HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2/16/12 - Thrashy @ Minnesota - 7 PM CST - FSN

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-17-2012, 11:22 AM
  #651
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 24,425
vCash: 500
On the plus side, it's pretty cool that there's finally a hockey team around who's fans care enough to fill up the X and make some noise. Not only could that be a good rivalry, but it might wake up a fairly quiet and complacent crowd (and team).

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 11:32 AM
  #652
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
I'm not going to do the math again this year, but the difference between a true 3 point system and the current system is exceptionally minimal.

The last four years I've done the math, no one gets bumped out of a play off spot and only twice have the standings actually changed. The change is normally a swap between 6 and 7 or 7 and 8.

It would make more mathematical sense to have true 3 point games, but the math just doesn't change the standings that much.
The problem with that math is it assumes that playstyles don't respond to stimuli, which has been repeatedly disproven. When a regulation win is worth more than an OT win, teams are given incentive to win in regulation. We frequently see teams "play for OT" by not taking offensive risks, playing extremely conservatively, and just in general not "going all out" because they're guaranteed a point. Take that away and you'll get different behavior out of the bench.

An interesting way to look at this (and I don't have the stat access or time to do it) would be to compare G/60 of the last 3-5 minutes of the third period of tie games and compare it to the overall G/60 rate of games to see how much scoring is affected by this behavior. This could be taken further by converting that rate into additional goals, assigning "points" via some formula to determine winners and adjust standings based upon that. A simple analysis of converting existing games to 3 point contests doesn't resolve those other issues.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 11:39 AM
  #653
Avder
Life Happens.*shrug*
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Location: Location.
Country: United States
Posts: 33,800
vCash: 405
What I would like to see is a very short intermission in order to resurface the ice quickly (say 5 minutes) followed by a 10 minute overtime period. 5 on 5 or 4 on 4, whatever.

Also convert to a three point system. If Ot is played 5 on 5, have an OT win worth three and a shootout win/loss worth 2/1. If OT is played 4 on 4, have OT win/loss also worth 2/1.

Or go to a 10 minute OT played 5 on 5 and drop the shootout completely, and return to ties. That makes the most sense from a pure hockey standpoint, but no one in the leagues marketing department will ever let that happen.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 11:53 AM
  #654
651*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Capital of MN 651
Country: United States
Posts: 2,601
vCash: 500
I just realized, MTS doesn't even have Club level, is that correct? That's not good. My friend used to work on club level when I was a STH and I would get a VIP on there all the time. How nice it was! I seriously look at the pictures of MTS and the best rink in the league in the X and think Squidz' comments hold some merit.

Also, does anyone remember the complaints people were having about the restroom facilities at MTS during the games? The X's are ridiculously larger and we still have to wait in line during intermission, albeit not very long at that. I understand it's a horribly long wait at MTS that the fans have made a stink about already this year.

Anyway, I just wish Manitobans the best and really look forward for one of the best rivalries in the entire league, with truly the greatest hockey state in America (MN, of course) playing Winnipeg (Canada) regularly. How cool. The sooner these two teams get a "Winter Classic" the better *drools*.

Regards.

651* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 11:59 AM
  #655
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 2203
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
The reasons Winnipeg relocated in the first place didn't have much (if anything) to do with a lack of fan support. At current exchange rates, with rabid support willing to pay exhorbitant ticket prices (if necessary) the team can survive with an arena that only seats 15k people. If that exchange rate takes a nose dive (and considering the arbitrage situation, either both countries will see major economic shifts or the exchange rate will move) Winnipeg will slide back down into that range where the team needs to make the playoffs every 2 out of 3 years or they fall back into the red.

I don't doubt the support Winnipeg has for its team. I was in Winnipeg for the first home game (watching the game from my hotel) and know about the reaction and support. But fan support doesn't determine exchange rates. Player salaries are paid in US dollars, and the salary cap is going to keep rising. A 5% slip in the exchange rate (which would be a moderate change over a year) would be up to a $4MM shift in player salaries at the expected 2012-2013 salary cap. Assuming 100% sellouts, that's a shift of $6.50 per ticket per game at MTS. Couple that with the equivalent increased cost of living from a negative shift in exchange rate with Canada's primary trade partner and it doesn't take too many bumps to drive ticket prices out of the range Winnipeggers can afford.

