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.

Seattle III: All Along the Watchtower (UPD: Rumored expansion 2014-15 Post#829)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-31-2013, 04:57 PM
  #976
superdeluxe
Seattle Sin Bin
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tukwila, Bellevue
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,961
vCash: 500
Joe Yeardon is going to be on the Softy show 3-7pm Iheart.com Seattle KJR 950

Also Bruce Harrell to talk about the arena and NBA/NHL

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:22 PM
  #977
tank44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: Canada
Posts: 191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superdeluxe View Post
I wouldn't say its 3 hours, I would say its 2 hours. Sure it shows 2 hours 48 minutes, but that is if you do the speed limit. I would say 2:15 or 2:30 is closer to the time frame.
I have never gotten between Seattle & Portland under 3 hours unless it was after midnight. It's 60mph for most of the urban areas with traffic and in the 70mph area it's 2 lane with some ******* in the left lane going 55. Key Arena to Rose Garden is 175 miles.

Similarly Key Arena to Rogers Arena in Vancouver is 142miles. I have made this trek (with border) in 2 hours but that was after midnight. However like the Portland trip, traffic & border make this usually 3+ hour trip.

Either way, both Vancouver and Portland are close to Seattle to draw from yet far enough to establish their own markets & areas.

For reference, Edmonton & Calgary's arenas are 191miles apart

As seen with the MLS: Vancouver-Seattle-Portland rivalry would be awesome in another league and the NHL would be best suited for this rivalry. This time with everyone hating the Canucks rather than hating the Sounders. The local WHL teams likely would flourish as well as increased sports exposure, different price range and different physical areas (at least for the 2 WHL teams in Seattle).

tank44 is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:45 PM
  #978
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmiralsFan24 View Post
Why don't you think Portland is good to pair with Seattle? I think that's the best possible pairing with Seattle.
There seems to be much Canadian unrest. To me, you mix it up (Seattle OR Portland and Quebec) just for the sake of political balance. Geographic balance comes secondary.

That's if the NHL actually thinks it has to massage the fan base. That might be a first.

It's possible the logic becomes Quebec getting the relocation because the TV partners will have more say on expansion than they do relocation. THAT assumes NBC has more power than any given Canadian network, and that's obviously debatable.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:47 PM
  #979
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
There seems to be much Canadian unrest. To me, you mix it up (Seattle OR Portland and Quebec) just for the sake of political balance. Geographic balance comes secondary.

That's if the NHL actually thinks it has to massage the fan base. That might be a first.

It's possible the logic becomes Quebec getting the relocation because the TV partners will have more say on expansion than they do relocation. THAT assumes NBC has more power than any given Canadian network, and that's obviously debatable.
You think portland would want to pay a expansion fee that high? NHL wants seattle. Its seattle and quebec with portland via relocation.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:48 PM
  #980
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Your forgetting that the Pacific Northwest has GREAT junior hockey support. Instead of college they have junior hockey which they support in huge numbers. Portland, Seattle and Tri-Cities are 3 of the absolute strongest markets in the WHL, generating huge revenues.
Replace Tri-Cities with Spokane and you're getting somewhere.

I could be technical about replacing the Thunderbirds (who have drawing issues) with Everett. There's a reason or several the Thunderbirds moved out of Seattle proper.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:50 PM
  #981
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
Replace Tri-Cities with Spokane and you're getting somewhere.

I could be technical about replacing the Thunderbirds (who have drawing issues) with Everett. There's a reason or several the Thunderbirds moved out of Seattle proper.
That has to do with that Key arena is not a hockey arena.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:54 PM
  #982
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,257
vCash: 500
Just discussing the other side of the coin...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
I think it depends on the club. You choose Toronto... What about a team like LA, or Carolina? The gate likely covers at least 60% of most teams income.
Who knows, exactly? We can only go by Forbes estimates, unless there are others that share their reports publicly. The best data I can give is from this report from Sportsnet.ca:
Quote:
Of course, ticket sales form a big chunk of the hockey-related revenues that owners and players are currently fighting over. Earlier this year, the Toronto Star received leaked financial data and found that ticket revenues totaled US$1.2 billion for the 2010-11 season, or about 41 per cent of overall revenues, assuming a reported $2.9 billion intake.
And that's before the new US TV deal, as well as a couple of local TV deals and a massive sponsorship deal over the past few years.

