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.

Spreadsheet of cities' ability to support professional sports

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2011, 10:22 AM
  #1
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Spreadsheet of cities' ability to support professional sports

Not sure if this has been posted here before but saw the doc off another message board (IGN) and found it really interesting for a few points

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...&rm=full#gid=0

-I have always thought the NYC area needs at a minimum 1 more team in the MLB and that study shows how much room there truly is left in NYC.

-I would rather a team anywhere in the Northwest over Quebec. That doc does not account for Portland having an MLS team but I really wish the NHL had the chance to beat the MLS to Portland. (But not at the expense of the Penguins moving) I really wish Seattle could figure something out too for the NHL and NBA. However, that's just another market the MLS beat the NHL to and now both the NHL and NBA would oversaturate the market.

-Cleveland is in rough shape; result of teams being there historically while the city declines. Hurts me to say it too but it's the same with Detroit Windsor except I would not miss the Pistons.

-Still tons of room in the NE for hockey markets. If Hartford could get a new arena, I bet that team would do good now. I also never knew the Providence area was that big with so much money.

-I wish Houston could get a chance at a team before Seattle/Quebec since their arena is NHL ready. Just wish the stipulation did not exist where only the Rockets owner can own an NHL team.

-Not hockey related but there is still decent room in Montreal for a baseball team or a 2nd NHL team. I've always held that Montreal was crippled the most from the 94 strike. An actual ballpark would have done wonders for the Expos.



So what do you guys think, fairly accurate in terms of opinions you already had?

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 10:40 AM
  #2
pondnorth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
How many hockey fans willing to pay average nhl ticket prices in a gate driven league are the only numbers that really matter.End of story.

pondnorth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 10:52 AM
  #3
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,729
vCash: 500
Similar to this:
http://www.portfolio.com/resources/SportsChart.pdf

Based on this:
http://www.portfolio.com/industry-ne...ion/index.html
Discussed here:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=743715

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 11:04 AM
  #4
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 8,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondnorth View Post
How many hockey fans willing to pay average nhl ticket prices in a gate driven league are the only numbers that really matter.End of story.
This. I will take Quebec City with 18,000 rabid hockey fans a game any day over some other unproven market that prefers its NBA team over hockey anyway. I frankly couldn't care less how much upside potential a given market has to make money for the league. Put the teams where you know people want them.

Ugmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 11:17 AM
  #5
AndersUlfBobby
Was there 35 yrs ago
 
AndersUlfBobby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
Glad to see that "Winnepeg" ranks 25 places lower than metro San Juan, Puerto Rico area. Makes sense to me.

AndersUlfBobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 11:37 AM
  #6
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndersUlfBobby View Post
Glad to see that "Winnepeg" ranks 25 places lower than metro San Juan, Puerto Rico area. Makes sense to me.
Yeah, not sure I buy this study.

And once and for all, it's spelled WINNIPEG. Far too many times is this creeping up. People who know and follow sports should know better than that.

Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:09 PM
  #7
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
Yeah, not sure I buy this study.

And once and for all, it's spelled WINNIPEG. Far too many times is this creeping up. People who know and follow sports should know better than that.
2.5 million people with a GDP per capita of $16,000 tied to the American dollar, what's not to buy? MLB trusted it with the Expos and the WBC for a reason.

As a Winnipegger, I can be realistic about my city being small with lower paying jobs on average then the Albertan cities.

Anyhow my main points still stand. I think the NHL should try to beat the NBA back to Seattle, but would an arena get built with only 1 primary tenant in it? Also, maybe another NE team should be looked at since there is so much money in the area.


Last edited by cutchemist42: 12-31-2011 at 12:21 PM.
cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:24 PM
  #8
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
2.5 million people with a GDP per capita of $16,000 tied to the American dollar, what's not to buy? MLB trusted it with the Expos and the WBC for a reason.

As a Winnipegger, I can be realistic about my city being small with lower paying jobs on average then the Albertan cities.

Anyhow my main points still stand. I think the NHL should try to beat the NBA back to Seattle, but would an arena get built with only 1 primary tenant in it? Also, maybe another NE team should be looked at since there is so much money in the area.
Trust me when I say Albertan's are very frugal with their money, especially here in Edmonton. And we have now all seen that regardless of these "stats", Winnipeggers are more than willing to pony up for the Jets, bar none.

Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:34 PM
  #9
AndersUlfBobby
Was there 35 yrs ago
 
AndersUlfBobby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
Awfully simplistic to only consider a city's "Available Personal Income" to determine it's ability to support an NHL team. Many more other factors need to be considered, both tangible and intangible. Hopefully we all know that.

The thing with the NHL in the 1990's is that this was pretty much the only factor that the league used (along with the ability to have the local government cough up the money to build the arena) to determine which cities got brand new NHL teams. The numbers were always on the NHL's side because if you go into cities with 2-3 million residents, you only have to find a tiny little fraction of them to get interested in the team. The thinking is that over time interest would naturally grow. Has worked in alot of these cities, but not all of them.

AndersUlfBobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:42 PM
  #10
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Not sure if this has been posted here before but saw the doc off another message board (IGN) and found it really interesting for a few points

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...&rm=full#gid=0

-Cleveland is in rough shape; result of teams being there historically while the city declines. Hurts me to say it too but it's the same with Detroit Windsor except I would not miss the Pistons..


So what do you guys think, fairly accurate in terms of opinions you already had?
No, because there's a split between Akron, Canton/Massillon, Cleveland, and Youngstown/Warren/Boardman. As discussed at length in the Cleveland thread, all would be part of the same region...five million people and multiple separate "metro areas" within the same region of Northeast Ohio.

I understand that it defies convention, but people have to trust me on this.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:43 PM
  #11
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndersUlfBobby View Post
Awfully simplistic to only consider a city's "Available Personal Income" to determine it's ability to support an NHL team. Many more other factors need to be considered, both tangible and intangible. Hopefully we all know that.

The thing with the NHL in the 1990's is that this was pretty much the only factor that the league used (along with the ability to have the local government cough up the money to build the arena) to determine which cities got brand new NHL teams. The numbers were always on the NHL's side because if you go into cities with 2-3 million residents, you only have to find a tiny little fraction of them to get interested in the team. The thinking is that over time interest would naturally grow. Has worked in alot of these cities, but not all of them.
Yeah, the 1990's city decisions were too simplistic. I think this doc goes to show having an 8 page thread on Cleveland being an NHL city is hopeless. If all leagues restarted for some apparent reason, Cleveland would probably not have baseball and only 1 of the NBA or NFL.

Going off that doc with cities with disposable income, a decent liking of hockey, and a "hypothetical NHL" arena, I would take Providence/Hartford/Portland/Seattle/Houston over Atlanta/Florida/Tampa/ Phoenix if you went back to square one.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:43 PM
  #12
HabsByTheBay
Registered User
 
HabsByTheBay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Country: United States
Posts: 1,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
No, because there's a split between Akron, Canton/Massillon, Cleveland, and Youngstown/Warren/Boardman. As discussed at length in the Cleveland thread, all would be part of the same region...five million people and multiple separate "metro areas" within the same region of Northeast Ohio.

I understand that it defies convention, but people have to trust me on this.
That's a US government data collection thing.

They do the same thing for the SF Bay Area, splitting off San Jose, and the most ardent San Jose-ite would struggle to argue that it's not one whole region.

HabsByTheBay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 12:50 PM
  #13
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
That's a US government data collection thing.

They do the same thing for the SF Bay Area, splitting off San Jose, and the most ardent San Jose-ite would struggle to argue that it's not one whole region.
Makes more sense linking Cleveland and Akron than San Jose and San Francisco. Not to say that they shouldn't be linked in both cases.

Looking back through the old thread...
Milwaukee-Racine
Grand Rapids-Holland
could also be linked.

As well and Toronto-Hamilton.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 12-31-2011 at 12:58 PM.
MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2011, 02:52 PM
  #14
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 24,617
vCash: 1
Looks interesting.... gonna have to give this a more in-depth look through at a time when I'm not also watching sports.

And speaking for Chicago.... could easily support another NFL and/or NBA team. Yeah, they'd play second fiddle to the Bears/Bulls, but the fandoms for both sports are so massive in the city that sustaining another team would be fairly easy (especially at lower ticket prices), a la bringing back the Cardinals or that one rumor about the Hornets moving to Chicago from a few years back. Never gonna happen, though.

