HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Barclay's Center & Brooklyn/Queens Talk Part III

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-15-2012, 01:43 PM
  #26
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorwood View Post
You kind of make my point for me.

The HUB is probably more develop-able without the Islanders.

That's the wild card here.

But what you seem to do, is put aside the politics involved.

You can scream lost revenue all you want.

It can even be true.

What you need to comprehend that as far as the taxpayer (and voting public) is concerned IT DOES NOT MATTER.

You cannot use tax dollars for a new arena

You can use tax dollars or tax incentives to draw industry that creates jobs that are available to someone who is not an NHL player but is more than a beer vendor.

That's the reality in Nassau.

You tell me how the NVMC gets done without tax dollars. (Wang willing to put up or get investors) and I am all ears.

Threatening about lost revenue means nothing to the residents of Nassau who as of this year will live in a county with a reserve fund of ZERO.
Are you spun?

Seriously, you not only miss the point, you hit a martian on that one.

Nassau County will turn into Detroit if it does not get fixed. Nassau can't spend any more money, and that is because they cannot TAX any more money, and that means they need to make more money, not lose the substantial revenue they have from NYI.

Get it?

Without the Isles, the Hub MAKES LESS REVENUE FOR NASSAU. Nassau does not tax like the Fed and NYS do, they rely on different taxes.

If you have questions, ask. The Isles/Hub is a critical thing for Nassau and especially property tax rates.

As for using tax dollars, the County can still borrow money from NYS, but it has to be approved by NIFA, who would have to approve the measure to preserve the tax basis for Nassau who would have to (easily) prove that losing the main tenant in NVMC would have a crippling spiral effect on taxpayers who would be stuck picking up the revenue for the County via HIGER PROPERTY TAXES AND REDUCED SERVICES (like they aren't NOW!).

And, of course, Nassau will have to do this with a reduced budget to fund the borrowing (like it's possible - but they HAVE TO).

But if Wang comes in like a White Knight and funds the renovation, this is just pure good. Nassau will have to reward him amply to do so. And my point was this would be the means to a great, long term deal Wang can strike to be VERY profitable, ESPECIALLY when the local economy turns around.

And conversely, if the Isles leave and taxes go UP, the economy will see business pack up, not come into Nassau, and the economy will take a monumental LONG TERM HIT.

So vote everyone out, folks. There's a lot more at stake than your favorite hockey team; there are retirees forced to sell, schools who won't be able to operate, cops and fire laid off, property values that will drop significantly. It will be a crippling blow. All because our favorite (or least favorite, Ranger fans!) hockey team left Nassau.


Last edited by OlTimeHockey: 07-15-2012 at 01:59 PM.
OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 02:19 PM
  #27
HyeDray
HFB Partner
 
HyeDray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Hyde Park, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,898
vCash: 500
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/

HyeDray is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 02:39 PM
  #28
19 in a row
Registered User
 
19 in a row's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/
The October Barclay's game should be sold out one way or the other. However it won't necessarlly be a good gauge with how they would draw there. I bought 6 seats and the guys i sit next to bought 16. Neither of us will be able to have STs if they move there. It is a first time spectacle, a chance to see the Isles in a new arena and a potential destination. It is technically a Devils home game although they are promoting the Isles so there will be Devils fans there as well, as well as people who just want to see the arena.

Should be a fun night but I don't think that it will be the deciding factor in moving there or not.
I am not a fan of the move there but will go with an open mind hoping to be pleasantly surprised.

19 in a row is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 02:43 PM
  #29
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19 in a row View Post
The October Barclay's game should be sold out one way or the other. However it won't necessarlly be a good gauge with how they would draw there. I bought 6 seats and the guys i sit next to bought 16. Neither of us will be able to have STs if they move there. It is a first time spectacle, a chance to see the Isles in a new arena and a potential destination. It is technically a Devils home game although they are promoting the Isles so there will be Devils fans there as well, as well as people who just want to see the arena.

Should be a fun night but I don't think that it will be the deciding factor in moving there or not.
I am not a fan of the move there but will go with an open mind hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
THE GOOD NEWS: The spectacle will draw far more fans than Kansas City did.

OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 02:51 PM
  #30
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,413
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19 in a row View Post
The October Barclay's game should be sold out one way or the other. However it won't necessarlly be a good gauge with how they would draw there. I bought 6 seats and the guys i sit next to bought 16. Neither of us will be able to have STs if they move there. It is a first time spectacle, a chance to see the Isles in a new arena and a potential destination. It is technically a Devils home game although they are promoting the Isles so there will be Devils fans there as well, as well as people who just want to see the arena.

