HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Why Paul Kelly thinks expansion would help end NHL lockout

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-29-2012, 09:07 PM
  #26
NORiculous
Registered User
 
NORiculous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiuozu View Post
The players wanted to go to War, not a negotiating table.
Players ALWAYS want to go to war... Which is sometime very good and sometime very NOT!

NORiculous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:16 PM
  #27
Saintpatrick
Registered User
 
Saintpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryHabs View Post
Because he was being too nice to the NHL and was going to avoid a lockout.
Too bad he was fired if he still had his job we might be watching hockey right now..

Saintpatrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:27 PM
  #28
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,225
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Expand to Markham, Quebec, and relocate franchises to Seattle and Regina and you'll see HRR skyrocket.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:31 PM
  #29
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,509
vCash: 500
Expansion should be done when/if it's a good thing for the League. Not to solve a problem like this. Of course, both could possibly be true.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:36 PM
  #30
The Shrike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Expand to Markham, Quebec, and relocate franchises to Seattle and Regina and you'll see HRR skyrocket.
I was on board, until you said Regina.

The Shrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:39 PM
  #31
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,526
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Expand to Markham, Quebec, and relocate franchises to Seattle and Regina and you'll see HRR skyrocket.
Regina does not have the population to sustain a NHL team. Besides there are better options available in the US.

Bourne Endeavor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:41 PM
  #32
psychonaut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 500
This was posted under the article could be interesting but to hard for a short fix.

"I think expansion can work, but I'd propose a different model.

Create a 2nd tier league and institute relegation a la European soccer. There would be a 24-team NHL (top markets) and a 16-team NHL-B league (small market, top AHL markets, top expansion markets).

All 40 teams draft the same pool of players, not against one another like the WHA-NHL dynamic of the 70s. All players are part of the NHLPA and covered by a single CBA. The Cap would have to be figured out, but there would be two tiers - NHL Cap ceiling and NHL Cap floor, NHL Cap floor = NHL-B Cap ceiling and NHL-B Cap floor. By linking the two, the need to drop a ton of salary or pick up a ton of salary is somewhat mitigated - not necessarily eliminated. The NHL worst record is relegated down automatically. NHL-B best record is relegated up automatically. NHL-B playoff champion (or 2nd place if best record is also champion) is relegated up. 4-team 'back-door' playoff of bottom teams to determine second team relegated down from NHL. There would likely still be some revenue sharing to start since this would be the first time its ever been done in North America (by one of the big four) and the marketing would require some effort. The influx of 10 new teams above the AHL-level, though, would give the league a huge source of expansion revenue.

This system does a couple things. It allows teams with the financial capabilities to compete at a high level and forces them to do so or risk relegation. It also allows the NHL to test new markets without massive financial commitment. They can ultimately tinker with markets and find the best way to grow the league and sport by utilizing the NHL-B platform. It could be used to offer some ticket price relief while maintaining a high-level team (NHL-B team in near-Toronto area instead of a second NHL team - shift an NHL team to NHL-B out of New York market). At the same time, it expands the player pool and gives the players more options - big fish, small market or potential salary implications to stay in the NHL.

It has the potential to offer a lot of upside to both players and owners."

psychonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:45 PM
  #33
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,356
vCash: 500
1) How would expansion/relocation fees be included since they are one time fees?

2) A revised NHL map should have 2 more teams in Southern Ontario. There is no reason why Markham AND Hamilton shouldn't get teams. They are far enough apart that they have their own fan bases.

3) People need to stop talking about Regina and Halifax. Just stop it. You make us Canadians look stupid

aqib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:47 PM
  #34
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychonaut View Post
This was posted under the article could be interesting but to hard for a short fix.

"I think expansion can work, but I'd propose a different model.

Create a 2nd tier league and institute relegation a la European soccer. There would be a 24-team NHL (top markets) and a 16-team NHL-B league (small market, top AHL markets, top expansion markets).