I don't expect TNSE to just sit on their heels, but if they were to, this franchise would be just a couple monetary shocks away from serious financial issues.
I'm a Jets fan and come in peace but this is a totally naive comment. You clearly know nothing about TNSE. 50% of the ownership is the 17th richest man in the world, David Thomson.

The reasons the Jets actually have a better likelihood of surviving versus the Wild include that TNSE own the MTS Centre versus the Wild as mere tenants in their facility. TNSE extract every dollar earned from the MTS Center, including food, merch, booze, etc. They run a concert promotion business which drives additional revenue into and from the building and back into their pockets. They own parking structures around the building and are constructing more, own their own ticketing agency, own bars and restaurants in the surrounding area and will soon own more. They own and run their practice Multiplex facility in Winnipeg, own and run their AHL team. They are building and will own a 20 story boutique hotel across the street from the arena...
http://www.groupegermain.com/en/media-alt-winnipeg.asp

Finally, they've a deal with the Province of Manitoba that guarantees them 20 million $ per year in video slot revenue from one of the bars they run, for the next twenty years. Plus, regarding your comment about currency exchange rates, the NHL now have systems in place to equalize any currency inefficiencies going forward via revenue sharing.

TNSE is an integrated corporation. They aren't solely reliant upon NHL business to keep afloat, unlike the Wild. I'm guessing their business actually easily out-grosses the Wild' revenues by tens of millions of dollars.

Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:33 PM
  #656
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
I'm a Jets fan and come in peace but this is a totally naive comment. You clearly know nothing about TNSE. 50% of the ownership is the 17th richest man in the world, David Thomson.

The reasons the Jets actually have a better likelihood of surviving versus the Wild include that TNSE own the MTS Centre versus the Wild as mere tenants in their facility. TNSE extract every dollar earned from the MTS Center, including food, merch, booze, etc. They run a concert promotion business which drives additional revenue into and from the building and back into their pockets. They own parking structures around the building and are constructing more, own their own ticketing agency, own bars and restaurants in the surrounding area and will soon own more. They own and run their practice Multiplex facility in Winnipeg, own and run their AHL team. They are building and will own a 20 story boutique hotel across the street from the arena...
http://www.groupegermain.com/en/media-alt-winnipeg.asp

Finally, they've a deal with the Province of Manitoba that guarantees them 20 million $ per year in video slot revenue from one of the bars they run, for the next twenty years. Plus, regarding your comment about currency exchange rates, the NHL now have systems in place to equalize any currency inefficiencies going forward via revenue sharing.

TNSE is an integrated corporation. They aren't solely reliant upon NHL business to keep afloat, unlike the Wild. I'm guessing their business actually easily out-grosses the Wild' revenues by tens of millions of dollars.
Oh god, this is the funniest thing I've seen in years. You accuse someone else of being naive about the situation then mention the NHL Revenue Sharing system as a reason the picture is incomplete? Really? Who's the naive one here? Next you'll be telling me about parity in MLB.

The relative wealth of TNSE is irrelevant insofar as a the operating profit/loss of an individual property is concerned. You do realize that TNSE is small fish compared to AOL/Time Warner, who owned the Thrashers at one point right?

No corporation, regardless of how desperately they love the sport of hockey, will continue to run a sports team if it is resulting in multi-million dollar losses every year. It doesn't matter who owns the team. It doesn't matter what other holdings they have. It doesn't matter what their market cap is (because we've seen how well that's worked for Balsille right?).

If TNSE sits on their hands (which I have no reason to believe they will) Winnipeg will be a threat for relocation vis a vis fluctuations in the exchange rate.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:40 PM
  #657
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 2203
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Oh god, this is the funniest thing I've seen in years. You accuse someone else of being naive about the situation then mention the NHL Revenue Sharing system as a reason the picture is incomplete? Really? Who's the naive one here? Next you'll be telling me about parity in MLB.

The relative wealth of TNSE is irrelevant insofar as a the operating profit/loss of an individual property is concerned. You do realize that TNSE is small fish compared to AOL/Time Warner, who owned the Thrashers at one point right?

