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.

TV ratings = Fan Support

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-20-2012, 12:13 PM
  #101
AdmiralsFan24
Registered User
 
AdmiralsFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 6,216
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AdmiralsFan24
Quote:
Originally Posted by PALE PWNR View Post
Is this really true? I guess I'm spoiled living in Philly's market but I couldn't imagine a game not being on the normal television package? I guess I'm oblivious to that but every game is either on VS. NBC CSN Philly or TCN preseason or not. How can a market grow when they don't even play every game on TV? I'd be disinterested too. Especially in a region where football is shoved down your throat since birth and nothing else
It's probably not an issue for the big cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Philly, etc. For the smaller markets it is though.

Speaking for Milwaukee we have one channel for the Bucks and two for the Brewers. If the Bucks and Brewers play on the same day the Bucks get the game on Fox Sports Wisconsin and the Brewers go to WMLW which is a crappy standard definition channel located in only the Milwaukee area so anyone in Madison or Green Bay or wherever who wants to watch the Brewers is out of luck.

The Bucks only get 70 of 82 games on TV per year and the Brewers get about 150. The Bucks never have preseason games on TV and the Brewers have maybe three spring training games (one usually with the opponents announcers) on TV every year.

I would imagine it's about the same in many other smaller markets.

AdmiralsFan24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 01:44 PM
  #102
HookeyPookey*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Country: Australia
Posts: 1,208
vCash: 500
where can I see easy to interpret stats on tv viewership?

HookeyPookey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 01:49 PM
  #103
Fidel Astro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grudy0 View Post
I don't see this as a border problem. See the Expos issue I presented earlier. Besides, for teams such as the Yankees and Red Sox, there are also teams such as the Royals, Pirates and Rays. There are franchise issues everywhere, in every sport. It just so happens when it comes to NHL hockey, it becomes a border problem.Coincidence? No.
Taking a hockey team from Winnipeg and moving it to Phoenix is the equivalent of taking a baseball team from -- I dunno, where do they really love baseball? Ohio or something? --and moving it to Iqaluit.

*That's* why it's a 'border problem,' plain and simple, and it's the reason why it's not an issue in other sports. Nothing as drastic as Winnipeg/Phoenix has happened in terms of distance and cultural difference between the two cities.

Quote:
And with the revenue pressures by the Canadian teams directly affecting the salaries that the lower revenue producing teams must pay, there will always be a problem with that disparity.
So what should happen? The Canadian teams should stop being so successful and stop making so much money because it's going to cause problems for the neglected teams in the south?

[QUOTE] Which is exactly why the Yankees and Red Sox are constantly on the hunt for championships, while the Royals and Pirates are farm teams, with tepid fan support, and therefore, tepid revenues. [QUOTE]

Royals and Pirates are Kansas City and Pittsburgh, right? I'm assuming those are cities in which baseball is at least a popular sport, so it's not really the same comparison. Phoenix is a horrible location for a hockey team not because the team can't afford salaries, but because hockey itself is not culturally relevant or popular in the region. Again, move an MLB team to Nunavut and you'll have the same result. This is the cause of the frustration.

Do you see many Canadian fans calling for St. Louis or the Islanders or anyone like that to be relocated? If it's happening at all, it's not nearly as much as "relocate Phoenix" or "relocate Florida" talk.

Quote:
And I'd definitely like it to be on the terms of how to increase revenues than to just say "bring it to Canada", even if it is somewhat true.
Look at Winnipeg's success. It's not just "somewhat true." It's an obvious solution. Bring the teams where hockey is already loved rather than introducing it to completely new markets before it has a chance to get a real foothold.

If some of these southern cities look like they might be well-suited to hockey, throw 'em an AHL team as a test-run. It worked for us in Winnipeg. We lost the Jets, the first-IHL-then-AHL Moose came around and were so successful/run so professionally that the big league took notice.

