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.

Metro Seattle: NHL, NBA and Arena - Part IV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2012, 10:35 AM
  #51
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawa666 View Post
Have you ever heard of the Vancouver Canucks?
Go run a post on the Canucks board asking how many would make the trip down to Seattle if they were to get an NHL team and then ask yourself that question again.

I am going to ask it again ... Have any of you making these statements ever been to Seattle? Somehow I doubt it ...

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 10:59 AM
  #52
Bob1321
Registered User
 
Bob1321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
Quebec isn't ready yet either! When shovel hits dirt they will be closer. If the arena goes over $400MM who is going to cover those costs? The QC mayor is so worried about it he has appointed someone to oversee costs. Another $40MM soil issue and then what?
Its why they move 200 feet from the site, so no soil issue

I think you need to read the french article for more accurate info

Bob1321 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:02 AM
  #53
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob1321 View Post
Its why they move 200 feet from the site, so no soil issue

I think you need to read the french article for more accurate info
The point remains ... When they start digging at that point QC will be closer. Until then, they are in essentially the same place as Seattle.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:05 AM
  #54
Bob1321
Registered User
 
Bob1321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
The point remains ... When they start digging at that point QC will be closer. Until then, they are in essentially the same place as Seattle.

ehhhhhhh no lol

Money: Quebec = Done deal, Seattle = no money for now
Arena plan: Quebec = will be out by March 31, Seattle = ?


Seattle is one year behind QC

Bob1321 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:07 AM
  #55
Risiko
Registered User
 
Risiko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 1,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
Go run a post on the Canucks board asking how many would make the trip down to Seattle if they were to get an NHL team and then ask yourself that question again.

I am going to ask it again ... Have any of you making these statements ever been to Seattle? Somehow I doubt it ...
I grew up in Victoria and only recently moved to Vancouver. Everyone i've talked to would love An NHL franchise in Seattle.

There's a ferry that takes you directly from downtown Victoria to Downtown Seattle. I can guarantee you would get a packed boat for Games involving Vancouver and probably a ton of fans going down for weekend games. It's essentially the same travel time as getting to a Canucks game and in the end it'd be a lot cheaper. It's pretty difficult to obtain Canuck tickets and then have to pay the expensive downtown Vancouver prices for accomodation/food, which I might add, have to be booked pretty far in advanced for Victoria residents as going to a game is a 2-day event.

People here are starved for entertainment and especially good hockey. Victoria has one of the worst Teams in the WHL and yet they're averaging close to 6,000 fans a game and over 7,000 often on Friday and Saturday nights.





I

Risiko is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:15 AM
  #56
worstfaceoffmanever
What's the Pred say?
 
worstfaceoffmanever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,417
vCash: 500
If Jamison's group legitimately wants to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix, that leaves very few options beyond expansion. I think that's the NHL's ultimate goal, as evidenced by their proposed realignment which left seven teams in two of the conferences and eight in the others.

I wouldn't be the least bit opposed to that, myself.

worstfaceoffmanever is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:17 AM
  #57
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 maruk14 View Post
The point remains ... When they start digging at that point QC will be closer. Until then, they are in essentially the same place as Seattle.
Really? Who's going to own the team in Seattle? What's the NHL team's lease look like? How much is each level of government committed to spend on the arena? How much if anything will the NHL team pay for the construction of the NHL arena? Will the arena get built even if an NBA team is not first made available? Has said potential NHL owner been lobbying the NHL BOGs for years and is he willing to pay $170MM plus for the next team no questions asked? Has the potential NHL owner made arrangements to have a team in Seattle in short notice and playing out of a temporary facility that is approved by the NHL? Those issues are all pretty much settled in QC.

As for the comment above about people never having been to Seattle, I've been to the city many times. I have also visited Quebec City although less often. The NHL is far more popular in QC in my opinion.