No corporation, regardless of how desperately they love the sport of hockey, will continue to run a sports team if it is resulting in multi-million dollar losses every year. It doesn't matter who owns the team. It doesn't matter what other holdings they have. It doesn't matter what their market cap is (because we've seen how well that's worked for Balsille right?).

If TNSE sits on their hands (which I have no reason to believe they will) Winnipeg will be a threat for relocation vis a vis fluctuations in the exchange rate.
You've clearly not heard of the NHL Supplemental Currency Equalization Plan.

You know what is amusing? That you just ignored that, unlike the Wild, TNSE are not sitting on their hands and running a business that will be subject to the whims of NHL related revenue alone. Their business dwarfs the Wild.

Funny you should mention large corporations BTW. Ever heard of Thomson Reuters? David Thomson own 50% of the Jets.

Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:42 PM
  #658
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
You've clearly not heard of the Supplemental Currency Equalization Plan.

You know what is amusing? That you just ignored that, unlike the Wild, TNSE are not sitting on their hands and running a business that will be subject to the whims of NHL related revenue alone.
You've clearly not heard of reality. Just because you name something fancy doesn't make it true. Just because you have money from other revenue sources doesn't mean you'll keep bleeding cash because you can afford it. It's not like AOL/Time Warner didn't have other revenue streams.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:48 PM
  #659
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 2203
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
You've clearly not heard of reality. Just because you name something fancy doesn't make it true. Just because you have money from other revenue sources doesn't mean you'll keep bleeding cash because you can afford it. It's not like AOL/Time Warner didn't have other revenue streams.
You claimed the Jets to be subject to large exchange rate risks, and I pointed out to you that the league now has a formula in place to equalize such risks, and you call me out of touch with reality... while denying its existence?

http://www.canada.com/topics/sports/...7882a142b2&p=1

http://books.google.ca/books?id=8W4H...20Plan&f=false

Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 01:06 PM
  #660
se7en
infamous...
 
se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mission Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,090
vCash: 500
Why are people arguing about this? What's the point? Im not saying someone is right or someone is wrong but I am saying that this seems like a pointless argument, especially to have on the GDT..

Both teams will be able to fiscally maintain themselves for at least the foreseeable future, both teams have strong fan bases, both teams are trying to make a name for themselves & both franchises probably have some of the best odds of staying put & being successful in the league.

We are 2 franchises that are eerily similar, we're both places that lost our original teams against the wishes of the fans & we're both cities that was given a new team (albeit one was an expansion & one a relocation) and regardless of how we acquired our new team, it's a pretty safe assumption that if Bettman is trying so hard to keep a team in place like Phoenix that he's not going to want to see one of is newer additions to the league fail anytime soon. Especially with us both being in major hockey markets..

Geezus guys, get along, the Wild & Jets should be buddies. We have the rare opportunity to not only be an awesome rivalry but a fun rivalry. Instead of being the type of fans that despise each other and call each other out for things like who's team is more financially stable lets be the fans that say "Hey it's awesome you got a team back, this is going to be fun" & "likewise"..

Argue about whatever you want but it seems a little unnecessarily heated...

se7en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 01:11 PM
  #661
651*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Capital of MN 651
Country: United States
Posts: 2,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by se7en View Post
Why are people arguing about this? What's the point? Im not saying someone is right or someone is wrong but I am saying that this seems like a pointless argument, especially to have on the GDT..

Both teams will be able to fiscally maintain themselves for at least the foreseeable future, both teams have strong fan bases, both teams are trying to make a name for themselves & both franchises probably have some of the best odds of staying put & being successful in the league.

We are 2 franchises that are eerily similar, we're both places that lost our original teams against the wishes of the fans & we're both cities that was given a new team (albeit one was an expansion & one a relocation) and regardless of how we acquired our new team, it's a pretty safe assumption that if Bettman is trying so hard to keep a team in place like Phoenix that he's not going to want to see one of is newer additions to the league fail anytime soon. Especially with us both being in major hockey markets..

Geezus guys, get along, the Wild & Jets should be buddies. We have the rare opportunity to not only be an awesome rivalry but a fun rivalry. Instead of being the type of fans that despise each other and call each other out for things like who's team is more financially stable lets be the fans that say "Hey it's awesome you got a team back, this is going to be fun" & "likewise"..

