HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

How much would slightly bigger ice size actually cost?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-10-2013, 09:53 PM
  #1
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 500
How much would slightly bigger ice size actually cost?

I'd like to know what the cost would be of making the rink bigger by 2-4 feet (basically removing one row of seats). How much revenue would be lost as a % and what the cost might be for an arena to restructure itself (I was not aware that there would be a cost associated with this since the seats/boards are removable anyways).

The reason I ask is this....there are two main arguments against using bigger rinks.

1. Cost will be too high
2. Product will result in boring/slow European hockey

I disagree with the second one and I'm not sure about the first one. If the product is more entertaining then that might make up for the added expenses anyways.

In terms of the second point, making the rinks a bit bigger will allow players to use their speed without slow and tactical European hockey because it still wouldn't be European size. More than that, the coaching philosophy will not change because the NAmerican game since peewee is a north-south game not lateral. And NHLers are faster and play with more intensity to begin with. That's an argument for the Hockey forum though, I'd like to know more about it strictly from a business point of view.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 10:41 PM
  #2
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 60,503
vCash: 500
Loss of revenue... Perhaps 400 seats in the first two rows ($100 and up per seat).

New boards and glass.... $10k+
Expanded ice plant......... $25k+

Additional expense to make ice ??? (water, coolant, electricity, etc.)

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 10:55 PM
  #3
kalessin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Loss of revenue... Perhaps 400 seats in the first two rows ($100 and up per seat).

New boards and glass.... $10k+
Expanded ice plant......... $25k+

Additional expense to make ice ??? (water, coolant, electricity, etc.)
You hear this a lot but you're not really losing the premium seating because if you take out rows A-B then row C becomes the new row A... no?

kalessin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 11:14 PM
  #4
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Loss of revenue... Perhaps 400 seats in the first two rows ($100 and up per seat).
That must only be for bigger markets though. I doubt that teams like Tampa or Dallas are charging $100 even for those seats. Maybe there's a formula to this taking the avg of those seats from two teams in the bottom 10 in attendance, the 10 in between, and the 10 on top and averaging the number.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 11:38 PM
  #5
MarkhamNHL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalessin View Post
You hear this a lot but you're not really losing the premium seating because if you take out rows A-B then row C becomes the new row A... no?
no offence, but I can't believe you can even post that as being serious...

MarkhamNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 12:17 AM
  #6
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 60,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalessin View Post
You hear this a lot but you're not really losing the premium seating because if you take out rows A-B then row C becomes the new row A... no?
Where are you putting the folks in the last two rows of the lower bowl then?

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 12:23 AM
  #7
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Where are you putting the folks in the last two rows of the lower bowl then?
Then the actual question is how much would you lose in revenue due to one row or two rows of seats being lost in the top of the lower bowl.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 07:30 AM
  #8
powerstuck
User Registered
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Serbia
Posts: 2,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
That must only be for bigger markets though. I doubt that teams like Tampa or Dallas are charging $100 even for those seats. Maybe there's a formula to this taking the avg of those seats from two teams in the bottom 10 in attendance, the 10 in between, and the 10 on top and averaging the number.
The way most arenas are built you lose some ticket revenue, unless you directly compensate it by an equivalent increase in prices.

While the A row will still be there, the B and C rows still cost a lot and at some point you can't move rows all the way up so that the highest, cheapest row, now costs more.

powerstuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 07:50 AM
  #9
Colin226
NJ Devils STH
 
Colin226's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Flemington, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,787
vCash: 500
The league is going to eventually need to do this.. They can delay all they want, but the game has gotten bigger and faster, effectively shrinking the surface and resulting in less space for players, increased injuries, and more of a game centered around just throwing the puck at the net in the hopes of a lucky bounce

The problem is all parties involved would rather make rule changes than invest in a costly solution that could work

Colin226 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 07:52 AM
  #10
colchar
The Keon Curse Lives
 
colchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalessin View Post
You hear this a lot but you're not really losing the premium seating because if you take out rows A-B then row C becomes the new row A... no?
Ultimately you will still have fewer rows.

colchar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 09:44 AM
  #11
RedWinger10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin226 View Post
The league is going to eventually need to do this.. They can delay all they want, but the game has gotten bigger and faster, effectively shrinking the surface and resulting in less space for players, increased injuries, and more of a game centered around just throwing the puck at the net in the hopes of a lucky bounce

The problem is all parties involved would rather make rule changes than invest in a costly solution that could work
I think the NHL proved furring this last lockout that profits matter more than almost anything else. Even though the league made record profits (with signs of continued growth) in 2011-2012 when the new CBA was up for discussion the league and owners wanted a bigger slice of the pie. So even though the game is faster, bigger, and more physical than its ever been resulting in more serious injury potential the league and owners wanted to take more money from the players. Bottom line: When they figure out how to make more money by making the rinks larger they will. Until then not a chance.