Fidel Astro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 02:25 PM
  #104
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidel Astro View Post
If some of these southern cities look like they might be well-suited to hockey, throw 'em an AHL team as a test-run. It worked for us in Winnipeg. We lost the Jets, the first-IHL-then-AHL Moose came around and were so successful/run so professionally that the big league took notice.
Phoenix Roadrunners - WHA
Phoenix Roadrunners - IHL
Atlanta Knights - IHL
Columbus Chill - ECHL
Nashville Knights - ECHL

All enormously successful, and all yielded to the NHL.

Quebec Rafales - IHL - lasted two years
Quebec Citadelles - AHL - lasted three years
Hamilton Canucks - AHL - lasted two years

Looks like those potential cities failed their first test, didn't they?

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 02:30 PM
  #105
Hoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Quebec Rafales - IHL - lasted two years
Quebec Citadelles - AHL - lasted three years
Hamilton Canucks - AHL - lasted two years

Looks like those potential cities failed their first test, didn't they?
Can't sell minor league sport in a major league town...

Hoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 02:37 PM
  #106
AdmiralsFan24
Registered User
 
AdmiralsFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 6,216
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AdmiralsFan24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoser View Post
Can't sell minor league sport in a major league town...
Using this logic the Aeros should have left Houston a long time ago or they should at least have attendance problems. Same with San Antonio, Charlotte, Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland and Cincinnati.

AdmiralsFan24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 02:43 PM
  #107
Hoser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,220
vCash: 500
You're assuming Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, etc. are major-league hockey towns...

(I'll grant you Chicago is an exception.)

Hoser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 02:52 PM
  #108
Fidel Astro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post

Looks like those potential cities failed their first test, didn't they?
Here's something you may be unaware of: for everyone in Winnipeg who loved the IHL/AHL Moose, you could easily find three others who flat-out refused to support the team because it was a poor substitute for the real thing.

You think people in Quebec City wanted to see some ****** IHL team after getting ***** by that **** Bettman?

...and before you start saying "people in (insert name of US city here) don't want to see a poor substitute for the real thing either," the difference is *they never had the real thing to compare it to.*


Last edited by Fidel Astro: 01-20-2012 at 02:54 PM. Reason: added a bit
Fidel Astro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 03:59 PM
  #109
Gnashville
Playoff losers
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidel Astro View Post
Here's something you may be unaware of: for everyone in Winnipeg who loved the IHL/AHL Moose, you could easily find three others who flat-out refused to support the team because it was a poor substitute for the real thing.

You think people in Quebec City wanted to see some ****** IHL team after getting ***** by that **** Bettman?

...and before you start saying "people in (insert name of US city here) don't want to see a poor substitute for the real thing either," the difference is *they never had the real thing to compare it to.*
So Canadians want the real thing and not some minor league subsitute? But Sunbelt cities have to prove themselves as fans before getting the NHL. No double standard there

The worst season attendance wise for the Predators blows away The Knights, Dixie Flyers, Nighthawks, South Stars. Hell those teams' owners would have jumped for joy to get attendance Numbers half of that. The 1st Pred's season was triple any of those team best season. FYI: Hamilton's current AHL team isn't even close attendance wise to the Pred's worst season.

BTW Ask Mike Eruzione if he's ever paid for lunch anywhere if you think Americans don't care about hockey.

Gnashville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 04:11 PM
  #110
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 36,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoser View Post
Can't sell minor league sport in a major league town...
Well, you can't have this argument both ways. Either minor league sports are a predictor of NHL success, or they aren't.

Look, I agree in principle that non-traditional cities should be developed with an AHL team before the NHL experiments with them. But there are a couple of really big counterpoints to that idea:

1) It ignores the fact that hockey has existed in most of these places for decades, including an NHL team in Atlanta that was perfectly normal for its era in terms of attendance. Hockey is not some mysterious, foreign sport that nobody has ever heard of. It's part of the Big Four for a reason.

