
The official definition clearly isn't a universal thing though. It varies from region to region, and especially, from country to country.
From the US Census site:

Quote:
A CBSA is a geographic entity associated with at least one core of 10,000 or more population, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured by commuting ties.

The standards designate and delineate two categories of CBSAs: Metropolitan
Statistical Areas and Micropolitan Statistical Areas.

...

Metropolitan Statistical Area—A Core Based Statistical Area associated with at least one urbanized area that has a population of at least 50,000. The Metropolitan Statistical Area comprises the central county or counties containing the core, plus adjacent outlying counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with the central county or counties as measured through commuting.
So commuting patterns is the key factor in the US definition.

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 09:29 PM
  #88
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigglysquishy View Post
The GTA (Toronto and Oshawa CMAs) was 6,100,000 in 2010.

The GTHA (Toronto, Oshawa and Hamilton CMAs) was 6,850,000 in 2010.

The Golden Horseshoe (all of Southern Ontario) was 8,500,000 in 2010. 9,000,000 if you want to include Windsor.

My source is Stats Can

The thing we need to consider about the Golden Horseshoe is that it really supports three teams. I think we underestimate the support Detroit and Buffalo get.

I have a cousin who lives in London and she has Buffalo season tickets. She guess that probably 40% of Buffalo season ticket holders are from north of the border. I'd love to see some stats for both Buffalo and Detroit on Canadian ST holders.
Windsor is really the only area that is realistically home to Wings STH's. I think we decided there were up to 300K folks in the Windsor metro area, while Detroit Metro is some 5+ million. I've never actually seen any figures, but considering that 64% of the Detroit STH base is corporate (auto industry no doubt), I don't believe it's as significant as Buffalo's, which admittedly has one of the lowest corporate STH bases (was it 15% or closer to 30%?).

It's 2+ hours from London to Detroit, and a border crossing. It can't be that much of a factor. As most of the Canadians here know, there's not much between Windsor and London either. That has to be one of the most BORING drives ever.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
From the US Census site:

So commuting patterns is the key factor in the US definition.
Thank you for supporting my laziness, whilst managing to show I was right to boot!

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2012, 10:14 PM
  #89
jigglysquishy
Registered User
 
jigglysquishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Commuting patterns is also the key factor in Canadian metros.

The problem is that Canada refuses to consolidate CMAs (metros over 100,000). By the proper definition Oshawa and Toronto should be the same CMA, but Stats Can won't do so because we can't actually lose a CMA.

Also Hamilton and Toronto destroy all our rules for CMA placement. A place like Oakville would be in both the Hamilton and Toronto CMA by commuting patterns, but that obviously doesn't work.


I'm a huge transit/urban planning enthusiast. If you want to compare the Canadian CMA to something it would be the American MSA. The American CSA doesn't have a Canadian equivalent, though there has been a push to do so in recent years.

jigglysquishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 03:12 AM
  #90
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,939
vCash: 500
At the end of the day, this is essentially meaningless.

At best, it's "Duh" statement: Canadian teams and large northern markets in the US (who've had teams the longest!) have the highest gate receipts! Go figure! Some teams that are lower than expected based on those factors are fielding bad teams! Those higher than expected currently have winning teams!


The fact of the matter is, this is only part of the revenue.
A team like the Islanders, for example, have a TV deal that basically matches their gate receipts. It's top 5 in the league at worst. If they had a new arena, they'd be fine.

Those with bad gate numbers in big markets help the NHL cover 37% of the population of USA/Canada in the TV package, so they're helping the league bring in revenue.

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 03:52 AM
  #91
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJet View Post
Bet if Winnipeg's capacity was 20,000 we'd be around number one or something like that, the Jets are around 20, but if we had 20,000 we'd be in the top 5, really we are in the top 5 though
Not sure I follow what you are saying. I estimate the Jets make over $1.2 million per game in gate receipts this season, and that does not include any suite revenue. That would easily place Winnipeg in the Top 10 of the recent list.

As to your suggestion that 20,000 capacity would move Winnipeg up the list: perhaps in the short term, but perhaps not in the long term. When there is less of something (tickets) and the product is in high demand (NHL hockey) you can often charge a lot more for it.

It is possible to make more with a smaller arena than a larger arena. The last thing you want is a situation where there are too many tickets available -- that leads to a lower average ticket price or worse empty seats. David Thomson, the Jets co-owner, discussed this point shortly after the NHL returned to Winnipeg. He stated that the MTS Centre was a good size for the market and that it could have been built even smaller! It appears that a smaller capacity is something Thomson wanted as his company was involved with the MTS Centre from the beginning.


