I understand business and the Wirtz model was not a business model at all.
Really? Making money isnt a what he should have been doing? What business have you studied?
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84
It was suicide for spite.
Really? Then how did he own the team to the point that after he passed away he left it to his very own child? Where is this phantom "suicide" when not once did he ever cry poor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84
Nobody bought Hawks merch,
Funny considering with very limited marketing, the Hawk jersey was one of the best sellers thru out its existance; http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4...l-time/page/11
Granted thats the Bleacher Report, but was taken from actual data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84
very few people went to the games,
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84
they never sold out,
Last edited by DisgruntledHawkFan: 10-05-2012 at 01:48 PM.
He was a good businessman in the liquor industry, not in the realm of professional sports.
How so? Wirtz ran this team brilliantly. How is making people pay for services that he provided, the Blackhawks, instead of giving it away for free with free television not something to be impressed by? He made people pay money to enjoy this team and didnt stray from that model until his death. Wirtz knew that the audience for hockey in Chicago is limited. Limited to the point that in a town with iconic teams such as the Bears, Bulls, and Cubs, there wasnt enough money to go around, and thats a flagship, original six team owner for such forthsite. He was right on the money considering the television ratings for the Hawks are putrid and there isnt anything thats making people turn the channel. He knew this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun
If he was, he would've made the identical common sense moves that his son immediately implemented upon taking over and stopped the hemorrhaging of money in a second, most importantly not being a stubborn buffoon regarding televising games despite it being apparently clear since the 60's and 70's that it helped grow revenues for professional sports teams.
McD "implemented" televising home games only because making feeble amounts of revenue with low rung advertisment was better then recieveing no money while die hards watched games on internet streams for free. And I highly doubt Bill lost a dime of money while using his business model while here you have Rocky, who put home games on TV mind you, crying poor. "Growing Revenue"? First find people who actually want to learn and understand hockey then throw blame on a person who actually understood this market better then the common fan.
Ratings say nobody cares about the Hawks. Now, if this was the Bears.......
Wirtz ran this team stupidly, locked into a twisted mindset that showing the games on TV would mean less people coming to the games. All that actually resulted was many people in Chicago not even knowing that the Blackhawks existed, as well as pretty consistent low attendance despite being a huge market. Wirtz lucked out that the Hawks drafted or managed to trade for some fantastic talent in the 80's and 90's, and the Stadium was pretty full as a result. A good team will do that (and also, TV was not a particularly huge deal back then. Many games were not televised for every team). Once the Hawks' on-ice play began to suffer and TV's importance increased, the fanbase decreased. Fans left in droves.
The Wolves' popularity peaked as a result. Blackhawk fans were sick of being treated like trash, and they left.
Wirtz forwent a huge amount of potential revenue by running the organization like a complete *******.
Do you understand how much money is made from television alone?
He had a great business mind in general. It certainly did not transfer to how he ran the Hawks, however. Unfortunately for the team's diehard fans.
I don't get this whole 'loyalty to the fans' thing. So because Rocky was smart and starting televising games (which he did, Martini, not McD. He started doing it before he hired him, I prove that with links in a thread probably a half year back) to actually grow a fan base and make people see how awesome going to a game in person is he's the bad guy for not only caring about the 8,000 or so season ticket holders he had? That's just silly, IMO.
McD did it, I proved it with a link from the Hawks actual site. Hawks get nowhere near a superstation nor one of the most important radio channels in the U.S without McD, end of. The only thing Rocky Wirtz did was step back and allow somebody with a proven track record on how to market and make money do what he does best.
Is McD spending a ton of Rocky's money? And is it all for naught considering the ratings and losing interest in the Hawks? Maybe, but time will tell more so then speculation on a message board.
Not true. Rocky took over prior to the 07-08 season after Bill's death just before the season was set to start. TV deals were set for the most part. Rocky fought to get as many Hawk home games on TV as possible that year, there were more than a few articles about it. McDonough was not with the team that season.
It was clear to everyone that the Hawks were going to be on full-time home TV the following year. Say what you will about Rocky (I can never trust the name "Wirtz," personally), but there is no denying he wanted to televise the home games. Sure, he probably did it for greedy rather than altruistic reasons - what businessman would say otherwise? But the fact is that he was the one to do it.
locked into a twisted mindset that showing the games on TV would mean less people coming to the games.