2) The minor leagues are not under the control of the NHL. Just because it would be nice for prospective NHL cities to have an AHL team doesn't mean it can or will happen.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 04:18 PM
  #111
AdmiralsFan24
Registered User
 
AdmiralsFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 6,216
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AdmiralsFan24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoser View Post
You're assuming Houston, San Antonio, Charlotte, etc. are major-league hockey towns...

(I'll grant you Chicago is an exception.)
They may not be but they have major league teams that play more popular sports than hockey (Texans, Astros, Rockets - Spurs - Panthers, Bobcats) and their AHL teams are near the top in attendance (Houston is 3rd, San Antonio 7th and Charlotte 9th).

So what exactly is the excuse for Hamilton not getting at least 6,000 for the Bulldogs? If they want an NHL team and are big hockey fans, seems they should be filling up Copps Coliseum at least that much. San Antonio, Houston and Charlotte seem to have no problem doing that.

AdmiralsFan24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 04:21 PM
  #112
Bob Cole
Tom ******* Brady
 
Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,658
vCash: 50
does anyone know where I can find Canadian TV ratings. ive quickly skimmed through this thread and didnt see them.

Curious about the Winnipeg numbers.

Bob Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 04:26 PM
  #113
Chief Ten Bears*
Unregistered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 250
vCash: 500
I fail to understand why people tout sold out arena's as a success when the tickets were free with a purchase of 40L of gas or something...

Just because the arena is full of people who paid nothing to get in, doesn't mean the market is a success. If it did, where are the line ups of rich american business men looking to get richer buying a failing southern NHL teams?

Chief Ten Bears* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 04:27 PM
  #114
Chief Ten Bears*
Unregistered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Carmoni View Post
does anyone know where I can find Canadian TV ratings. ive quickly skimmed through this thread and didnt see them.

Curious about the Winnipeg numbers.
And we pay 10 bucks a month for the privilage to watch TSN Jets...

Can you imagine if Florida, Phoenix, Carolina, Nashville charged to watch them on local TV??

Hell, for 10 bucks I could go to a game in any one of those cities...

Chief Ten Bears* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 05:29 PM
  #115
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Ten Bears View Post
I fail to understand why people tout sold out arena's as a success when the tickets were free with a purchase of 40L of gas or something...

Just because the arena is full of people who paid nothing to get in, doesn't mean the market is a success. If it did, where are the line ups of rich american business men looking to get richer buying a failing southern NHL teams?
No successful market should have promotions or ticket giveaways, right?

Fill in the following blanks for me, please.

"It was Guaranteed Win Night in ____________

______ management told the 8,427 fans that if the __________ did not win, they could redeem their ticket stubs for free tickets."

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 05:36 PM
  #116
garnetpalmetto
HFBoards Sponsor
 
garnetpalmetto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
No successful market should have promotions or ticket giveaways, right?

Fill in the following blanks for me, please.

"It was Guaranteed Win Night in ____________

______ management told the 8,427 fans that if the __________ did not win, they could redeem their ticket stubs for free tickets."


Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Mr. Kotter! Mr. Kotter! I know!

garnetpalmetto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 05:47 PM
  #117
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
No successful market should have promotions or ticket giveaways, right?

Fill in the following blanks for me, please.

"It was Guaranteed Win Night in ____________

______ management told the 8,427 fans that if the __________ did not win, they could redeem their ticket stubs for free tickets."
And people make the false assumption that just because some tickets were sold at cheap prices during some promotion that all tickets were sold at those cheap prices.

kdb209 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 05:53 PM
  #118
HabsByTheBay
Registered User
 
HabsByTheBay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Country: United States
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
Canadian anger is totally justified as long as Quebec doesn't have a team. I put the Hamilton/GTA/Horseshoe/Whatever thing in a separate category, since that's about league politics as much as anything else. I think once the Nordiques come back (and let's be honest, it's a matter of time) then you'll see a lot of anger subside, since the two teams that left in the 90s for new markets will have returned.