No Fun Shogun is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 10:46 AM
  #15
barneyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,210
vCash: 500
Thanks. Let's not reinvent the wheel every time, shall we. A measure only based on API is so simplistic I'm not sure it's even warranted as a starting point for discussion. But I'll bite anyway.

Notwithstanding the fact that the "cost to support a franchise" shouldn't be the same for every city (I can assure you that it doesn't "cost" Pittsburgh $85.4M to support the Pirates), the table suggests that the NYC area could support 15 additional NHL teams and Houston could pick up 3 teams, while Toronto would not be able to support an extra NHL (or could barely do it if you include Hamilton, absent from the list).

To me those lists are asking the wrong question: "could X support an extra major league team?" as opposed to "would X support an extra major league team?". And when you use "would" instead of "could", proven and potential fan support have to come into play, and in that case API is a significant but smallish factor in the equation. It costs the same amount to support an NHL team than an NFL team but I've yet to meet anybody on the face of the Earth who believes an additional NHL team in the LA area would have the same chance of success than the NFL going back there.

barneyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 10:52 AM
  #16
King Woodballs
MVP! MVP! MVP!
 
King Woodballs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Your Mind
Posts: 32,106
vCash: 50
mega spread sheet fail

how do people keep spelling WinnIpeg wrong?

__________________
Most Valuable Player
Most Valuable Player

Most Valuable Player
Most Valuable Player
King Woodballs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 11:02 AM
  #17
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Anyhow my main points still stand. I think the NHL should try to beat the NBA back to Seattle...
Why?

We've been through this many times before. Raw population and income data isn't the entire story. The people with that money must be interested in and willing to spend their money on the product.

MAROONSRoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 01:33 PM
  #18
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Why?

We've been through this many times before. Raw population and income data isn't the entire story. The people with that money must be interested in and willing to spend their money on the product.
Seattle not a hockey city then? I still maintain I would want another Hartford team before Seattle if an NHL arena existed.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 01:38 PM
  #19
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barneyg View Post
Thanks. Let's not reinvent the wheel every time, shall we. A measure only based on API is so simplistic I'm not sure it's even warranted as a starting point for discussion. But I'll bite anyway.

Notwithstanding the fact that the "cost to support a franchise" shouldn't be the same for every city (I can assure you that it doesn't "cost" Pittsburgh $85.4M to support the Pirates), the table suggests that the NYC area could support 15 additional NHL teams and Houston could pick up 3 teams, while Toronto would not be able to support an extra NHL (or could barely do it if you include Hamilton, absent from the list).

To me those lists are asking the wrong question: "could X support an extra major league team?" as opposed to "would X support an extra major league team?". And when you use "would" instead of "could", proven and potential fan support have to come into play, and in that case API is a significant but smallish factor in the equation. It costs the same amount to support an NHL team than an NFL team but I've yet to meet anybody on the face of the Earth who believes an additional NHL team in the LA area would have the same chance of success than the NFL going back there.
Which is why i was maintaining I would trust the NE (Bridgeport/Hartford/Providence/etc.) with another team over Phoenix. The area appears to have both the money and appreciation of hockey. No doubt Phoenix has the size and money but the NHL was foolish to pursue the location thinking you can convert them to hockey fans.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2012, 04:26 PM
  #20
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,275
vCash: 500
I see Toronto has free money availiable. Perhaps another team? What about Hartford, that area is very rich.


Last edited by Hank Chinaski: 01-01-2012 at 04:41 PM. Reason: we'll take care of it :)
Melrose Munch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2012, 01:22 PM
  #21
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
I see Toronto has free money availiable. Perhaps another team? What about Hartford, that area is very rich.
Well according to the spreadsheet and already having hockey established in the area, Hartford and Providence or a 4th team in the NYC area by Birdgeport if an NHL arena existed. Would you really think those areas would do worse then Phoenix?

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2012, 01:38 PM
  #22
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Which is why i was maintaining I would trust the NE (Bridgeport/Hartford/Providence/etc.) with another team over Phoenix. The area appears to have both the money and appreciation of hockey. No doubt Phoenix has the size and money but the NHL was foolish to pursue the location thinking you can convert them to hockey fans.
Phoenix didn't need to be converted; they had a WHA team for several years, then a very well-followed IHL team during the 1990s.