All 40 teams draft the same pool of players, not against one another like the WHA-NHL dynamic of the 70s. All players are part of the NHLPA and covered by a single CBA. The Cap would have to be figured out, but there would be two tiers - NHL Cap ceiling and NHL Cap floor, NHL Cap floor = NHL-B Cap ceiling and NHL-B Cap floor. By linking the two, the need to drop a ton of salary or pick up a ton of salary is somewhat mitigated - not necessarily eliminated. The NHL worst record is relegated down automatically. NHL-B best record is relegated up automatically. NHL-B playoff champion (or 2nd place if best record is also champion) is relegated up. 4-team 'back-door' playoff of bottom teams to determine second team relegated down from NHL. There would likely still be some revenue sharing to start since this would be the first time its ever been done in North America (by one of the big four) and the marketing would require some effort. The influx of 10 new teams above the AHL-level, though, would give the league a huge source of expansion revenue.

This system does a couple things. It allows teams with the financial capabilities to compete at a high level and forces them to do so or risk relegation. It also allows the NHL to test new markets without massive financial commitment. They can ultimately tinker with markets and find the best way to grow the league and sport by utilizing the NHL-B platform. It could be used to offer some ticket price relief while maintaining a high-level team (NHL-B team in near-Toronto area instead of a second NHL team - shift an NHL team to NHL-B out of New York market). At the same time, it expands the player pool and gives the players more options - big fish, small market or potential salary implications to stay in the NHL.

It has the potential to offer a lot of upside to both players and owners."
relegation would never work in North American sports

__________________
Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:51 PM
  #35
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,175
vCash: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
relegation would never work in North American sports
It is cool to think about, but I completely agree.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 09:58 PM
  #36
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,686
vCash: 500
Promotion/Relegation talk can go into this thread:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...683958&page=16

KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 10:25 PM
  #37
octopi
Registered User
 
octopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 30,679
vCash: 703
expansion is a quick fix and could do more harm than good in the long run.

octopi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 10:44 PM
  #38
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,354
vCash: 500
How would this help the small and medium market teams at all? In fact it would probably hurt them more by raising the cap floor even higher. I have no problem with expansion, and I don't care where, but fix the finanicial situation of the league before adding more teams.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 10:47 PM
  #39
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Expand to Markham, Quebec, and relocate franchises to Seattle and Regina and you'll see HRR skyrocket.
All this would do is eventually replace the bottom teams with new ones. You have to improve revenue sharing or not have a cap (then see the same teams win all the time).

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 10:51 PM
  #40
algernon
Registered User
 
algernon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 600
vCash: 500
I'm worried that the NHLPA put their collective eggs into Lindros' scrambled basket.
Where are his enlightened proposals??

No pox wishing, but F you, NHLPA, if you are stoopid enough to leave a season (or month) on the table.

algernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 11:38 PM
  #41
Hamilton Tigers
Registered User
 
Hamilton Tigers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I mean zero disrespect to Hamilton, because I don't doubt how successful a franchise there would be...

... but if the NHL could accurately project revenues, we wouldn't be in this mess. They failed to project the 30 teams revenues out over the length of the CBA and see where the 57% HRR split CBA would end up in 2012.
In defense of Hamilton, (and I'm grasping at straws here to counter your point) the NHL isn't so much projecting revenues with Hamilton, as they are comparing the southern Ontario market with existing hockey markets.

Is that different enough?

But, aside from assigning them a ranking of 5th in revenue, is there really any doubt that Hamilton/southern Ontario is probably one of ,if not, the best hockey market in the world?

Hamilton Tigers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 11:56 PM
  #42
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Expansion would just exacerbate the current financial problems. Please could these people just read some economics 101 textbooks in their spare time.

DuklaNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:04 AM
  #43
Hamilton Tigers
Registered User
 
Hamilton Tigers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,293
vCash: 500
Only in the modern NHL is increased revenue a bad thing.

Hamilton Tigers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:14 AM
  #44
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrdevil View Post
Well expansion fees are not ever going to count as HRR because it is a one time fee. Basically revenues would go drastically up one year and then drastically back down which would cause havoc on the cap and result in high escrow.