RedWinger10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 09:58 AM
  #12
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWinger10 View Post
Bottom line: When they figure out how to make more money by making the rinks larger they will. Until then not a chance.
More space for advertisements

But I am shocked by the fact that the BOG gets a vote in rule changes...they aren't hockey guys. I agree they should get a vote in this case since it involves costs and is not the type of move where you just move a line up or down the ice.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:01 AM
  #13
CrazyMonkey1208
Registered User
 
CrazyMonkey1208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
I think the real question is, why would you WANT to make the ice surface bigger? It would lead to boring international style hockey. If anything, I'd rather it be smaller.

CrazyMonkey1208 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:07 AM
  #14
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Loss of revenue... Perhaps 400 seats in the first two rows ($100 and up per seat).
This is common fallacy whenever this topic gets brought up. You aren't losing front row seats, you are really losing the last row of seats in the lower bowl. All of the rows essentially get pushed back by a few feet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkhamNHL View Post
no offence, but I can't believe you can even post that as being serious...
He's right. You don't lose the front row, you lose the back row.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyMonkey1208 View Post
I think the real question is, why would you WANT to make the ice surface bigger? It would lead to boring international style hockey. If anything, I'd rather it be smaller.
A reasonable increase would do wonders for the quality of play. I don't think anyone wants 200x100 international ice, but 200x90 would be just fine. Players are just too damn big and too damn fast compared to what they used to be. There's hardly any room to move out there.

Tough Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:10 AM
  #15
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
In terms of the second point, making the rinks a bit bigger will allow players to use their speed without slow and tactical European hockey because it still wouldn't be European size. More than that, the coaching philosophy will not change because the NAmerican game since peewee is a north-south game not lateral. And NHLers are faster and play with more intensity to begin with. That's an argument for the Hockey forum though, I'd like to know more about it strictly from a business point of view.
You'd just get more teams clogging up the front of the net, it wont add any speed to the game just more perimeter play.

As for monetary cost it's hard to get any exact numbers but a quick guess would be it would cost you at least a couple hundred premium seats per game. That's well over a million dollars a year in most locations and it's an ongoing expense for a nebulous benefit.

Halibut is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:12 AM
  #16
rafterman
Registered User
 
rafterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Flyover country
Posts: 594
vCash: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Loss of revenue... Perhaps 400 seats in the first two rows ($100 and up per seat).

New boards and glass.... $10k+
Expanded ice plant......... $25k+

Additional expense to make ice ??? (water, coolant, electricity, etc.)
You're going to be looking at replacing every bit of cooling piping as the entire ice surface is going to need to be raised to be at the correct level to the 'new' first row. Also, entries from the locker rooms and for the zamboni/equipment will have to be re-done to deal with the now raised floor.

It would be a very expensive task to retrofit to existing buildings.

rafterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:17 AM
  #17
IceAce
RAISED IN A BARN
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 4,600
vCash: 7125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin226 View Post
The league is going to eventually need to do this.. They can delay all they want, but the game has gotten bigger and faster, effectively shrinking the surface and resulting in less space for players, increased injuries, and more of a game centered around just throwing the puck at the net in the hopes of a lucky bounce

The problem is all parties involved would rather make rule changes than invest in a costly solution that could work
What's the cost of contracting the Devils?

I kid, I kid

IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 10:52 AM
  #18
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 26,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rafterman View Post
It would be a very expensive task to retrofit to existing buildings.
Ya, Bingo. Not cheap at all. All kinds of engineering & construction costs. And what about all of the rest of the arenas, minor leagues, Junior, NCAA & amateur etc in North America? Quickest "fix" is to simply move the goal lines & nets back to the original 10' out from the boards configuration, get rid of the trapezoid & go back to the rectangular crease. Right there another 340' square feet of extra room. Might want to reconsider re-inserting the centre ice red-line as well, the size of todays players with the advancements in skating skills & increased speed resulting in numerous career ending hits and injuries.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 11:03 AM
  #19
Tough Guy
Registered User
 
Tough Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
And what about all of the rest of the arenas, minor leagues, Junior, NCAA & amateur etc in North America?
That is a complete non-issue. Most of those rinks are of different sizes already. I don't know about you, but I didn't play on no NHL-sized rink when I was a kid.

And any change in rink dimensions at the NHL level would likely need to be done on new rinks only. Within the next 5 years there's likely to be a few new rinks built. That's a good start.

Tough Guy 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 09:15 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.