Should be a fun night but I don't think that it will be the deciding factor in moving there or not.
I am not a fan of the move there but will go with an open mind hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
I don't think the attendance at the Barclay's game will be the determining factor either.

I think Wang wants to see, what Nassau County's final offer is in 2015,then compare it to the Barclay's execs 2015 offer.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 02:55 PM
  #31
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,413
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/

All of the off ice turmoil has an impact on what can and cannot be done. Charles Wang — bad decisions and all — is not made of money. The losses continue to mount and at some point, he will either simply go broke or he will sell the team. Lots of fans — including me — would welcome a new owner but we also must be cautious in that desire. A new owner could move the team, cut costs a la Millstein/Gluckstern. The grass is seldom greener on the other side of the fence. Be very careful.

Good article HyeDray.


I do question how a new owner like Peltz, could cut costs a la Millstein/Gluckstern.
Wang's actual 2011-2012 payroll was $36m.The cap floor was $48m.How much less could Peltz have spent?

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 06:44 PM
  #32
19 in a row
Registered User
 
19 in a row's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/

Great article by the way. I think you hit the nail right on the head. One thing that is loud and clear to me is that as fans, we can't count on ownership or the politicians to bail us out, so all we can do is offer our support to this team so they stay somewhere local whether it be Nassau, Brooklyn, Queens or Suffolk, we need to show that this area is preferable to an owner versus Quebec, hamilton, seattle or Kc

19 in a row is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 07:47 PM
  #33
Steve55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/
Excellent article. I agree that Nassau is pretty much done since the offers have gotten worse since the referendum went down. As far as Brooklyn is concerned, an agreement could be reached sometime in 2015 as BC will still be there and there will be more certainty of how AY will be developed. (Wang can pay the 20% price of the development already constructed on top of other development that are given the green light). As with Queens, who knows what's going on? Any financial negotiations between them and the Isles will be kept under wraps until an agreement is reached (IF there is one). I think what Picker said back in February something has to be done in Nassau (or Uniondale) before the end of this year may have indicated the Isles would like to pursue a deal outside of Nassau AND Brooklyn.

Steve55 is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 09:12 PM
  #34
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve55 View Post
Excellent article. I agree that Nassau is pretty much done since the offers have gotten worse since the referendum went down. As far as Brooklyn is concerned, an agreement could be reached sometime in 2015 as BC will still be there and there will be more certainty of how AY will be developed. (Wang can pay the 20% price of the development already constructed on top of other development that are given the green light). As with Queens, who knows what's going on? Any financial negotiations between them and the Isles will be kept under wraps until an agreement is reached (IF there is one). I think what Picker said back in February something has to be done in Nassau (or Uniondale) before the end of this year may have indicated the Isles would like to pursue a deal outside of Nassau AND Brooklyn.
Are the offers getting worse or more feasible? Wang can't afford a new arena unless he gets a partner with big money to do a LHP. No LHP? Wang gets an arena paid for by taxpayers and he pays it back, or......our taxes go up. No? So we go from Billions to hundreds of millions.....now what if they came up with a $300M, 99 year lease and first right to develop in the future? Oh, that's AWFUL! So he only makes tens of millions instead of hundreds for a fraction of the outlay. Horrible.

Since the referendum, the only offers were bids that went south when Wang refused. And only a year's time. So what makes one think there won't be a more significant offer as the clock ticks closer, given Nassau's need to retain the team and resuling revenue? I'll tell you.

drama, drama, drama, drama, drama......

I hear if the next offer isn't solid, they move the team to Haiti and a baby penguin will be beaten.

OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 09:20 PM
  #35
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/

"… How far are you willing to go to save your hockey team? Talk is cheap.. that is all Islander fans have been doing. Through all of this frustration, are you willing to travel to Brooklyn on October 2, 2012?

the NHL brain trust is going to be watching that pre-season game very closely. They want to see what kind of response there will be from the fans. "

Nice job! Basically, if we want NYI to stay in NY then go to this game. If you don't want to have NYI in the area anymore then don't go.

You can bet the powers that be will be watching and making all kinds of judgements and decisions. A half empty arena could be the end of this franchise in NY.

Let's see if NYI fans can do something besides talk.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 09:42 PM
  #36
IslesFanatic
**** you SnoWang
 
IslesFanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,707
vCash: 500
I met a board member from NIFA the other day. He said there was "zero chance" the referendum would hve passed through NIFA even if the voters had voted yes. A lot of people here were saying that back then.