The problems with Phoenix stem 100% not from the market, but from America West Arena being built with a ridiculous configuration. In order to convert it from basketball to hockey, AWA needed almost five entire sections of lower-bowl seats torn out. This had the following effects:
- People at center court were actually near a blue line
- People in the corners had their seats oriented toward the middle, even though there could actually be substantial action that would require looking across their body
- People in parts of the upper bowl were not physically able to see the action on the ice closest to them, a direct result of part of the ice being underneath the upper bowl overhang

ALL of the problems with Phoenix stem from this. Had the arena been built properly with a dual configuration, the Coyotes would be playing in Scottsdale, which has both the local population and the local money. Instead, the abominable configuration forced another arena to be built, in Glendale. That got a horribly run city government involved, in addition to being a distance away from the population and the money. Glendale is to Phoenix what Richfield was to Cleveland....a long drive to nowhere.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2012, 01:45 PM
  #23
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Phoenix didn't need to be converted; they had a WHA team for several years, then a very well-followed IHL team during the 1990s.

The problems with Phoenix stem 100% not from the market, but from America West Arena being built with a ridiculous configuration. In order to convert it from basketball to hockey, AWA needed almost five entire sections of lower-bowl seats torn out. This had the following effects:
- People at center court were actually near a blue line
- People in the corners had their seats oriented toward the middle, even though there could actually be substantial action that would require looking across their body
- People in parts of the upper bowl were not physically able to see the action on the ice closest to them, a direct result of part of the ice being underneath the upper bowl overhang

ALL of the problems with Phoenix stem from this. Had the arena been built properly with a dual configuration, the Coyotes would be playing in Scottsdale, which has both the local population and the local money. Instead, the abominable configuration forced another arena to be built, in Glendale. That got a horribly run city government involved, in addition to being a distance away from the population and the money. Glendale is to Phoenix what Richfield was to Cleveland....a long drive to nowhere.
Just to clarify, you think Phoenix is a bigger hockey town then Hartford?

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2012, 01:54 PM
  #24
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,903
vCash: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
Trust me when I say Albertan's are very frugal with their money, especially here in Edmonton. And we have now all seen that regardless of these "stats", Winnipeggers are more than willing to pony up for the Jets, bar none.
This not a bash on Winnipeg fans as we've seen it work in Minnesota where a city that undersupported lost its team before and has come back stronger then ever, mind you MSP is a larger market but it's still a good correlation to use. But the question remains as to how that will hold up long term, especially if the team runs into difficulty in remaining competitively viable. Time's the only thing that will prove this hypothesis right or wrong since it's still the new thing in town and will likely be seeing that reflected in attendance at least into next season.


Last edited by DaveG: 01-02-2012 at 02:00 PM.
DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2012, 01:58 PM
  #25
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
Just to clarify, you think Phoenix is a bigger hockey town then Hartford?
I didn't utter the words "Hartford", "Whalers", or anything else that would indicate a great concern for cities in Connecticut. However, I'll bite on the important issues.

Hartford had a pretty successful team in the WHA, then a less-than-stellar NHL team. But it's important to note that, even in the best of times, Hartford suffered from mediocre attendance. They never had good season ticket numbers, and even when the Whalers were hitting the breaking point of "support us or we're moving", there wasn't much in response to the ultimatum. The benchmark of 14,000 season tickets was a pipe dream; Hartford had never hit 14K in a year or 14K equivalents. Peter Karmanos actually talked about moving the team to Columbus and housing the team in a temporary arena (converted from an abandoned aircraft hangar) until a permanent one was built. A "Save the Whalers" rally in 1996, much promoted and featuring player appearances, drew 400 people.

If the Whalers had been as well-supported as people claim, they never would have left. Instead, as is the case with pretty much any other lost cause, there's a revision of the historical record that makes it sound like the Big Bad Karmanos unjustly stole the Whalers out of their packed arena. That's not the case.

Now then, to your original question...I don't know, and I honestly don't care. I know that if I had the money for an NHL team, Hartford wouldn't be on my short list of locations. But that's just me, and I'm one of a small number that takes my opinions seriously.

Mayor Bee 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 08:16 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.