HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Toews, Wirtz, and Bettman

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-05-2012, 05:31 PM
  #176
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madgoat33 View Post
when are there only 5000 people inthe arena?

besides, this is chicago and if attendance did drop to 5000, it would be 5000 die hards and we enjoy our booze
Going back to the initial discussion that the Hawks never lost money. When they were not drawing anyone + no t.v., there is a good chance they were. Especially when payroll started to escalate. There was a lag until attendance caught up, t.v. revenues, ect.

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 05:43 PM
  #177
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,559
vCash: 10592
Why did they dump Gilmour plus cash plus our best young player for nothing if they were making money?

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 06:38 PM
  #178
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
While I don't think Wirtz is losing money I don't think it's as out of the question as some on here. Running a hockey team or any professional sports team requires a hell of a lot more money then most realize. For most of the people who do it it's done because they love the sport and not because it's something they can make money doing, especially a sport like hockey.

So while Wirtz might not be losing money, he might be, and he certainly isn't raking in the profit and claiming to be losing money.
So true. It is laughable to read all this crap about revenue from Fehr, and the players are buying into it. Revenue generated is not the same as profit... duh. A team like Chicago should be making money no matter what, even if they don't make the playoffs there should be a positive margin after selling out every home game. That is what business that has invested miillions, is all about, even in bad times. Fehr's in a dream world, if he thinks the owners are going to come close to giving up what he seems to want. They'll keep the players locked out indefinitely and I'm sure Bettman has told Fehr that many times behind closed doors. And he is not bluffing. Fehr is!

BobbyJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 06:50 PM
  #179
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,559
vCash: 10592
I agree on some points but not in relation to Wirtz, that's tin foil hat territory.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 06:57 PM
  #180
TwistedWrister90
Registered User
 
TwistedWrister90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 4,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
The Hawks would always trump attendance up to 12,000 or more but the place was empty.
True story. I don't know if it was as low as 5000, but I remember games when like half the sections in the 200 and 300 levels were completely empty.

TwistedWrister90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 09:36 PM
  #181
zytz
lumberjack
 
zytz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,798
vCash: 500
I don't think I buy that the Hawks still lose money, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were barely turning a profit. Honestly all the money in the AHL is hard to factor in for me.

However, I would believe the org is still in the negative in terms of net revenue over time. All those negative years will take some time to overcome.

zytz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 11:09 PM
  #182
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
I love the guy who is spouting on with random facts with no proof is now the one demanding proof from other people.

It's the ultimate troll move.

They blast your argument demanding facts and then give no facts of their own while making ridiculous claims and their proof is that they are smarter and know more then any of us.

AWESOME!
So, asking for proof that televised home games garner more interest while defending Bill Wirtz and the way he ran his team thru out his tenure up until the internet exploded, when he never had a problem not providing home games on televsion while protecting his STH's, with proof from that perspective being he, you know, never put home games on TV up until he died, when he never once complained about financial loss, went half on a super arena that makes tons of money on parking and consessions alone outside of a ticket purchasing public?

The proof, is right there. He didnt change. Not one bit up until he died.

Now, show me where putting home games on TV has made the Hawks better right in the face of yet another lock out. When Rocky Wirtz has cried poor countless times thru the media even with 108,000 TV's turned onto his product in a city of 9.8 million. Show me proof that the Hawks are breaking even without some sort of speculative consipracy that Rocky is just saying this and that to justify being part of another lockout in less then a decade for a palrty sport in the States that is just hanging on by a thread that has die hards pointing to small media statistics that are the so low from the get go even a minute jump up would seem impressive and "table turning" while an inconic team such as the Cubs, has numbers dwindle down to the point that people are actually worried it might be a trend when reality says its just a bump in the road.

So again, proof?

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 11:10 PM
  #183
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
SO all your proving is that the NBA is a more popular sport then the NHL.

Wow maybe you can also prove to me water is wet and the sky is blue and many other facts that everyone already knows to be true.
Wait, you are not implying that the Hawks are more popular then baseball in Chicago, are you?