IslesFanatic is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 10:00 PM
  #37
macleod50
Registered User
 
macleod50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,120
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19 in a row View Post
The October Barclay's game should be sold out one way or the other. However it won't necessarlly be a good gauge with how they would draw there. I bought 6 seats and the guys i sit next to bought 16. Neither of us will be able to have STs if they move there. It is a first time spectacle, a chance to see the Isles in a new arena and a potential destination. It is technically a Devils home game although they are promoting the Isles so there will be Devils fans there as well, as well as people who just want to see the arena.

Should be a fun night but I don't think that it will be the deciding factor in moving there or not.
I am not a fan of the move there but will go with an open mind hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
I don't understand how people are still getting this wrong. The Islanders are the home team for this game.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ys-center.html

Quote:
The Islanders will be the home team in the preseason game on Oct. 2, according to a news release from the club. The National Basketball Association’s New Jersey Nets are set to move into the building, and become the Brooklyn Nets when the arena opens this September.

macleod50 is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 10:07 PM
  #38
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyeDray View Post
All the talk about Isles in brooklyn or staying Nassau is pointless in many ways. If we the fans dont show up in October in Brooklyn, Isles will more than likely be sold/moved out of the area.

http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/hyedray/46855/
Interesting article, but I disagree with the premise the team could move out of the NYC area.

First, the NHL doesn't want to relocate teams, they want to expand. $200M in expansion fees is more desirable than ~$60M in relocation fees. The NHL wants to expand to Quebec, Seattle or maybe Markham (longshot). The NHL also doesn't want to leave a market where a team can clearly be successful (fiscally) under the right circumstances.

Second, the cable deal is a huge incentive to keep the team local. I believe it's around $30M/yr. You're not going to get that in any other market out there. So that's another reason to figure out how to keep it in the NYC area.

IF NYI are put up for sale, it makes the most sense for the Barclays owners to buy it.

Their biz model is based on the basketball + concerts, etc. To add 41+ more dates a year is almost all gravy and margin for them, as their fixed and capital costs are modelled on the basketball / concert revenues. That's a huge incentive for them to own the team.

The cable deal would cover any financing costs of the purchase (assuming a reasonable price) and what's left after that + ticket revenue should make the hockey team a break-even. But they'll make millions more off all that extra building revenue (that's all gravy!).

I see no way that the Barclays group lets the team be sold out of the area. They have too much to gain by getting the team. I also can't see Wang as a tenant there, it's the same deal he has at Nassau, except a prettier building and maybe a couple dollars more.

It comes down to:

1) Will Wang get a real estate deal + arena on his dime (in Nassau or some other place)
2) Will he get a new, free building in Nassau
3) Will he sell to the Barclays group
4) Will he sell elsewhere
5) Will he be a tenant in Barclays

I would currently bet on #3 above and I would bet against #4 or #5 happening. The wild card, which is what he's been chasing for a decade, is #1 and #2.

I don't think a meaningless pre-season game at Barclays is a make-or-break in any way. It's preseason. Which may be washed out by the CBA crap anyway...

JKP is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 11:44 PM
  #39
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesFanatic View Post
I met a board member from NIFA the other day. He said there was "zero chance" the referendum would hve passed through NIFA even if the voters had voted yes. A lot of people here were saying that back then.
And no way it should have. I was hawking an unpopular opinion against it, stating the homeowner woud get hit with tax hikes and it was shady. NIFA, thankfully, would have stepped in.

It's our team, yeah, but how much more can a homeowner take in taxes? Someone said, "it's only $XX bucks" and I responded, "exactly. They shouldn't have to pay any more. Nassau should have CUT SPENDING to make up the difference.

OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-15-2012, 11:58 PM
  #40
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by macleod50 View Post
I don't understand how people are still getting this wrong. The Islanders are the home team for this game.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ys-center.html
I read the NJD (oops, not NYR!) were the home team back when. I think Bloomberg got it wrong or they changed it, because the announcement of the game shortly after had the Isles named the away team.

No matter. It's a neutral site game unless you're bound up on a message board losing hair.


Last edited by OlTimeHockey: 07-16-2012 at 02:01 AM.
OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 12:06 AM
  #41
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKP View Post
I also can't see Wang as a tenant there, it's the same deal he has at Nassau, except a prettier building and maybe a couple dollars more.
Umm......no. He does not get parking revenue (like there is any parking!) 365/yr, does not get concession revenue 365/yr, does not get ad revenue 365/yr, does not get all ticket revenue (minus broker) 365/yr, does not get all luxury box revenue to his own games, let alone 365/yr, does not get nearly that.