Argue about whatever you want but it seems a little unnecessarily heated...
I'm not calling anyone out or being nasty in any way. I just am concerned about the MTS because I DO want the Winnipeg Jets to be north so I finally have a better reason to get back to Canada more often (despite having family there anyways). God forbid if we lost them again, just like the Wild. I'd like to think Manitobans feel mutually when it comes to us just below them and hopefully they have a good idea about how big hockey really is in MN.

651* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 01:14 PM
  #662
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 2203
Quote:
Originally Posted by se7en View Post
Argue about whatever you want but it seems a little unnecessarily heated...
No heat intended from my side whatsoever. Good luck with your season.


Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 01:54 PM
  #663
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
You claimed the Jets to be subject to large exchange rate risks, and I pointed out to you that the league now has a formula in place to equalize such risks, and you call me out of touch with reality... while denying its existence?

http://www.canada.com/topics/sports/...7882a142b2&p=1

http://books.google.ca/books?id=8W4H...20Plan&f=false
There's no denying that the NHL has a program for easing the burden of currency fluctuations. There's also no denying that the actual program itself resides somewhere between useless and a practical joke. Just like the "paperwork reduction act" that requires that two copies of the notification of the act be distributed every time paperwork is removed due to the act, the name of a program doesn't actually have anything to do with its efficacy.

Since your entire argument hinges upon this humorous belief that the NHL's currency fluctuation protection program actually has an effect. The revenue sharing from this and other programs within the NHL are an absolute joke. They might be able to absorb a very short term shock, but they could never withstand even a medium term slide.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 02:02 PM
  #664
Teddy10Beers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
The reasons Winnipeg relocated in the first place didn't have much (if anything) to do with a lack of fan support. At current exchange rates, with rabid support willing to pay exhorbitant ticket prices (if necessary) the team can survive with an arena that only seats 15k people. If that exchange rate takes a nose dive (and considering the arbitrage situation, either both countries will see major economic shifts or the exchange rate will move) Winnipeg will slide back down into that range where the team needs to make the playoffs every 2 out of 3 years or they fall back into the red.

I don't doubt the support Winnipeg has for its team. I was in Winnipeg for the first home game (watching the game from my hotel) and know about the reaction and support. But fan support doesn't determine exchange rates. Player salaries are paid in US dollars, and the salary cap is going to keep rising. A 5% slip in the exchange rate (which would be a moderate change over a year) would be up to a $4MM shift in player salaries at the expected 2012-2013 salary cap. Assuming 100% sellouts, that's a shift of $6.50 per ticket per game at MTS. Couple that with the equivalent increased cost of living from a negative shift in exchange rate with Canada's primary trade partner and it doesn't take too many bumps to drive ticket prices out of the range Winnipeggers can afford.

I don't expect TNSE to just sit on their heels, but if they were to, this franchise would be just a couple monetary shocks away from serious financial issues.
I don't see how the currency exchange rate is much of a risk for Winnipeg or any other Canadian franchise for that matter. The US Dollar has been in a secular decline against the Canadian Dollar for the past decade. The USD/CAD peaked at around 1.62 in January 2002; today it's trading at 0.99 and got as low as 0.93 in the fall of 07 (coinciding with the spike in Brent oil futures). The Dollar has declined by approximately 40% against the Loonie during this time. With salaries being by far the largest operating expense of an NHL franchise, the owners of the Canadian franchises have received a huge boost in their bottom line from currency translations alone.

Going forward there is a much stronger bias for a continuation of the Dollar declining against the Loonie than vice versa. Canada is in a much stronger fiscal condition than the US by almost any metric and the trends are in Canada's favor. US Debt/GDP is at 106%; Canada's is only 83%. The primary risk to the Loonie against the Dollar is a worldwide financial collapse (akin to 08-09) that would cause commodities to tank. If anything there's a much more likely Geo-political event in the Mid East that cause another spike in crude.