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-05-2012, 11:30 PM
  #184
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Provide some of your own for a change. Asking me for proof is about akin to asking someone for proof that water's wet. Uh.... it's pretty common knowledge, dude, and there have been countless articles and books written about the troubles that the Blackhawks faced under the old regime.
Link to these articles and books? Hopefully you provide something other then the book written by the hack who wrote the Blue Line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
They're not scraps compared to the rest of the league, as the website indicated.
Which is, compared to other sports...nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Plus, as others have pointed out, the Hawks' measly 100,000 is about on par with the Cubs and Sox, if not higher.
Which is nothing compared to the Bulls and Bears, both of which play in the winter at the exact same time as the Hawks. Now, even though its an excuse, but the Cubs were horribad and nobody watches the White Sox. The Hawks, coming off of a Cup win a couple years ago and still a playoff team beating a team that used to draw 8.0's but are in such horrific shape I wouldnt blame anybody or force even my worst enemy to watch the Flubs the way they are structured at the moment, is the best the Hawks can do?They should be dominating TV and the interests of the sport fans in Chicago yet arent. A Derrick Rose-less Bulls team will safely put up 6's while the Hawks, if they even play this year, will be putting up comfortable 2.5's everybody will point to as some sort of win refering to the ratings of last year not understanding that those numbers, locally, mind you, are terrible.Reruns of the Simpsons draw 4.0 locally, just as a reference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Are you suggesting that their TV contracts are a bad idea, too?
Bsaeball? Baseball's TV contract is far beyond the NHL dollar wise and more ad revenue considering more people watch baseball. How is that bad?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
And, again.... how is not making money off of TV better then making money on TV?
Huh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post

So you have to go back 15-20 years for when Dollar Bill's team was doing well?
And you can go back minutes with Rocky saying he is losing money. Your point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Good show. What about the late 90s and 00's when the team drew nothing and weren't even as big as an afterthought in the city?
And with a Cup, they are still an after thought in the city. Your point, again?


Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Again, proof please. You claiming that he somehow made money, despite very public admissions that the Wirtz empire had to repeatedly loan money to the team to even make payroll, doesn't cut it.
Oh, the 40 million dollars Rocky took out? Was this after the internet took off? I think so. But again, it still didnt stop Bill Wirtz from not televising home games, nor did televising home games suddenly make Rocky money.

Lockout?

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 01:45 AM
  #185
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
So, asking for proof that televised home games garner more interest while defending Bill Wirtz and the way he ran his team thru out his tenure up until the internet exploded, when he never had a problem not providing home games on televsion while protecting his STH's, with proof from that perspective being he, you know, never put home games on TV up until he died, when he never once complained about financial loss, went half on a super arena that makes tons of money on parking and consessions alone outside of a ticket purchasing public?

The proof, is right there. He didnt change. Not one bit up until he died.

Now, show me where putting home games on TV has made the Hawks better right in the face of yet another lock out. When Rocky Wirtz has cried poor countless times thru the media even with 108,000 TV's turned onto his product in a city of 9.8 million. Show me proof that the Hawks are breaking even without some sort of speculative consipracy that Rocky is just saying this and that to justify being part of another lockout in less then a decade for a palrty sport in the States that is just hanging on by a thread that has die hards pointing to small media statistics that are the so low from the get go even a minute jump up would seem impressive and "table turning" while an inconic team such as the Cubs, has numbers dwindle down to the point that people are actually worried it might be a trend when reality says its just a bump in the road.

So again, proof?
You prove that McD and not Wirtz is the reason that games on on TV and after you give proof that internet viewership is the reason games where put on TV.

I want proof too.

Sir Psycho T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 05:17 AM
  #186
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,221
vCash: 500
I like that Toews said this...

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 06:22 AM
  #187
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
I like that Toews said this...
Why what does it prove, other then that all the players care about is winning the media hype.

Betteman could just as easily call the players greedy morons who think they're worth the biggest % of team sports revenue in the world during an economic crisis while playing what is the 5-6th most popular sport in the world.

Sir Psycho T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 09:55 AM
  #188
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: Fiji
Posts: 25,458
vCash: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
Link to these articles and books? Hopefully you provide something other then the book written by the hack who wrote the Blue Line.


Which is, compared to other sports...nothing.

Which is nothing compared to the Bulls and Bears, both of which play in the winter at the exact same time as the Hawks. Now, even though its an excuse, but the Cubs were horribad and nobody watches the White Sox. The Hawks, coming off of a Cup win a couple years ago and still a playoff team beating a team that used to draw 8.0's but are in such horrific shape I wouldnt blame anybody or force even my worst enemy to watch the Flubs the way they are structured at the moment, is the best the Hawks can do?They should be dominating TV and the interests of the sport fans in Chicago yet arent. A Derrick Rose-less Bulls team will safely put up 6's while the Hawks, if they even play this year, will be putting up comfortable 2.5's everybody will point to as some sort of win refering to the ratings of last year not understanding that those numbers, locally, mind you, are terrible.Reruns of the Simpsons draw 4.0 locally, just as a reference.
Bsaeball? Baseball's TV contract is far beyond the NHL dollar wise and more ad revenue considering more people watch baseball. How is that bad?