As for the comment about mentioning QC in this thread: this thread is about Seattle's chances of obtaining an NHL team. Many people have stated it will be the Coyotes if that team needs to be relocated. QC is an issue for Seattle's chances of landing the next available NHL team and is thus a relevant issue as to when and how Seattle can obtain an NHL team. QC is a competitor and an obstacle to Seattle landing the next NHL team. That's just the reality whether you like it or not. The NHL will pick the best alternative. I'm putting my money on QC.

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:21 AM
  #58
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob1321 View Post
ehhhhhhh no lol

Money: Quebec = Done deal, Seattle = no money for now
Arena plan: Quebec = will be out by March 31, Seattle = ?


Seattle is one year behind QC
I don't understand why this keeps getting repeated. It's like if you say it over and over it must be true.

Have you heard of Don Levin?

And that 3/31 date is to see if QC can build the arena for $400MM which in today's climate can be tough to do. Like I said, far from a done deal.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:30 AM
  #59
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Really? Who's going to own the team in Seattle? What's the NHL team's lease look like? How much is each level of government committed to spend on the arena? How much if anything will the NHL team pay for the construction of the NHL arena? Will the arena get built even if an NBA team is not first made available? Has said potential NHL owner been lobbying the NHL BOGs for years and is he willing to pay $170MM plus for the next team no questions asked? Has the potential NHL owner made arrangements to have a team in Seattle in short notice and playing out of a temporary facility that is approved by the NHL? Those issues are all pretty much settled in QC.

As for the comment above about people never having been to Seattle, I've been to the city many times. I have also visited Quebec City although less often. The NHL is far more popular in QC in my opinion.

As for the comment about mentioning QC in this thread: this thread is about Seattle's chances of obtaining an NHL team. Many people have stated it will be the Coyotes if that team needs to be relocated. QC is an issue for Seattle's chances of landing the next available NHL team and is thus a relevant issue as to when and how Seattle can obtain an NHL team. QC is a competitor and an obstacle to Seattle landing the next NHL team. That's just the reality whether you like it or not. The NHL will pick the best alternative. I'm putting my money on QC.
Again ... For about the 4th time in this thread. Don Levin has said on numerous occasions he is interested in owning an NHL team in Seattle, has visited the area to discuss it and has discussed it with the NHL. Why does this keep getting ignored? It has also been reported there is a second, independent group.

I never said QC isn't a competitor and I never said they won't ultimately get a team before Seattle. My point is to simply refute that QC is a done deal like has been stated in this thread ( about the Seattle bid, BTW, do you see a bunch of us trying to talk about Seattle in the QC thread in this forum ... No.). QC is not a done deal and they still have things they have to deal with just like Seattle.

One last thing ... The financing plan is in place. Once the committee studying it comes back in mid March we will know how it will shake out. $290MM in private money and $200MM in city/county backed municipal bonds paid back by arena generated revenues. Much stronger, IMO, than a 100% publicly funded plan.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:35 AM
  #60
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
Again ... For about the 4th time in this thread. Don Levin has said on numerous occasions he is interested in owning an NHL team in Seattle, has visited the area to discuss it and has discussed it with the NHL. Why does this keep getting ignored? It has also been reported there is a second, independent group.
No one is ignoring it. But none of these people/groups have officially put their hats in the ring so to speak and say they are actively pursuing NHL ownership. So until that time happens, Seattle does not have a ready-to-go owner at the moment. Claiming to be interested and actually stepping up and publicly declaring you are pursuing an NHL are two different things.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:47 AM
  #61
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
No one is ignoring it. But none of these people/groups have officially put their hats in the ring so to speak and say they are actively pursuing NHL ownership. So until that time happens, Seattle does not have a ready-to-go owner at the moment. Claiming to be interested and actually stepping up and publicly declaring you are pursuing an NHL are two different things.
Actually, everyone but you is ignoring it. The question keeps getting asked "who will own a team in Seattle"? And they do have an owner ready ... google Don Levin Seattle. The NHL knows him ... It's not like he is some pie in the sky owner. He already owns the Chicago Wolves.