However, a portion of expansion fees could be used as that "make good" fund in the owners proposal.
Not exactly. Expansion doesn't count as revenue, in part, to avoid the phenomenon you describe, but mostly because the owners just don't want it to.

Reason Kelly thinks that topic would end the lockout is because player gross goes up drastically, the cap rises moderately (if the teams are in healthy markets immediately), new jobs are created and the guys on the other side of the table don't lose a dime to give any of this to the PA.

From the standpoint of these two parties...both win big.

It's stuff like this why I've always liked this guy a lot. He was all over the headshot issue, too, before Eric Lindros and Andy Ference convinced everybody to fire him by locking them in a hotel auditorium until 4 am. Then everybody with a loud voice kind of forgot about it for 3 years.

Edit:

just read the article. He wants to use expansion windfall to bridge the monetary gap. That -might- work. It would all depend on if the owners thought they could raise the price on buyers by enough to still get what they want.


Last edited by billybudd: 10-30-2012 at 12:21 AM.
billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:29 AM
  #45
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I mean zero disrespect to Hamilton, because I don't doubt how successful a franchise there would be...

... but if the NHL could accurately project revenues, we wouldn't be in this mess. They failed to project the 30 teams revenues out over the length of the CBA and see where the 57% HRR split CBA would end up in 2012.
Nobody's business projections can foresee drastic, unpredictable currency fluctuations 7 years out. Economists who specialize in currencies can't predict that. Too many variables.

What would a sport W team in market X, with attendance Y make right now? Numbers are going to be pretty accurate. Like, nearly bullseye, almost no matter who's doing them.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:32 AM
  #46
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychonaut View Post
This was posted under the article could be interesting but to hard for a short fix.

"I think expansion can work, but I'd propose a different model.

Create a 2nd tier league and institute relegation a la European soccer. There would be a 24-team NHL (top markets) and a 16-team NHL-B league (small market, top AHL markets, top expansion markets).

All 40 teams draft the same pool of players, not against one another like the WHA-NHL dynamic of the 70s. All players are part of the NHLPA and covered by a single CBA. The Cap would have to be figured out, but there would be two tiers - NHL Cap ceiling and NHL Cap floor, NHL Cap floor = NHL-B Cap ceiling and NHL-B Cap floor. By linking the two, the need to drop a ton of salary or pick up a ton of salary is somewhat mitigated - not necessarily eliminated. The NHL worst record is relegated down automatically. NHL-B best record is relegated up automatically. NHL-B playoff champion (or 2nd place if best record is also champion) is relegated up. 4-team 'back-door' playoff of bottom teams to determine second team relegated down from NHL. There would likely still be some revenue sharing to start since this would be the first time its ever been done in North America (by one of the big four) and the marketing would require some effort. The influx of 10 new teams above the AHL-level, though, would give the league a huge source of expansion revenue.

This system does a couple things. It allows teams with the financial capabilities to compete at a high level and forces them to do so or risk relegation. It also allows the NHL to test new markets without massive financial commitment. They can ultimately tinker with markets and find the best way to grow the league and sport by utilizing the NHL-B platform. It could be used to offer some ticket price relief while maintaining a high-level team (NHL-B team in near-Toronto area instead of a second NHL team - shift an NHL team to NHL-B out of New York market). At the same time, it expands the player pool and gives the players more options - big fish, small market or potential salary implications to stay in the NHL.

It has the potential to offer a lot of upside to both players and owners."
Neither the players nor owners have proposed an offer this bad. This serves nobody's interests. For owners, it slashes half of their franchise values into ribbons and for players, it creates a perceived underclass.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:44 AM
  #47
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
Expansion would just exacerbate the current financial problems. Please could these people just read some economics 101 textbooks in their spare time.
Depends on how it was done. Expand into healthy markets and you can actually add new pillars to a league's financial strength. Especially if you also create rivalries such as placing markets in Houston (Dallas), Seattle (Vancouver) KC (St. Louis), Quebec (Montral) and Tor2 or Hamilton (TOR) might create. Then you potentially improve existing franchises by expanding.