Huh?


And you can go back minutes with Rocky saying he is losing money. Your point?

And with a Cup, they are still an after thought in the city. Your point, again?



Oh, the 40 million dollars Rocky took out? Was this after the internet took off? I think so. But again, it still didnt stop Bill Wirtz from not televising home games, nor did televising home games suddenly make Rocky money.

Lockout?
Okay, you're just being nonsensical at this point. In the course of your posts, you've defended the elder Wirtz for not letting Hawks games be on TV because it wouldn't make enough money to make it worthwhile and yet still admitted that making some money off TV is better than nothing (not to mention putting an unnecessary hassle on fans that actually want to follow the team on TV), complained about Hawks local TV ratings despite being on par if not higher than two more popular teams in Chicago just because they're not as popular as two other more popular teams, provided no evidence to back up any of your claims while requiring other people to do the legwork for you for universally agreed upon facts, likened to the current ownership fibbing about losing money to the previous ownership actually losing money in droves due to lacking a TV contract and drawing for **** at the gate with significantly lower ticket prices than now, and completely ignored how much more popular the Blackhawks have gotten over the past several years largely due the Rocky and McD abandoning the idiotic policies of Dollar Bill.

Nothing you're saying makes sense, and a lot of what you're saying is incredibly inconsistent, too.

As for proof, fine....

Quote:
Rocky's father, Bill Wirtz, ran the team from 1966 until his death in 2007. Earlier in 2007, Bill Wirtz told the Toronto Star that he had lost $191 million on the team in the last 10 years, including $31 million in the 2006-07 season.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...orp-bill-wirtz

Business and other organizational ineptitude leading the Hawks to be named the worst franchise in all sports (opinion, of course):
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...417_blackhawks

Quote:
The Blackhawks’ transformation from moribund franchise to elite team is a repudiation of Bill Wirtz’s old-school, pre-free agency style of doing business, which made him increasingly unpopular with fans. He would not televise home games and stuck stubbornly to an ancient ticket policy that crimped team revenue.
Quote:
“I’d say, ‘Dad, we’re losing generations of fans by not televising home games,’ ” he said. “He said it wouldn’t be fair to our fans with season tickets. But we’d gotten down to 3,400 season tickets, which meant maybe 1,500 to 1,700 fans. So we weren’t televising home games for 1,700 people? Why bang your head against the wall?”
Quote:
He had to use $40 million in family business money to finance players’ salaries through the 2006-7 season. Fans had been abandoning the team for years; attendance was lingering close to the bottom of the league.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sp...irtz.html?_r=0

The transformation of the Hawks from a joke to a profitable (albeit lying about said profits) team with a championship under their team was downright meteoric. The Hawks are going to be pointed at for years as the premier example of a sports franchise managing to turn things around in astonishingly fast fashion. Ignoring that is just laughable.

The Hawks are #5 in Chicago right now..... a few years ago, they probably weren't even in the top 20 most popular teams in any sport in their own town. Heck, the freaking AHL Wolves were more popular than the Hawks.


Last edited by No Fun Shogun: 10-06-2012 at 10:02 AM.
No Fun Shogun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 11:58 AM
  #189
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Okay, you're just being nonsensical at this point. In the course of your posts, you've defended the elder Wirtz for not letting Hawks games be on TV because it wouldn't make enough money to make it worthwhile and yet still admitted that making some money off TV is better than nothing (not to mention putting an unnecessary hassle on fans that actually want to follow the team on TV), complained about Hawks local TV ratings despite being on par if not higher than two more popular teams in Chicago just because they're not as popular as two other more popular teams, provided no evidence to back up any of your claims while requiring other people to do the legwork for you for universally agreed upon facts, likened to the current ownership fibbing about losing money to the previous ownership actually losing money in droves due to lacking a TV contract and drawing for **** at the gate with significantly lower ticket prices than now, and completely ignored how much more popular the Blackhawks have gotten over the past several years largely due the Rocky and McD abandoning the idiotic policies of Dollar Bill.

Nothing you're saying makes sense, and a lot of what you're saying is incredibly inconsistent, too.

As for proof, fine....