I noticed in all this mudslinging that San Jose has never been mentioned. Probably because they've sold out something like 90-95% of their games since entering the league 20 years ago. And that's the lesson that all Sun Belt apologists need to learn.

Sell out your building, and nobody *****es about you. Remember, Canadians hated San Jose when they came into the league for the teal jerseys and the slick marketing.

Look, I'm from California, as much as anybody else I shake my head at the Mother Bear-protectiveness Canadians have about hockey, which goes over the top. But when Quebec doesn't have a team and people choose going to Panda Express over the NHL, they have a point.

HabsByTheBay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 06:14 PM
  #119
Kritter471
Registered User
 
Kritter471's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,719
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kritter471
Quote:
Originally Posted by kward View Post
In my opinion, any team that has to rely on being in the top 8 in its conference to sell-out its barn on a regular basis is not a strong franchise, but instead is one built on a pillar of sand.

In other words, if the team lives and dies by the bandwagon, it's not a strong, viable franchise, and the potential for failure is always there, no matter how well the team is playing today.
So you're saying we should scratch Edmonton (avg. 13,478, 13,124 and 12,335 from 1993-96), Ottawa (avg. 10,485, 10,391, 9,879 and 13,24 from 1992-96), Boston (avg. more than 16,000 only once from 1989-2007), Chicago (avg. 14,795, 13,253, 13,318 and 12,727 from 2002-07) and Pittsburgh (avg. 14,895, 14,749, 11,877 and 15,804 from 2001-06).

Brilliant thesis. Lots of houses of sand there.

(FWIW, I realize that all the teams I mentioned have extenuating circumstances that had little to do with the on-ice product. Thing is, so do many of those he mentioned).

Kritter471 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 11:03 PM
  #120
Shawa666
Registered User
 
Shawa666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Québec, Qc, Ca
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Phoenix Roadrunners - WHA
Phoenix Roadrunners - IHL
Atlanta Knights - IHL
Columbus Chill - ECHL
Nashville Knights - ECHL

All enormously successful, and all yielded to the NHL.

Quebec Rafales - IHL - lasted two years
Quebec Citadelles - AHL - lasted three years
Hamilton Canucks - AHL - lasted two years

Looks like those potential cities failed their first test, didn't they?
Oh look I can do History too.

Quebec Aces - (QHSL 1934-1953 / QHL 1954-1959 / AHL 1959-1971) 37 years
Quebec Remparts (QMJHL 1969-1985) 16 years
Quebec Nordiques (WHA 1972-1979 / NHL 1979-1995) 23 years
Quebec Remparts (QMJHL 1997-2012) 15 and counting.

Shawa666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 11:29 PM
  #121
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidel Astro View Post
Taking a hockey team from Winnipeg and moving it to Phoenix is the equivalent of taking a baseball team from -- I dunno, where do they really love baseball? Ohio or something? --and moving it to Iqaluit.

*That's* why it's a 'border problem,' plain and simple, and it's the reason why it's not an issue in other sports. Nothing as drastic as Winnipeg/Phoenix has happened in terms of distance and cultural difference between the two cities.

So what should happen? The Canadian teams should stop being so successful and stop making so much money because it's going to cause problems for the neglected teams in the south?

Royals and Pirates are Kansas City and Pittsburgh, right? I'm assuming those are cities in which baseball is at least a popular sport, so it's not really the same comparison. Phoenix is a horrible location for a hockey team not because the team can't afford salaries, but because hockey itself is not culturally relevant or popular in the region. Again, move an MLB team to Nunavut and you'll have the same result. This is the cause of the frustration.
Move to Iqaluit? Seriously? I get that you are saying somewhere with no real baseball presence, but this has to be one the most exaggerated ridiculous statements I have ever heard. Be serious here. The team moved from a 600K city to a 2 million + city, not the other way around. Phoenix was/is a place alot of inroads into big money can be made.