One of the dumbest things the players association did was to agree to have all salaries paid in US Dollars. Apparently there's no one at the PA that has any experience in the Forex market. Think of all the Canadian hockey players living in Canadian markets getting paid in US Dollars. The purchasing power of their salaries has taken a big hit over the past several years. If I was a Canadian hockey player I'd be demanding that the PA rectify this in any extension of the CBA by allowing players the option to be paid in Canadian dollars rather than the sinking US Dollar. If I'm a US player I'd rather be paid in Loonies than Dollars.

In any event, the currency exchange risk for the owners of the Jets is no where near the top of the list. Even if it where you can easily hedge currency risks with swap contracts.

Teddy10Beers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 02:23 PM
  #665
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teddy10Beers View Post
Going forward there is a much stronger bias for a continuation of the Dollar declining against the Loonie than vice versa. Canada is in a much stronger fiscal condition than the US by almost any metric and the trends are in Canada's favor. US Debt/GDP is at 106%; Canada's is only 83%. The primary risk to the Loonie against the Dollar is a worldwide financial collapse (akin to 08-09) that would cause commodities to tank. If anything there's a much more likely Geo-political event in the Mid East that cause another spike in crude.
This is simply not true. Because of Canada's nearly unique population distribution, their relationship with the US heavily impacts the relative values of the currencies. The current exchange rate between the countries is completely untenable, and at some point arbitrage will finally outweigh the ridiculous effects of currency speculation. Canada's currency has received a huge boost (along with those currencies in Australia and New Zealand) due to risk aversion vis a vis recession in the US. As the economic situation in the US continues to improve, and the issues within the Eurozone continue to be up in the air or deteriorate (can you imagine the effects if Sarkozy isn't reelected?) the desirability of the US dollar will continue to rise. The current exchange rate is determine almost exclusively by speculation. Eventually actual economic realities will take over again. As currency speculators resume normal behavior as normal economic conditions return, the Canadian dollar will fall back to sustainable levels much more in line with PPP.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 02:58 PM
  #666
SwimToTheMoon
Wild fan in WPG
 
SwimToTheMoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
The problem with that is, while winning a shootout would net fewer points than winning in OT, losing the shootout would result in more than losing in OT. That's going to lead to far more defensive play in OT. Teams ahead in the standings would rather have 1 guaranteed point with a shot at another than nothing guaranteed but a shot at 3 points. In that scenario, you're better off keeping the loser point for OTL. Want fewer shootouts without adjusting to a 3 point win? Keep the loser point in OT but get rid of it in the shootout. That will encourage more offensive play and risk taking during the OT as screwing up to allow a goal in OT is worth more than losing in the "skills competition."

Someone on the main board was mentioning (though I don't have the data to support this claim) that OT G/60 is far lower than regulation G/60. That implies that teams playing 4v4 are either more defensive (I haven't seen regulation 4v4 stats) or OT teams are playing for the shootout. Take away the incentive and you'll see the frequency drop dramatically.
Problem with that is, losing in the shootout is no way to lose a game. You shouldnt get 0 points due to not winning a skills competition.

I do see your point(s) in the rest of your post though. I just wish there was someway to get rid of the shootout and/or make it so it rarely happens.

SwimToTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:03 PM
  #667
SwimToTheMoon
Wild fan in WPG
 
SwimToTheMoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
Coming from a Wild fan living in Winnipeg, I don't see the Jets moving anywhere for at LEAST the next 10 years. The ownership is so solid its not even funny. Sellouts are guaranteed for the next 5 years and I'm sure they will continue long after that.

Say TNSE DOES start losing money and wants to get rid of the team, we always have the NHL to swoop in and buy the team for 3 years, am I right?!?!

SwimToTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:04 PM
  #668
Teddy10Beers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
This is simply not true. Because of Canada's nearly unique population distribution, their relationship with the US heavily impacts the relative values of the currencies. The current exchange rate between the countries is completely untenable, and at some point arbitrage will finally outweigh the ridiculous effects of currency speculation. Canada's currency has received a huge boost (along with those currencies in Australia and New Zealand) due to risk aversion vis a vis recession in the US. As the economic situation in the US continues to improve, and the issues within the Eurozone continue to be up in the air or deteriorate (can you imagine the effects if Sarkozy isn't reelected?) the desirability of the US dollar will continue to rise. The current exchange rate is determine almost exclusively by speculation. Eventually actual economic realities will take over again. As currency speculators resume normal behavior as normal economic conditions return, the Canadian dollar will fall back to sustainable levels much more in line with PPP.
The US Dollar has been in a secular decline against the Loonie for the past decade. If you sold the Loonie short and went long the Dollar in 2002 you would be down 40%. This is a fact; not an opinion.