The point here is that a CBA is negotiated so that teams must spend to a percentage of League-wide revenue that there are many other ways to increase that, but as you mention, if the product isn't supported because of horrible business decisions (see "Dollar Bill" Wirtz, or better yet, the Atlanta Spirit Group), it poses a very large problem.

Regarding my take on rivalries:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
That's because Philly has a massive rivalry with both of those teams. As a Pens fan, my ideal trip to make for a hockey game would be a home and home in Philly and Pittsburgh to watch a pair of games. Or games 2 & 3 (or 4 & 5) in the playoffs. Neither teams want to lose those games, and as a fan, I want to see those games. Same goes for Edmonton and Calgary and countless others. Yes new rivalries will be born... but there's no reason to lose the ones you already have.
Of course there isn't. Because those teams with numerous rivals don't want to lose the passion of their fans, specifically because it can help their revenues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Those anchor teams, also have a long standing history, and a very solid group of hockey following and supporting fans. They also have success on the ice. What would happen if Columbus could put forth a competitive team and make the playoffs for 10 straight years while occasionally going deep? Their fan support and thus their revenue and value would see a marketable improvement.
The flipside is if you can't get rivals and are perenially bad (Columbus, Florida, Tampa Bay to a point recently) then you see what happens. Columbus was dealt a bad hand from the get-go, originally slated to be in the Eastern Conference for a few years, until unseated by the Leafs. Leafs revenues go up and up and up; Columbus can't get anything generated, and both teams have had similar standings.

You need to fix the alignment so there is a chance at better rivalries for perennial bottom-dwellers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Some teams will undoubtedly have issues. If you can't fill the building, and sell tickets at a decent price, then perhaps this isn't the league/location for you. But most teams have the chance to be successful... as long as things go right for them.
And that's my point. This year, the "relocation crowd" is clamoring to move the low revenue teams (except the Blues for some reason). Move those low-revenue teams and there will be a new call from the "relocation crowd" for a new set of revenue bottom-dwellers.

The funny part is directly after the 2005 lockout, those low-revenue teams were Chicago, Washington and Pittsburgh. The pro-relocation crowd hardly talked about them. A couple loaded drafts later, they're leading their conferences and doing well in revenue.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:56 PM
  #983
Jacob8hockey*
Maple Leaf Fan
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
Why does an odd number of teams matter in the NHL?

They've had an odd number of teams at least two times.

Also, unlike the MLB, an odd number of teams wouldn't make a difference schedule-wise, since they don't play games every day.

Is there something I'm forgetting?
I think it has more to do with fans wanting 2 teams just for the sake of 2 new franchises than for the sake of having an odd number team.

BTW, I'd like Seattle and Portland. Would make for good rivals to go along with Vancouver.

In the same area and I assume the Seattle and Portland would have one of those rivalries just naturally

Jacob8hockey* is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:57 PM
  #984
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
You think portland would want to pay a expansion fee that high? NHL wants seattle. Its seattle and quebec with portland via relocation.
Remember the OTHER Paul Allen scenario. Joe Roth and company gave Paul Allen an ownership stake in exchange for placing the Flounders in CenturyLink.

Bill Gallacher is rather loaded himself, and as well as the Winterhawks draw, he stands to lose a bunch of money if Seattle goes NHL without Portland. Most years, Seattle games in Portland are 25% of the announced gate and probably more of the revenue. The value HERE of Portland playing the Thunderbirds (if the T-Birds survive while there's an NHL team in Seattle... and I seriously doubt that's sustainable) diminishes greatly.

Merritt Paulson faced the same situation in USL with the Timbers when the Flounders left and found his way up, so there's the second precedent. Paulson got lucky Seattle came down for cup matches two years in a row while still in USL.

Gallacher is now the key to this, especially given there's a way to Allen's heart and potential substantial motivation.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 05:58 PM
  #985
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 1,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
That has to do with that Key arena is not a hockey arena.
It's more than that. The T-Birds haven't been a good draw in Kent, either. Modest, perhaps.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:00 PM
  #986
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
It's more than that. The T-Birds haven't been a good draw in Kent, either.
Seattle fans isn't much of a lower league sports team.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:21 PM
  #987
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Seattle fans isn't much of a lower league sports team.
This is true... like when the Sounders' attendance jumped from 2,000 a game to like 37,000 a game after they made the jump to MLS.