Not every recent expansion has been a "project." No one really wants to put, say, the Lightning on the block. That's a franchise that works and it's obvious that it works. People just focus on the ones that have been struggling because it feeds into certain inherent prejudices of theirs.


Last edited by Dojji*: 10-30-2012 at 12:49 AM.
Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 12:53 AM
  #48
HockeyShack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
vCash: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 View Post
Why expand when you have a perfectly awful market "Phoenix" just waiting to be relocated or contracted?
Phoenix is the 6th largest us city. You want a hockey team there if you want a large us tv deal.

The need a team in Houston (4th largest).

HockeyShack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 02:01 AM
  #49
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 3,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Tigers View Post
In defense of Hamilton, (and I'm grasping at straws here to counter your point) the NHL isn't so much projecting revenues with Hamilton, as they are comparing the southern Ontario market with existing hockey markets.

Is that different enough? But, aside from assigning them a ranking of 5th in revenue, is there really any doubt that Hamilton/southern Ontario is probably one of ,if not, the best hockey market in the world?
Short story, no. There's no doubt Hamilton is not at worst, a top 12 market, and most likely in the 3-8 range somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
Nobody's business projections can foresee drastic, unpredictable currency fluctuations 7 years out. Economists who specialize in currencies can't predict that. Too many variables.

What would a sport W team in market X, with attendance Y make right now? Numbers are going to be pretty accurate. Like, nearly bullseye, almost no matter who's doing them.
I wasn't commenting really on Hamilton at all. I think if you were to take a comparable market/circumstance, it would be fair. For example: NYI in Barclays, probably the same as the Devils. Kansas City, probably same or 90% of St. Louis.
Houston, about the same or a little less than Dallas.

But my point was that any moron with access to decent data and Excel (like me!) can pull up team revenue numbers from two seasons five years apart, say "if the growth pattern continues…" and apply it to the CBA they just proposed.

For example, when they proposed the last CBA, there was 26 teams within the payroll range, 3 teams could easily spend to the cap, and one team that would struggle to hit the floor. Just looking at the Top, Middle and Bottom:

#1 TOR 42% growth from 2001-06; 2011 projection: $169 mil.
#15 LA 12% growth from 2001-06; 2011 projection: $93 mil.
#30 NYI 22% growth from 2001-06; 2011 projection: $68 mil.

That would have told me that at the end of 2012, we'd probably have a situation where the league average was $110 million, and the bottom 10 teams couldn't afford the damned floor. (It's actually 12). As you correctly said: We couldn't have predicted Toronto surging to $193 million, or Dallas going into the crapper, etc. But it's a ballpark).

Looking at 2006-11 and projecting that to 2017, if the last NHL proposal was approved, we'd have SIXTEEN teams that couldn't afford the floor by spending 50% of HRR on payroll and 21 teams below the midpoint.

Obviously, there's outside factors: EDM, CAL, DET and NYI will open new arenas. FLA (winning) PHX (sale), NASH and CBJ (new leases) have the ability to grow their revenues. But where is the GROWTH coming from in places like St. Louis, Anaheim, Pittsburgh or Ottawa?

Which is why I think this lockout is going horribly. Not because the two sides aren't talking, or are far apart. They're not talking and are far about about THE WRONG ISSUE.

It doesn't matter if we have teams in Hamilton, Quebec, Seattle or wherever. Because if they go through with their payroll tied to average revenue plan, PIT, OTT, WIN, MIN, SJ, LA, and EDM are going to join the list of have nots by 2020. We'll have 11 good markets and 19 ones that are struggling to keep up.


Last edited by KevFu: 10-30-2012 at 02:06 AM.
KevFu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 05:06 AM
  #50
Master Shake
Registered User
 
Master Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinsBtn View Post
What were the players thinking firing this guy?

He's all about creative solutions to grow the game that will help both sides.

A pox on the NHLPA.


because the NHLPA has been hijacked by extremists who were mad about being shouted down the last CBA

Master Shake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 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.