He gets his share of ticket revenue to HIS 41 nights (unless the seal is broken and the 6th sign comes and four horsemen ride from all four corners of the earth and the sea boils and the Isles make the playoffs), he gets an agreed upon share of concessions and advertising related to the NYI and possibly more (if Ratner is desperate), gets maybe some more but nothing compared to the post SMG deal revenue stake he does now.

The rest, I pretty much agree.

But Wang isn't gonna be given arena ownership llevel share for just moving his team there. Ratner probably makes more money with concerts, especially in Ranger Country.

OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 01:07 AM
  #42
19 in a row
Registered User
 
19 in a row's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by macleod50 View Post
I don't understand how people are still getting this wrong. The Islanders are the home team for this game.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ys-center.html
They must have switched it.. Originally isles site had it as devils home game which is what the reps told me on the phone the day after the game was announced. I posted the isles site the day it came out and it had isles as away on oct 2, now it shows them as home.. they are promoting it for the isles so I would assume that was the cause.. as i said before it is semantics, point is the game should sell out the way it is set up.

19 in a row is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 01:30 AM
  #43
19 in a row
Registered User
 
19 in a row's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Yep, I just looked and on 6/26 I posted that they had 3 home games from the Isles site. The reps had told me prior that they were playing it down but it was a devils home game.. everything to that point always said they were playing but never gave home team. When it came out Isles site originally showed that as Devils home game. Now the Barclay's game shows as a fourth home game for Isles. Slowly they seem to be moving in that direction it seems inch by inch as Nassau continues to bicker amongst themselves and offer no options. Oh well.

19 in a row is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 06:33 AM
  #44
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKP View Post
Interesting article, but I disagree with the premise the team could move out of the NYC area.

First, the NHL doesn't want to relocate teams, they want to expand. $200M in expansion fees is more desirable than ~$60M in relocation fees. The NHL wants to expand to Quebec, Seattle or maybe Markham (longshot). The NHL also doesn't want to leave a market where a team can clearly be successful (fiscally) under the right circumstances.

Second, the cable deal is a huge incentive to keep the team local. I believe it's around $30M/yr. You're not going to get that in any other market out there. So that's another reason to figure out how to keep it in the NYC area.

IF NYI are put up for sale, it makes the most sense for the Barclays owners to buy it.

Their biz model is based on the basketball + concerts, etc. To add 41+ more dates a year is almost all gravy and margin for them, as their fixed and capital costs are modelled on the basketball / concert revenues. That's a huge incentive for them to own the team.

The cable deal would cover any financing costs of the purchase (assuming a reasonable price) and what's left after that + ticket revenue should make the hockey team a break-even. But they'll make millions more off all that extra building revenue (that's all gravy!).

I see no way that the Barclays group lets the team be sold out of the area. They have too much to gain by getting the team. I also can't see Wang as a tenant there, it's the same deal he has at Nassau, except a prettier building and maybe a couple dollars more.

It comes down to:

1) Will Wang get a real estate deal + arena on his dime (in Nassau or some other place)
2) Will he get a new, free building in Nassau
3) Will he sell to the Barclays group
4) Will he sell elsewhere
5) Will he be a tenant in Barclays

I would currently bet on #3 above and I would bet against #4 or #5 happening. The wild card, which is what he's been chasing for a decade, is #1 and #2.

I don't think a meaningless pre-season game at Barclays is a make-or-break in any way. It's preseason. Which may be washed out by the CBA crap anyway...
It's NOT a meaningless pre-season game. Anything but. If there's no demand there's no supply. If there's no interest by fans then Ratner can get roller derby, ice capades, monster truck shows etc to fill 41 dates. It's a test to determine if it's worth it to Barclays/NHL and if it can acommodate a team as well as a symbolic statement event for the fans.

NYI doesn't have the best reputation for attendance. If I was a potential owner or arena operator I'd say a franchise on the brink of leaving their home and not knowing where they will be in 3 years and fans don't show up to the potential new arena?
If no interest no decision maker will care.

Everything else you said I agree with and hope #3 is what happens.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 09:52 AM
  #45
BorzNYI
Registered User
 
BorzNYI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
does anyone have a sub to SBJ... Botta has a new article on Bklyn/Isles with an interview with Bettman

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...ers-arena.aspx

By Christopher Botta, Staff Writer

Published July 16, 2012, Page 6
With only three years left on a lease that team officials insist they will not extend, and no deal for a new arena in sight, the New York Islanders’ best option to continue playing in New York in 2015 might be in Brooklyn, at the soon-to-open Barclays Center. The Islanders’ ...

what a tease...