Phoenix had at least a good a chance if not much better since the population is much bigger than say San Jose or Tampa Bay. Both those teams are doing well despite average populations since they are well run organizations. Hockey can and has done very well in cities like San Jose, Los Angeles, Dallas, Carolina in the south, and you can see this in the stability of the these franchises and the numbers of grassroots players. This organizations did it right. It can be done. Phoenix has not been run very well, but don't blame "cultural differences" in the failure of the market. They had the population and product, but mismanagement has led to the current situation nothing else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidel Astro View Post
Do you see many Canadian fans calling for St. Louis or the Islanders or anyone like that to be relocated? If it's happening at all, it's not nearly as much as "relocate Phoenix" or "relocate Florida" talk.

Look at Winnipeg's success. It's not just "somewhat true." It's an obvious solution. Bring the teams where hockey is already loved rather than introducing it to completely new markets before it has a chance to get a real foothold.

If some of these southern cities look like they might be well-suited to hockey, throw 'em an AHL team as a test-run. It worked for us in Winnipeg. We lost the Jets, the first-IHL-then-AHL Moose came around and were so successful/run so professionally that the big league took notice.
Phoenix has a very good track record in the AHL/IHL. They had proven themselves, they had put the time and effort in. How about Quebec City, they lost their AHL team after only a few years, should they now forever be prevented from getting a major league team? Houston has been VERY succesful for MANY years in the AHL, league leading attendance and all that. Be your criteria shouldn't they be next in line for an NHL team? Somehow I doubt it, since your agenda seems to be "**** the south".

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 11:33 PM
  #122
dronald
Registered User
 
dronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hamilton, ON
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin226 View Post
How does that grow the sport? You've missed the points raised earlier.. Teams bring the game to the areas they play in, just look at the talent coming from the southern US lately (especially in southern California, and consider how long the Kings have been there)..

Like I said, are more kids in Winnipeg now interested in and playing hockey? NO! Why? Because it's already a part of life up there.. Will interest in hockey be boosted with teams in QC or Hamilton? Not really, because people there already love the sport

All that it would do is get more money for the league, which I agree is good, but it won't grow the sport and the NHL (and hockey in general) needs to grow.. The southern US is a great place for the NHL to work on growing itself and the sport.. It's a long-term investment that the league feels will be a struggle now, but pay huge dividends down the road.. It simply can't grow more in Canada, and it's not like the NFL that can prosper while really only limiting itself to one or two countries (you damn Canadians trying to be interested in our great American sport )

The whole argument is that Canadians don't seem to care about this long-term investment and would just rather see more teams in Canada and keep the sport primarily a Canadian-dominated one.. They just want more for Canada, and want to use the current struggles of southern teams as an excuse to get what they want.. The long-term health and growth of the league and sport is irrelevant to them because they just want more more more for Canada.. I get the passion behind it, but it's bad in the long run
Just curious to know if you even read my post?

dronald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 11:36 PM
  #123
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
Canadian anger is totally justified as long as Quebec doesn't have a team. I put the Hamilton/GTA/Horseshoe/Whatever thing in a separate category, since that's about league politics as much as anything else. I think once the Nordiques come back (and let's be honest, it's a matter of time) then you'll see a lot of anger subside, since the two teams that left in the 90s for new markets will have returned.
Aha. But...

Winnipeg has a new arena, and the third-largest ticket average in the league in order to compensate for their smallish building.

And Quebec doesn't have a true money-making building, yet. I do agree the return of the Nordiques needs to happen. And if the arena is an actual go, then yes, by all means it is time to return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
I noticed in all this mudslinging that San Jose has never been mentioned. Probably because they've sold out something like 90-95% of their games since entering the league 20 years ago. And that's the lesson that all Sun Belt apologists need to learn.