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...orp-bill-wirtz

Business and other organizational ineptitude leading the Hawks to be named the worst franchise in all sports (opinion, of course):
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...417_blackhawks




http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sp...irtz.html?_r=0

The transformation of the Hawks from a joke to a profitable (albeit lying about said profits) team with a championship under their team was downright meteoric. The Hawks are going to be pointed at for years as the premier example of a sports franchise managing to turn things around in astonishingly fast fashion. Ignoring that is just laughable.

The Hawks are #5 in Chicago right now..... a few years ago, they probably weren't even in the top 20 most popular teams in any sport in their own town. Heck, the freaking AHL Wolves were more popular than the Hawks.
Good post. It's amazing how many here forget how low the Hawks were in this town at one point. The Wolves were outdrawing them.

I also just think you're getting trolled. It's not even worth it, the guy makes absolutely no sense.

It also gets to my point of the team losing money. Especially when salaries began to escalate but the fans and money had yet to return. I'm pretty sure many people here have not run their own business. Just because the doors are open doesn't mean it's always making money. They can be a huge financial burden.


Last edited by HawksFan74: 10-06-2012 at 12:22 PM.
HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 12:14 PM
  #190
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,184
vCash: 500
Well, I think No Fun Shogun successfully ended this silly argument with that one post. Props.

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 12:18 PM
  #191
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Why what does it prove, other then that all the players care about is winning the media hype.

Betteman could just as easily call the players greedy morons who think they're worth the biggest % of team sports revenue in the world during an economic crisis while playing what is the 5-6th most popular sport in the world.
Both the players and the owners care about winning in the media. Its why Rocky cries poor.

Billionaires fighting millionaires. Neither side has my sympathy, just give me my hockey.

DisgruntledHawkFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 12:21 PM
  #192
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Good post. It's amazing how many here forget how low the Hawks were in this town at one point. The Wolves were outdrawing them.

I also just think you're getting trolled. It's not even worth it, the guy makes absolutely no sense.

It also gets to my point of the team losing money. Especially when salaries began to escalate but the fans and money had yet to return.
As often as its stated, I doubt the wolves ever outdrew the Hawks. On my phone though, and its possible im wrong.

DisgruntledHawkFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 12:35 PM
  #193
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
As often as its stated, I doubt the wolves ever outdrew the Hawks. On my phone though, and its possible im wrong.
Sure they did, they were a playoff team for years while the Hawks were doing nothing.

HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 12:39 PM
  #194
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Sure they did, they were a playoff team for years while the Hawks were doing nothing.
The gap between a mediocre top flight hockey team and a very good minor league team should be obvious.

DisgruntledHawkFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 01:05 PM
  #195
Rexy
Registered User
 
Rexy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Okay, you're just being nonsensical at this point. In the course of your posts, you've defended the elder Wirtz for not letting Hawks games be on TV because it wouldn't make enough money to make it worthwhile and yet still admitted that making some money off TV is better than nothing (not to mention putting an unnecessary hassle on fans that actually want to follow the team on TV), complained about Hawks local TV ratings despite being on par if not higher than two more popular teams in Chicago just because they're not as popular as two other more popular teams, provided no evidence to back up any of your claims while requiring other people to do the legwork for you for universally agreed upon facts, likened to the current ownership fibbing about losing money to the previous ownership actually losing money in droves due to lacking a TV contract and drawing for **** at the gate with significantly lower ticket prices than now, and completely ignored how much more popular the Blackhawks have gotten over the past several years largely due the Rocky and McD abandoning the idiotic policies of Dollar Bill.

Nothing you're saying makes sense, and a lot of what you're saying is incredibly inconsistent, too.

As for proof, fine....

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...orp-bill-wirtz

Business and other organizational ineptitude leading the Hawks to be named the worst franchise in all sports (opinion, of course):
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...417_blackhawks




http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sp...irtz.html?_r=0

The transformation of the Hawks from a joke to a profitable (albeit lying about said profits) team with a championship under their team was downright meteoric. The Hawks are going to be pointed at for years as the premier example of a sports franchise managing to turn things around in astonishingly fast fashion. Ignoring that is just laughable.

The Hawks are #5 in Chicago right now..... a few years ago, they probably weren't even in the top 20 most popular teams in any sport in their own town. Heck, the freaking AHL Wolves were more popular than the Hawks.
The fans came back because the team was winning, not because the games were magically on TV. The old barn was sold out in the 80's and 90's because it was a good team.