BorzNYI is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 10:03 AM
  #46
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
It's NOT a meaningless pre-season game. Anything but. If there's no demand there's no supply. If there's no interest by fans then Ratner can get roller derby, ice capades, monster truck shows etc to fill 41 dates. It's a test to determine if it's worth it to Barclays/NHL and if it can acommodate a team as well as a symbolic statement event for the fans.

NYI doesn't have the best reputation for attendance. If I was a potential owner or arena operator I'd say a franchise on the brink of leaving their home and not knowing where they will be in 3 years and fans don't show up to the potential new arena?
If no interest no decision maker will care.

Everything else you said I agree with and hope #3 is what happens.
I have to disagree. You can't judge anything by crappy preseason hockey. Habs-Bruins doesn't even sell out our 10k seat metro centre for a preseason game here in Halifax.

You can't infer demand for a superior product by the demand for an inferior version of it. Surely to god, the multi-milllionaire business men involved in all this are smarter and basing decisions on a lot more than a crappy pre-season game.

JKP is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 10:26 AM
  #47
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKP View Post
I have to disagree. You can't judge anything by crappy preseason hockey. Habs-Bruins doesn't even sell out our 10k seat metro centre for a preseason game here in Halifax.

You can't infer demand for a superior product by the demand for an inferior version of it. Surely to god, the multi-milllionaire business men involved in all this are smarter and basing decisions on a lot more than a crappy pre-season game.
Neither the Habs nor Bruins are in need of a new arena or possibly a new city to play in in 3 years. This particular game is much more than a typical "crappy preseason" one - most anyone can see that. Especially the powers that be. Maybe since you're not in NY every NYI game seems like an away game but for many who live here the importance of keeping them in the area is magnified.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 11:02 AM
  #48
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
Neither the Habs nor Bruins are in need of a new arena or possibly a new city to play in in 3 years. This particular game is much more than a typical "crappy preseason" one - most anyone can see that. Especially the powers that be. Maybe since you're not in NY every NYI game seems like an away game but for many who live here the importance of keeping them in the area is magnified.
My point was it's a terrible product and fans and owners both know it. You'll get more people going to Barclays to see what it's like than you will people that want to see the game. These business men know that.

Furthermore, they will invest in market research to determine who will attend and how often. The attendance for a ****** preseason game in a novelty of a brand new arena is not going to make or break what's happening and will not be much of a factor at all in what ultimately prevails.

JKP is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 11:13 AM
  #49
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
Umm......no. He does not get parking revenue (like there is any parking!) 365/yr, does not get concession revenue 365/yr, does not get ad revenue 365/yr, does not get all ticket revenue (minus broker) 365/yr, does not get all luxury box revenue to his own games, let alone 365/yr, does not get nearly that.

He gets his share of ticket revenue to HIS 41 nights (unless the seal is broken and the 6th sign comes and four horsemen ride from all four corners of the earth and the sea boils and the Isles make the playoffs), he gets an agreed upon share of concessions and advertising related to the NYI and possibly more (if Ratner is desperate), gets maybe some more but nothing compared to the post SMG deal revenue stake he does now.

The rest, I pretty much agree.

But Wang isn't gonna be given arena ownership llevel share for just moving his team there. Ratner probably makes more money with concerts, especially in Ranger Country.
100% of crap is still crap, that's the problem with staying a tenant in a run-down Coliseum. My suspicion is taking a portion of the cut on 41 dates at the new place with all its extra revenue generating aspects is likely similar in terms of revenue and not enough either way to move the needle.

Being a tenant in the new building doesn't get him a payday. Being the primary tenant in the old, run-down building clearly doesn't get him a payday. Either way, being a tenant in Barclays doesn't make sense and staying the status quo doesn't make sense either. That's the point I was making. Neither drives enough cash to him.

JKP is offline  
Old
07-16-2012, 11:37 AM
  #50
BorzNYI
Registered User
 
BorzNYI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
Tweets from Botta on his Bklyn/Bettman story:

Bettman to @SBJSBD on possibly changing his tune from recent years on #Isles in Brooklyn: "I didn’t know anything about it." (cont.)


Bettman on Barclays: “It was still being built. I hadn’t been to see it, hadn’t done any market research. I hadn’t polled many fans.”

Botta ‏@ChrisBottaNHL
Now that he has seen Barclays Center, Bettman on #Isles in Brooklyn: "It's something we'd have to look at." @SBJSBD

BorzNYI 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 10:32 PM.

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.