People going to the games was his bread and butter, ya know. He also put away games on TV for free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
All that actually resulted was many people in Chicago not even knowing that the Blackhawks existed, as well as pretty consistent low attendance despite being a huge market.
And guess what, even with a Cup, home games on TV, and McD, many people in Chicago still dont know the Hawks exist. Now maybe I am just a child of ESPN, but hockey will never be considered a major sport in my opinion. It will never be amongst the big three in city that has three of the flagship franchises in all of sport with one of the original six hockey teams being second hand nothing to even a hapless Cub team that will never win a world series. You have to place hockey in a bracket of importance with sports such as Nascar, golf, and the WNBA, and even then Nascar and golf get huge ratings while, home gamed Hawks get peanuts. Granted the WNBA might be a bit of a stretch, but its in the same boat as to its growth is dependant upon percieved notions that television will make it bigger then it is.
It hasnt, and neither has hockey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
Wirtz lucked out that the Hawks drafted or managed to trade for some fantastic talent in the 80's and 90's, and the Stadium was pretty full as a result. A good team will do that (and also, TV was not a particularly huge deal back then. Many games were not televised for every team). Once the Hawks' on-ice play began to suffer and TV's importance increased, the fanbase decreased. Fans left in droves.
Um, ok....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
The Wolves' popularity peaked as a result. Blackhawk fans were sick of being treated like trash, and they left.
And even then, ticket prices were a fraction of hawks ticket prices which made it a more economicly feasable for the proverbial family of four to go out and enjoy a hockey game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
Wirtz forwent a huge amount of potential revenue by running the organization like a complete *******.
Proof?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
Do you understand how much money is made from television alone?
Do you understand how much money it costs to produce television?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
He had a great business mind in general. It certainly did not transfer to how he ran the Hawks, however. Unfortunately for the team's diehard fans.
Die hards are the Hawks only fans. This whole "Bill owed the fans home games on TV" is nothing but folly considering those who actually paid money to go out to the games were treated with respect and Wirtz protected those people like family.
Bill Wirtz didnt owe anybody a damn thing, and didnt give a damn what anybody said about him even until he died. That, in a nut shell, surely drives fans crazy. He was right, and felt in his mind he was right right up until he died. And, just looking at ratings, he actually was right, the whole time.
I don't for a second ever believe the Hawks lost one cent
Even during the lean years? With very low attendance, no local TV deal, and near-constant reports of barely making payroll and having to loan his team money? Seriously?
Nov 5th he announced they'd show some home games. It was an abbreviated scheduled due to logistics with CSN's schedule that wouldn't allow all of them at such short notice.
How so? Wirtz ran this team brilliantly. How is making people pay for services that he provided, the Blackhawks, instead of giving it away for free with free television not something to be impressed by? He made people pay money to enjoy this team and didnt stray from that model until his death. Wirtz knew that the audience for hockey in Chicago is limited. Limited to the point that in a town with iconic teams such as the Bears, Bulls, and Cubs, there wasnt enough money to go around, and thats a flagship, original six team owner for such forthsite. He was right on the money considering the television ratings for the Hawks are putrid and there isnt anything thats making people turn the channel. He knew this.
He made a very limited number of people pay money, and as a result the Blackhawks were near-constantly deep in the red according to essentially every report that's even been done of the old regime.
And what are you talking about? Hawks averaged over 100,000 viewers for their local broadcasts last year, which was good for second in the league when it comes to local television ratings in the United States (http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...N-ratings.aspx) and, guess what, it draws more fans in and helps drive ticket prices up, making more money for the team.
Quote:
McD "implemented" televising home games only because making feeble amounts of revenue with low rung advertisment was better then recieveing no money while die hards watched games on internet streams for free. And I highly doubt Bill lost a dime of money while using his business model while here you have Rocky, who put home games on TV mind you, crying poor. "Growing Revenue"? First find people who actually want to learn and understand hockey then throw blame on a person who actually understood this market better then the common fan.
Ratings say nobody cares about the Hawks. Now, if this was the Bears.......
So.... even if the Hawks got bad ratings, which they don't, you admit that getting a little would be better than getting nothing and yet you still think that Bill was right to take nothing and Rocky was wrong to take something?
Um.... what?