Ugmo is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:22 PM
  #988
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
The funny part is directly after the 2005 lockout, those low-revenue teams were Chicago, Washington and Pittsburgh. The pro-relocation crowd hardly talked about them. A couple loaded drafts later, they're leading their conferences and doing well in revenue.
No, I fully recognize that you can't always move the guy on the bottom. Because there'll always be someone at the bottom. That said, it might be time to end the NHLs experiment in the desert. The idea is that as long as the system can help them (ie subsidize them), then you accept that and move on. The issue becomes, well what happens when the subsidizing isn't enough?

These markets need to spend money to 'grow the game' locally. So that in 5-10 years, these kids with some money are now fans of hockey in general, and hopefully fans of your team. And then over a 10-20 year period, while you may not be a power house like Toronto, you could at least be a team that with help, is competitive, and can break even/post a profit. However, not every market will be able to do this. And unfortunately for Phoenix fans, they may be one such market. But hey, as long as the owner(s) are willing to take losses and keep them there, then it's not my problem.

As for more NHL teams... would love to see it happen. Would also love to have another team near Vancouver.

__________________
"I changed the whole game, man," Rinaldo said. "Who knows what the game would have been like if I didn't do what I did?" [after illegally running Letang from behind, slamming his head into the glass]
Riptide is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:23 PM
  #989
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,077
vCash: 500
I don't think it would be that big of a deal to have 31 or 33 teams.

For 13 seasons, the NHL had an odd number of teams (17 in 1978-79, 21 in 1979-80 thru 1991) and the NBA, which plays basically the exact same season had an odd number for 27 of 34 seasons from 1970-2004.

KevFu is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:28 PM
  #990
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 33,958
vCash: 5113
I used to think that having an odd number of teams in the NHL in this day and age would be a bad thing, but but more that I've thought about it the more that I've realized that it really wouldn't be that big of a deal. It's not like baseball, where having an odd number of teams is a bad thing given that you play over six out of seven days a week for the most part and have to play on the major vacation days and weekends. Not the case for the NHL, with day(s) off between most games for every team.

32 sounds better than 31 teams-wise, but don't think it'd be that huge of an issue. If anything, adding a team at a time might be in their best interest, as it'd guarantee that the newbies would get a first overall pick versus only a 50% chance if they expanded by two at once.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 06:31 PM
  #991
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugmo View Post
This is true... like when the Sounders' attendance jumped from 2,000 a game to like 37,000 a game after they made the jump to MLS.
Pretty much this.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 08:05 PM
  #992
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
I used to think that having an odd number of teams in the NHL in this day and age would be a bad thing, but but more that I've thought about it the more that I've realized that it really wouldn't be that big of a deal. It's not like baseball, where having an odd number of teams is a bad thing given that you play over six out of seven days a week for the most part and have to play on the major vacation days and weekends. Not the case for the NHL, with day(s) off between most games for every team.

32 sounds better than 31 teams-wise, but don't think it'd be that huge of an issue. If anything, adding a team at a time might be in their best interest, as it'd guarantee that the newbies would get a first overall pick versus only a 50% chance if they expanded by two at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I don't think it would be that big of a deal to have 31 or 33 teams.

For 13 seasons, the NHL had an odd number of teams (17 in 1978-79, 21 in 1979-80 thru 1991) and the NBA, which plays basically the exact same season had an odd number for 27 of 34 seasons from 1970-2004.
You strike when the iron is hot, as the saying goes. If Seattle, Quebec City, and Portland all come forth with owners who want teams and are willing to dish out the $ to get teams, then all 3 of those locations are great for the NHL. The only issue might be a possible negative effect on the skill factor within the League if there are 3 new teams all of a sudden, but I don't think that would be a serious issue.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 08:22 PM
  #993
Kodi
Registered User
 
Kodi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
It's more than that. The T-Birds haven't been a good draw in Kent, either. Modest, perhaps.
They haven't been a good draw in Kent because they missed the playoffs for 3 seasons in a row (nice to see them back last season though). Most Seattle teams are that way I mean hell look at the Mariners.

Kodi is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 08:57 PM
  #994
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
Just discussing the other side of the coin...Who knows, exactly? We can only go by Forbes estimates, unless there are others that share their reports publicly. The best data I can give is from this report from Sportsnet.ca:And that's before the new US TV deal, as well as a couple of local TV deals and a massive sponsorship deal over the past few years.

The point here is that a CBA is negotiated so that teams must spend to a percentage of League-wide revenue that there are many other ways to increase that, but as you mention, if the product isn't supported because of horrible business decisions (see "Dollar Bill" Wirtz, or better yet, the Atlanta Spirit Group), it poses a very large problem.