Rexy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 01:16 PM
  #196
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rexy View Post
The fans came back because the team was winning, not because the games were magically on TV. The old barn was sold out in the 80's and 90's because it was a good team.
It was a combination of factors IMO.

1. New ownership. Bill had given himself and the team a really bad reputation in town. Shortly after his death everybody wondered if the Hawks would become relevant again.

2. The addition of Toews, Kane, Keith. Huge FA signing in Campbell.

3. The success of the team combined with the ability to actual watch them.


Last edited by HawksFan74: 10-06-2012 at 01:29 PM.
HawksFan74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 01:17 PM
  #197
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rexy View Post
The fans came back because the team was winning, not because the games were magically on TV. The old barn was sold out in the 80's and 90's because it was a good team.
It wasn't just fans who departed returning to the team...it was the growth of the fanbase...including introducing younger fans to a team they probably had never paid attention to previously...and having games on t.v. definitely contributed to that.

UsernameWasTaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 01:25 PM
  #198
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,559
vCash: 10592
Yeah, it's not that they forgot, it's that they never knew to begin with...pretty damn clear.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 02:42 PM
  #199
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Okay, you're just being nonsensical at this point. In the course of your posts, you've defended the elder Wirtz for not letting Hawks games be on TV because it wouldn't make enough money to make it worthwhile and yet still admitted that making some money off TV is better than nothing (not to mention putting an unnecessary hassle on fans that actually want to follow the team on TV),
I notice the spin doctoring, yet see thinly veiled assumptions to what was actually said.

Bill Wirtz didnt have to put home games on TV. He protected his season ticket holders who were his bread and butter in his business model. He didnt have the production costs associated with broadcasting home games and focused on keeping costs low for tickets so, thru actually going to the games, he could increase his fanbase. It worked, like it or not, during the 80's and early 90's until, which I have stated countless times, the internet exploded. Now, this is only home games, not away games which he did put on TV, and radio which the games were on and Wirtz paid for out of his own pocket, purchasing the air time outright until McD came into the fold. I have asked for proof that suddenly with home games on TV, where is this increased fanbase, and have been told that 108,000 viewers, a quarter of the UC, is a sudden step up and that the casual fan is now watching home games on TV and the outpouring of financial justification just by the mere token of putting home games on televsion has placed the beloved Blackhawks on the same level as the Cubs, who had posssibly fielded one of the weakest teams in the last decade this year without looking at how the Bulls, another winter sport and the Hawks direct competition for the casual fans hard earned dollar, not only have been honestly selling out the UC without padded stats to pacify advertising, but have also been drawing TV ratings that are almost triple what the Hawks can produce.

Now, I dont believe in revisionist history, but will indulge in it just this once to prove a point. A point that might be hard for some here , but as a strong person, will guide the masses to the all illuminating light of reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
complained about Hawks local TV ratings despite being on par if not higher than two more popular teams in Chicago just because they're not as popular as two other more popular teams,
Huh? I read that twice and still dont understand.

The simple fact that the Hawk ratings, 108,000 viewers is better then a horrible Cub team that usually draws 7.0's or the White Sox who nobody watches, means what, exactly?

That the Cubs are bad? Yes. That the possibility of it ever happening again? Most definately not. There isnt one person in the city of Chicago who will put the Hawks over the Cubs as a more viable team in terms of popularity and thats with McD running the marketing department. Throw out the simple fact that getting people to actually watch TV during the summer months is hard enough will only prove just how strong the Cubs are and that one year, a year in which they are horrible, no less, is just a simple mirage and wont keep advertisers from running to the Cubs brand with money in hand to advert while they are on TV. You cannot say the same thing about the Hawks. Not now and thats with winning the Cup, and if they do get somebody interested, that same prospective client wants either Toews or Kane while McD speculatively puts a Hawks jersey on them.