Last edited by MAROONSRoad: 01-05-2012 at 04:28 AM.
MAROONSRoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 04:16 AM
  #92
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
At the end of the day, this is essentially meaningless.
False.

Quote:
At best, it's "Duh" statement: Canadian teams and large northern markets in the US (who've had teams the longest!) have the highest gate receipts! Go figure!
Yes, that's become accepted since the figures have leaked out. One sure couldn't make that argument four or five years ago without being ridiculed.

Quote:
Some teams that are lower than expected based on those factors are fielding bad teams! Those higher than expected currently have winning teams!
Lower than expected by who ? Nashville and Tampa were pretty competitive last year, I was shocked to see their last year's gate figures.


Quote:
The fact of the matter is, this is only part of the revenue.
At ~44%, the most significant of any, by far.

Quote:
A team like the Islanders, for example, have a TV deal that basically matches their gate receipts. It's top 5 in the league at worst. If they had a new arena, they'd be fine.
That depends on how the arena is capitalized. If it was that easy, the owner would just write a cheque for ~$300 million for that guaranteed profit.

Quote:
Those with bad gate numbers in big markets help the NHL cover 37% of the population of USA/Canada in the TV package, so they're helping the league bring in revenue.
No they don't. Many of those markets you speak of have poor viewerships. Whether a thousand people in Arizona or Florida watch a Sunday Flyers-Blackhawks' game matters little if there's an NHL team in their market or not. That's what the viewership will be.

And it matters little to the National advertisers.

Hawker14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 10:47 AM
  #93
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawker14 View Post
False.

Yes, that's become accepted since the figures have leaked out. One sure couldn't make that argument four or five years ago without being ridiculed.


Lower than expected by who ? Nashville and Tampa were pretty competitive last year, I was shocked to see their last year's gate figures.


At ~44%, the most significant of any, by far.


That depends on how the arena is capitalized. If it was that easy, the owner would just write a cheque for ~$300 million for that guaranteed profit.


No they don't. Many of those markets you speak of have poor viewerships. Whether a thousand people in Arizona or Florida watch a Sunday Flyers-Blackhawks' game matters little if there's an NHL team in their market or not. That's what the viewership will be.

And it matters little to the National advertisers.
Good points. Ask the Devils if their new arena is hurting or helping at this point.


Regarding the ridicule, absolutely. We had the Great Third Debate when someone leaked that Canadian teams together accounted for a third or more of league or gate receipts. Preposterous! was the rallying call. There's a healthy dose of revisionism now, thanks to Phoenix and Atlanta, and some not-so-lustrous sales and franchise value falls.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:13 AM
  #94
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Thank you for supporting my laziness, whilst managing to show I was right to boot!
Maybe.

But, to salvage some of my argument, the Golden Horseshoe could still be considered a part of Toronto's market, which would be one of the largest in North America.

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 11:37 AM
  #95
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
Maybe.

But, to salvage some of my argument, the Golden Horseshoe could still be considered a part of Toronto's market, which would be one of the largest in North America.
I understand your point.

Canada is somewhat unique in how the population is concentrated-- along the US border and then in higher density around the major cities. I'm sure some of that also has to do with having far less population than the US, which grew so rapidly over the same time period that sprawl at a greater rate was somewhat unavoidable. (Factor in the two greatest economic expansions the world has ever seen, the 1840-1910 and then the Post War Boom, and its clearer.)

It was apparent to even the most casual of observers that a second team in the Golden Horseshoe benefits from the synergies and proximity to Toronto itself.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2012, 07:39 PM
  #96
archangel archangel
Registered User
 
archangel archangel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,320
vCash: 50
gotta factor in that canadian teams also have the highest ticket prices

archangel archangel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2012, 03:11 AM
  #97
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Around 9 million people live in the so-called Golden Horseshoe, a densely populated region centered around the GTA -- indicated by the red/green coloured areas in the below map. The region has one NHL team and the highest concentration of hockey fans in the world. If the same area with the same demographic existed anywhere in the USA you can bet several NHL teams would already be located there (in an effort to boost USA TV ratings, etc). My theory: since the region exists in Canada the NHL has had less of an interest in having additional franchises there and has allowed the Leafs to have their way and monopoly.


MAROONSRoad 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 07:02 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.