Regarding my take on rivalries:Of course there isn't. Because those teams with numerous rivals don't want to lose the passion of their fans, specifically because it can help their revenues. The flipside is if you can't get rivals and are perenially bad (Columbus, Florida, Tampa Bay to a point recently) then you see what happens. Columbus was dealt a bad hand from the get-go, originally slated to be in the Eastern Conference for a few years, until unseated by the Leafs. Leafs revenues go up and up and up; Columbus can't get anything generated, and both teams have had similar standings.

You need to fix the alignment so there is a chance at better rivalries for perennial bottom-dwellers.And that's my point. This year, the "relocation crowd" is clamoring to move the low revenue teams (except the Blues for some reason). Move those low-revenue teams and there will be a new call from the "relocation crowd" for a new set of revenue bottom-dwellers.

The funny part is directly after the 2005 lockout, those low-revenue teams were Chicago, Washington and Pittsburgh. The pro-relocation crowd hardly talked about them. A couple loaded drafts later, they're leading their conferences and doing well in revenue.
Grudy, I was on the move pittsburgh bandwagon. we'll see if crosby gets hurt in 5 years what happens. I bet 10,000 a game will be back. As for the other two, you don't get rid of a market of 5 million in the NE and 10 million the captial of the midwest.

The real question, is why the same market struggle in each of the big four sports. If it was just hockey fans this argument would be fair, but it's not and no one wants to touch this.

Melrose Munch is offline  
Old
07-31-2013, 10:17 PM
  #995
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
Grudy, I was on the move pittsburgh bandwagon. we'll see if crosby gets hurt in 5 years what happens. I bet 10,000 a game will be back. As for the other two, you don't get rid of a market of 5 million in the NE and 10 million the captial of the midwest.

The real question, is why the same market struggle in each of the big four sports. If it was just hockey fans this argument would be fair, but it's not and no one wants to touch this.
The Penguins are more than just Crosby. Yes the team is built around him and Malkin, but if (God forbid), he had to retire in 5 years due to injury, the team would be fine. Malkin becomes the star, and the Pens get another 9m in cap space to go after UFAs. The only way they go back to 10k in attendance, is if both Malkin and Crosby are gone, and the team starts sucking for a decade. But even then... you draft well, and things will eventually get better.

As for the 2nd question... can't really help you out there.


Last edited by Fugu: 07-31-2013 at 10:49 PM. Reason: ...
Riptide is offline  
Old
08-01-2013, 12:31 AM
  #996
enrothorne
A DJ saved my life
 
enrothorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,632
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to enrothorne
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Seattle is comparable to Buffalo, IMO.

Much bigger, which will help, but also going to benefit a lot from being so close to Canada.
You're very mistaken about Seattle being close to Canada. Buffalo is right up against Canada, literally. I live 1/4 of a mile from the border here in Downtown Buffalo. But Seattle isn't anywhere near that. Take a look at a map:



That's water next to Seattle, not Canada.


Last edited by enrothorne: 08-01-2013 at 12:47 AM.
enrothorne is offline  
Old
08-01-2013, 12:40 AM
  #997
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 25,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by enrothorne View Post
You're very mistaken about Seattle being close to Canada.
Its about a 2.5 hour drive from Vancouver-Seattle provided the highways & Border are clear.

Killion is offline  
Old
08-01-2013, 12:48 AM
  #998
enrothorne
A DJ saved my life
 
enrothorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Downtown Buffalo
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,632
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to enrothorne
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Its about a 2.5 hour drive from Vancouver-Seattle provided the highways & Border are clear.
And if you think that is comparable to being "like Buffalo so close to Canada" then you need to get out of your spaceship where you're viewing the world. In 2.5 hours by car I could be almost to Pittsburgh.

enrothorne is offline  
Old
08-01-2013, 12:57 AM
  #999
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 25,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by enrothorne View Post
In 2.5 hours by car I could be almost to Pittsburgh.
Ya its no short hike from Vancouver-Seattle, traffics heavy, Border line-up's....

Killion is offline  
Old
08-01-2013, 01:14 AM
  #1000
Brodie
pretty on fleek
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 13,245
vCash: 500
Seattle's metro area stretches into Skagit County, the northern parts of which are about half an hours drive to the border.

and, on to the next thread

Brodie is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 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.