There is also a second ownership group that has been reported. Just because someone isn't completely public about their pursuit doesn't mean it doesn't exist. For 9 months no one knew who Chris Hansen was and then he makes his intentions public and they aren't just starting the process ... They are ready to unveil the deal. At times it's best to keep stuff private until it's ready.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:51 AM
  #62
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
BTW ... To get this thread back on track about the Seattle Arena proposal, the 2nd of 3 committee hearings before they publish their findings on 3/16 is set for next Wednesday and Chris Hansen will be there.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:53 AM
  #63
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
No one is ignoring it. But none of these people/groups have officially put their hats in the ring so to speak and say they are actively pursuing NHL ownership. So until that time happens, Seattle does not have a ready-to-go owner at the moment. Claiming to be interested and actually stepping up and publicly declaring you are pursuing an NHL are two different things.
Perhaps they are waiting for the arena plan to get approved? No point in trying to actively pursue a team if there is no approved arena plan.

The league knows there are group(s) that want to lure a NHL team here. And those group(s) knows that they need an arena. The league isn't going to continue discussions with any of the Seattle NHL group(s) until the an arena plan is approved.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:01 PM
  #64
Mr. T
Registered User
 
Mr. T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post


Quebec Nordiques: Champions, 1976-1977.

The sign in question depicts the Stanley Cup.


Back on topic, Seattle needs to make this happen.

Mr. T is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:03 PM
  #65
Bob1321
Registered User
 
Bob1321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
I don't understand why this keeps getting repeated. It's like if you say it over and over it must be true.

Have you heard of Don Levin?

And that 3/31 date is to see if QC can build the arena for $400MM which in today's climate can be tough to do. Like I said, far from a done deal.
far from done deal hahahahahahahahaha

you are not in QC, if the project not go thrue, it will be the biggest fail in decades

Bob1321 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:06 PM
  #66
Shawa666
Registered User
 
Shawa666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Québec, Qc, Ca
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,310
vCash: 490
Perhaps this fan is refering to the 86cup that Kerry Fraser robbed us of?

Shawa666 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:09 PM
  #67
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,846
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
If the Coyotes ownership situation is still in flux and payments from the City of Glendale for running the Coyotes are drastically reduced next season, the Coyotes can be relocated to Seattle by the NHL, the owners of the franchise. The NHL can sign a deal to play out of either Key Arena or Tacoma Dome for the next year or two, while negotiating a sale of the team to the party that presents the best stadium plan.
What exactly do you think they've been doing for almost the past 3 years in Phoenix??? I'll cut the Seattle fans here some slack. You're probably new to this board, and don't know some of the background. The Phoenix soap opera has been going on approaching 3 years now see this summary for an idea of the drama. If commissioner Gary Bettman suggested another 2 years of NHL ownership and ongoing losses, he would very soon be ex-commissioner Gary Bettman.

The 29 owners want to get this mess off their hands NOW. With a potential lost season coming up, the owners would very much appreciate an extra 6 or 7 million dollars each in their pockets, from a sale to PKP. As for the "bidding war", 2 years in Key Arena is going to be a $60 million financial bath. Throw in $10 million interest expenses per year for 2 years on the NHL's line-of-credit. You're talking $250 million for the franchise JUST FOR THE NHL TO BREAK EVEN versus $170 from PKP this spring. Does anybody seriously believe that somebody would pay $250 million for an NHL franchise in Seattle???

I've always advocated sending the Coyotes to QC at the end of this post-season, and awarding Seattle a franchise for 2015-2016. The franchise would be subject to revocation if there's no new arena by 2017. This avoids 3 years in Key Arena, and $100 million in losses that will weigh down the team down the road. It'll also give the NHL some flexibility. If the Islanders' arena fiasco isn't solved by then, they relocate to Seattle. Otherwise Seattle gets an expansion team.

knorthern knight is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:09 PM
  #68
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
The point remains ... When they start digging at that point QC will be closer. Until then, they are in essentially the same place as Seattle.
Tell me, when is the shovel hitting the ground in Seattle? Quebec City starts digging this summer...