TV ratings are big, attendance is up in a huge way, ticket prices have increased, merchandise sales are almost assuredly also up, the parent company is no longer throwing millions upon millions of dollars at the team to keep them afloat, and yet.... somehow you're claiming that Dollar Bill ran the team better?
Even during the lean years? With very low attendance, no local TV deal, and near-constant reports of barely making payroll and having to loan his team money? Seriously?
Or are you talking under the current ownership?
Disregarding the arena rights, parking, and concessions as team revenue is disingenuous at best. Nobody would buy the Hawks without Wirtz' share in the UC being a part of the deal.
"Blackhawks Set Ratings Record: Regular season Chicago Blackhawks telecasts averaged a 3.11 rating on Comcast SportsNet Chicago this season, up 12% from last year (2.78), up 28% from 2010 (2.44), and the highest average for Blackhawks telecasts ever on the network. The previous record was set last season."
Not true. Rocky took over prior to the 07-08 season after Bill's death just before the season was set to start. TV deals were set for the most part. Rocky fought to get as many Hawk home games on TV as possible that year, there were more than a few articles about it. McDonough was not with the team that season.
What? Rocky started trying to get home games worked into CSN's schedule on Oct22, McD was hired on Nov. 22, a month later, and then and only then were games suddenly placed onto CSN's schedule. Where are these articles that you speak of because the dates I found were on just the Blackhawks web site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
It was clear to everyone that the Hawks were going to be on full-time home TV the following year.
Because of McD and only McD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
Say what you will about Rocky (I can never trust the name "Wirtz," personally), but there is no denying he wanted to televise the home games. Sure, he probably did it for greedy rather than altruistic reasons - what businessman would say otherwise? But the fact is that he was the one to do it.
He made a very limited number of people pay money, and as a result the Blackhawks were near-constantly deep in the red according to essentially every report that's even been done of the old regime.
And what are you talking about? Hawks averaged over 100,000 viewers for their local broadcasts last year, which was good for second in the league when it comes to local television ratings in the United States (http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...N-ratings.aspx) and, guess what, it draws more fans in and helps drive ticket prices up, making more money for the team.
So.... even if the Hawks got bad ratings, which they don't, you admit that getting a little would be better than getting nothing and yet you still think that Bill was right to take nothing and Rocky was wrong to take something?
Um.... what?
TV ratings are big, attendance is up in a huge way, ticket prices have increased, merchandise sales are almost assuredly also up, the parent company is no longer throwing millions upon millions of dollars at the team to keep them afloat, and yet.... somehow you're claiming that Dollar Bill ran the team better?
The new regime is also crying that they're bleeding money. Its crap.
The new regime is also crying that they're bleeding money. Its crap.
As long as they spend money on the team, keep the games on TV, and retain the talent, I can't complain that much. Although ticket prices are getting ridiculous.
What? Rocky started trying to get home games worked into CSN's schedule on Oct22, McD was hired on Nov. 22, a month later, and then and only then were games suddenly placed onto CSN's schedule. Where are these articles that you speak of because the dates I found were on just the Blackhawks web site.
Because of McD and only McD.
After listening to McD, who wouldnt?
It took the Hawks so long to air home games because local stations had contracts for the time slots already in place.
Are you honestly arguing that airing home games was some stroke of genius?
Disregarding the arena rights, parking, and concessions as team revenue is disingenuous at best. Nobody would buy the Hawks without Wirtz' share in the UC being a part of the deal.
I'm not disregarding those as revenue streams in the least bit. Doesn't change the fact that having those doesn't really do you nearly as much when your barn's only half full.
Those are worth much, much more now that the Hawks pack the house, for obvious reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan
The new regime is also crying that they're bleeding money. Its crap.
I admit that it's crap, but I'll take a stupid fib like that over the previous regime having their heads up their keisters on just about everything.
What? Rocky started trying to get home games worked into CSN's schedule on Oct22, McD was hired on Nov. 22, a month later, and then and only then were games suddenly placed onto CSN's schedule. Where are these articles that you speak of because the dates I found were on just the Blackhawks web site.
The new regime is also crying that they're bleeding money. Its crap.
If it weren't for linkage, we'd never hear about it. But when the owners can sit down together and say "Hey, let's all count our money this way by removing this and paying rent to ourselves on that..." so when crunchtime comes (right now in a lockout) they can all claim phony losses and take more money out of the players pockets.