The Bulls? You know, that team that plays the same winter months that the Hawks do, put up triple the TV ratings. Lets not talk about them because the only excuse anybody could provide is that they are more popular even with, if reading some of the threads here in this forum, many want to proclaim the Hawks as a more popular team. I swear, I keep forgeting those 108,000 viewers, silly me. Putting the onus upon the fact that the Hawks, and hockey in general, is a niche sport that has limited, repeat, very limited gains in terms of popularity in the city of Chicago, and the fact that I see that the glass isnt half empty or half full, but just a glass with a small crack in it that will once in a while get half full, only to trickle out little by little just means I dont see the growth of hockey in the city of Chicago. Not gonna happen. Theres more options out there for the casual fans time and money. Wirtz saw this, Bill, and placed his priority on protecting his season ticket holders and shouldnt be villianized for doing what he thought was right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
provided no evidence to back up any of your claims while requiring other people to do the legwork for you for universally agreed upon facts,
The only "facts" anybody has provided in this thread is;

1. Bill Wirtz didnt put home games on TV
2. The Hawks average 108,000 fans watching games on TV
3. Rocky Wirtz is crying poor
4. The NHL is locked out with every owner crying poor

What hasnt be documented, is just how strong are those home game ratings compared to away games, what impact home games on TV have provided the Blackhawks in terms of popularity when compared to their main rival in the winter, the Bulls, they fall flat, and with all thses 108,000 fans on top of a sold out UC with patches of empty seats here and there, why in gods name is Rocky Wirtz crying poor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
likened to the current ownership fibbing about losing money
Wait, Rocky is lying about losing money?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
to the previous ownership actually losing money in droves due to lacking a TV contract
There has always been a national TV contract for the NHL. What are you talking about? Wirtz put away games on that were produced by another network and just purchased the rights and the air time. He was making stable money off of that exchange. How is that bad when he didnt have to share any revenue with anybody outside of purchasing air time, which was dirt cheap, and paying for a already produced signal that he surely got a tremendous discount from, speculatively, of course?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
and drawing for **** at the gate with significantly lower ticket prices than now,
When they were garbage? Like the Cubs right now? How about when they were good, thru the 80's and early 90's?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
and completely ignored how much more popular the Blackhawks have gotten over the past several years largely due the Rocky and McD abandoning the idiotic policies of Dollar Bill.
Where is this popularity? 108,000 viewers? It remains to be seen if the Hawks can keep this momentum, not popularity, but momentum, positive momentum, in tact when the wheels do indeed fall off and they are put in a position of rebuilding. There is a shroud of uncertainty surrounding this franchise and until seen, nobody can do nothing but speculate. But it sure must feel good pointing to a team built to contend and suddenly proclaiming just how popular a team is and pointing to low TV ratings for a cities most iconic franchise while they are, you know, rebuilding.

Now, I can go as far as say the Hawks are nothing but the flavour of the day right now in Chicago and not be too far off with such a statement. But the reality is, they are indeed a popular flavor, like a Culvers flavor of the day, that when all the winning stops and not even bad, but mediocrity suddenly starts to fester, they will be replaced on the bill board soon enough. And this "popularity" is nothing compared to the early 80's, when Wirtz wasnt showing home games on TV. simplier time perhaps....
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Nothing you're saying makes sense, and a lot of what you're saying is incredibly inconsistent, too.
Huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Um, ok? First off, its a news article and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Second, one of the first lines in this article states, sadly;
"Exactly how much money was lost is something team executives will not discuss."
So, right there, we are looking only one way, Tribune article with whom McD, who is quoted in said article, worked for for years with the disclaimer that they cannot talk about financial losses yet have no problem quoting another article from another paper about the losses Bill Wirtz suppossedly made. So proof in an article, from the Tribune no less, whom McD worked for for years, without any actual open book numbers to actually look at is just a puff piece and not actual proof.

Now, actual numbers would be proof, but then.....

Now, as a casual person, I have a hard time comprehending how losses of the fisical year were off limits yet there was no problem with Melissa Harris using an article from another paper to pronounce Bill's financial hardships. Just doesnt make sense, but thats just me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Business and other organizational ineptitude leading the Hawks to be named the worst franchise in all sports (opinion, of course):
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...417_blackhawks
Like you stated, opinion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sp...irtz.html?_r=0

The transformation of the Hawks from a joke to a profitable (albeit lying about said profits) team with a championship under their team was downright meteoric. The Hawks are going to be pointed at for years as the premier example of a sports franchise managing to turn things around in astonishingly fast fashion. Ignoring that is just laughable.
Where, again, is this profit when Rocky is crying poor, again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
The Hawks are #5 in Chicago right now..... a few years ago, they probably weren't even in the top 20 most popular teams in any sport in their own town. Heck, the freaking AHL Wolves were more popular than the Hawks.
The Wolves were never more popular then the Hawks.

So again, where is this proof?

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2012, 02:47 PM
  #200
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,700
vCash: 772
You don't know when to quit

If no one else replies, this nonsense will die...

IU Hawks fan is online now   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 08:18 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.