Sell out your building, and nobody *****es about you. Remember, Canadians hated San Jose when they came into the league for the teal jerseys and the slick marketing.

Look, I'm from California, as much as anybody else I shake my head at the Mother Bear-protectiveness Canadians have about hockey, which goes over the top. But when Quebec doesn't have a team and people choose going to Panda Express over the NHL, they have a point.
San Jose? Fine. It wasn't until Canada lost a couple of teams that the complaining really started. And it can still go back to selling out your building; if that had happened, neither team may have moved.

It is only a recent phenomena, during the past decade or so that most Canadian franchises sellout their entire slate of games. I'm not claiming a lack of support, but I am claiming that with the loss of a couple of teams Canada roared back by supporting their teams fully. It's a lesson that the "non-traditional" markets should learn.

Grudy0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2012, 12:05 AM
  #124
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 14,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Phoenix Roadrunners - WHA
Phoenix Roadrunners - IHL
Atlanta Knights - IHL
Columbus Chill - ECHL
Nashville Knights - ECHL

All enormously successful, and all yielded to the NHL.

Quebec Rafales - IHL - lasted two years
Quebec Citadelles - AHL - lasted three years
Hamilton Canucks - AHL - lasted two years

Looks like those potential cities failed their first test, didn't they?
Team League Avg. Attendance
Phoenix Roadrunners WHA 6,964
Phoenix Roadrunners IHL 6,554
Atlanta Knights IHL 8,001
Columbus Chill ECHL 5,330
Nashville Knights ECHL 4,315
. . .
Quebec Rafales IHL 8,922
Quebec Citadelles AHL 4,323
Quebec Nordiques WHA 8,656
Hamilton Canucks AHL 4,061

Looks like both the Rafales and WHA-era Nordiques were supported much better than any of the teams you listed.

Also of note, Quebec City's current hockey club, the Ramparts of the QMJHL, drew an average of 11,680 fans per game to the Colisee this past season, more than a certain NHL team in Phoenix.


Last edited by htpwn: 01-21-2012 at 12:41 AM.
htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2012, 01:00 AM
  #125
Gnashville
Playoff losers
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Ten Bears View Post
I fail to understand why people tout sold out arena's as a success when the tickets were free with a purchase of 40L of gas or something...

Just because the arena is full of people who paid nothing to get in, doesn't mean the market is a success. If it did, where are the line ups of rich american business men looking to get richer buying a failing southern NHL teams?
How do you know the fans paid nothing to get in??? Brett Wilson (small ownership stake), Tom Gaglardi, names ring a bell. Only one team is having trouble finding an owner (Coyotes), Don't count Atlanta. A$G never gave anyone a chance to step up there.

Once again the target is moved!! I should get to dictate where teams belong because I"m the almighty Canadian Hockey fan and my Point of view is always right. I rule the hockey world because I grew up watching and playing the game. I don't want anyone else to enjoy it because it belongs to me!! I can't be disgusted by empty arenas anymore I'm going to start talking ticket prices and ratings. It's not good enough to have a full house!! You must now charge What I pay for hockey. Who cares if your owners may actually like to charge something different. Your owner should only want to make what MLSE makes every year not break even or a small profit/loss. I love watching a bunch of Empty suits sit and make deals on their phones or not show up at all because I know that empty seat was paid for. You should attend games to be seen not heard. I know for a fact the Nashville Predators give away 17,113 free tickets (Go on their website and search for tickets they just give them to you free of charge!!!! Every seat is priced at zero, they even pay the tickmaster charge for you ) Those horrible people actually cheer for the team and make noise!! We can't have that it's a disgrace for those worthless undeserving so-called fans to act like they care and to watch the game. They should either charge 10,000 for nose bleed seats or move the team to where it right fully belongs here in my backyard.


Last edited by Gnashville: 01-21-2012 at 01:06 AM.
Gnashville 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 12:42 PM.

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.