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:10 PM
  #69
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 9,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowe View Post
1.) While it may be true, I'd like a more concrete source other than Don Cherry.

2.) Note that it specifies game day revenues. What are the top overall revenue producing teams?

There are more factors at play here than tickets sold. Yes, they do drive a good chunk of revenue, but there is a reason why the whole league isn't in Canada.
True... it was from a thread that's currently on page six, dealing with ticket revenue. So you're right, not overall revenue, but in a gate-driven league ticket revenue is a major factor. And considering how much more the Canadian teams are making in ticket revenue on average than the U.S. teams, the Don Cherry number doesn't seem so far-fetched to me.

Ugmo is online now  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:32 PM
  #70
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Tell me, when is the shovel hitting the ground in Seattle? Quebec City starts digging this summer...
We don't know when shovel to ground is going to happen. They aren't going to start building the arena until team or teams are secured. Speculation has been going on that they will start as soon as a NBA team is secured.

The agreement in the deal is city/county won't provide their share of the cost of the arena until Hansen does and Hansen won't provide his portion of the cost until a team(s) is/are secured. They aren't going to do what KC did with their arena.

The big issue with seattle's arena since it involves city bonds it has to be I-91 compliant (aka must show profit if public investment is involved)

If there isn't any team(s) secured and they build it anyways then its imo not compliant with I-91 since majority of the revenue from the arena will be coming from NBA/NHL.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:37 PM
  #71
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Tell me, when is the shovel hitting the ground in Seattle? Quebec City starts digging this summer...
Great ... Go talk about it in the QC thread from here on out and we will talk about the Seattle Arena and NHL possibilities for a Seattle team in the Seattle nhl and arena thread. Easy ...I am done with everything else in this thread and the circular arguments.

Yes, we have an arena plan, yes, we have a prospective owner (s). Yes, our project is moving forward.

At this point I hope Phoenix makes a nice cup run.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 12:54 PM
  #72
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Tell me, when is the shovel hitting the ground in Seattle? Quebec City starts digging this summer...
Tell me when a Quebec City based NHL team is playing its next home game there.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 01:04 PM
  #73
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Tell me when a Quebec City based NHL team is playing its next home game there.
Quebec City is getting a new arena, Seattle? In Seattle they get an arena only if they get a team... Almost blackmailing the NHL... Gary does not like to be blackmailed in giving teams. Just trying to put things in perspective to all Seattle people. You guys just aint ready for the Coyotes this summer. I am trying to prepare you guys for a dissapointement. And if the Coyotes stay we will all be dissapointed...

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 01:34 PM
  #74
justincredible
Registered User
 
justincredible's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 34
vCash: 500
Personally i'd like to see Seattle get the next team. The northwest is lacking NHL hockey, and the northeast has too many teams already.

justincredible is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 01:40 PM
  #75
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Quebec City is getting a new arena, Seattle? In Seattle they get an arena only if they get a team... Almost blackmailing the NHL... Gary does not like to be blackmailed in giving teams. Just trying to put things in perspective to all Seattle people. You guys just aint ready for the Coyotes this summer. I am trying to prepare you guys for a dissapointement. And if the Coyotes stay we will all be dissapointed...
Do you have any idea on how difficult it is to get anything build sports related facilities the state of Washington built. Quebec City doesn't have to deal with I-91 like Seattle has to. How are they suppose to pay off the 200m in bonds if there is no team or teams coming here. Hansen has a right to want a return on his investment.

Seattle isn't blackmailing the NHL since they aren't the only league Seattle is trying to lure a team. They want the NBA back and the NHL well knows that if Seattle wants a NBA team again they are going need a new arena.

Hansen will be at the NBA owners meeting in April with hopefully an approved plan. We are hoping that construction will start as soon as they secure an NBA team and that may or may not be happening this year. The big issue is what happens if they secure a NHL team first before the NBA.


Last edited by gstommylee: 03-04-2012 at 01:47 PM.
gstommylee is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:43 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.