You say the Loonie has gone up because of risk aversion but it's the exact opposite of that. In a risk-on environment you go long the Loonie and short the Dollar. Risk-on = global economic expansion = increase commodity prices.

In a risk-off environment you long the Dollar and short the Loonie. Why do you think the USD/CAD spiked to 1.29 in March 09 (which coincided with the peak of the financial panic)? Risk-off = global contraction = lower commodity prices.

You are implying that the enormous expansion in US debt to GDP has little to no bearing on the value of the Dollar relative to the Loonie. A decade long 40% decline of the Dollar against the Loonie says otherwise. Why would you think that a country's fiscal condition would not have a bearing on the value of its currency? Canada, relative to the US, is in an infinitely better fiscal condition and that will in fact benefit its currency.

Finally the Fed is printing money like crazy with the intention of trying to inflate our way out of the mess we're in. This alone is bearish for the Dollar.

You don't trade currency pairs do you?

Teddy10Beers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:06 PM
  #669
se7en
infamous...
 
se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mission Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,090
vCash: 500
The Shoot-Out -

I LOVE it when:

* We win it

* Im watching two teams that I have no vested interest in (Its entertaining to watch when you have no emotional ties to the teams)

I HATE when:

* We lose it

se7en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:07 PM
  #670
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwimToTheMoon
Problem with that is, losing in the shootout is no way to lose a game. You shouldnt get 0 points due to not winning a skills competition.

I do see your point(s) in the rest of your post though. I just wish there was someway to get rid of the shootout and/or make it so it rarely happens.
I'm not saying it's a justifiable action from the point of view of the game. I'm just illustrating how things could be resolved for the sake of reaching an end. If you want fewer shootouts, you need to incentivize the teams to finish the game in regulation.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:15 PM
  #671
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by teddy10beers
The US Dollar has been in a secular decline against the Loonie for the past decade. If you sold the Loonie short and went long the Dollar in 2002 you would be down 40%. This is a fact; not an opinion.
And the Loonie appreciating at a completely unsustainable rate for a decade means it must continue that way for the next decade right? I mean, that's exactly what happened with housing prices, and that's why they're at the highest levels ever right now right? Oh wait.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teddy10beers
Finally the Fed is printing money like crazy with the intention of trying to inflate our way out of the mess we're in. This alone is bearish for the Dollar.
Somebody doesn't know how the Federal Reserve works. :



Short term currency valuations (and yes, with post-Breton-Woods floating exchanges, 10 years can be described as short term) are determined by speculation. Long term currency valuations are determined by economics. You can bubble your currencies up all you want by tracking your circular references to drive values higher and higher, but we all know how bubbles end.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:16 PM
  #672
Teddy10Beers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
The relative wealth of TNSE is irrelevant insofar as a the operating profit/loss of an individual property is concerned. You do realize that TNSE is small fish compared to AOL/Time Warner, who owned the Thrashers at one point right?

No corporation, regardless of how desperately they love the sport of hockey, will continue to run a sports team if it is resulting in multi-million dollar losses every year. It doesn't matter who owns the team. It doesn't matter what other holdings they have. It doesn't matter what their market cap is (because we've seen how well that's worked for Balsille right?).

If TNSE sits on their hands (which I have no reason to believe they will) Winnipeg will be a threat for relocation vis a vis fluctuations in the exchange rate.
Classic apples and oranges comparison.

TNSE, from what I can tell, is a privately held corporation with Chipman and Thompson as the primary shareholders. Time Warner on the other hand is a large publicly traded company with a market cap of $37 billion that answers to its shareholders and BoD.

TNSE is going to do whatever Chipman and Thompson want it to do. Given how wealthy these guys are (especially Thompson) I doubt they got involved in the Jets for the sole purpose of making profits.

Even publicly traded companies do things that are not always dependent on profitability. A good example is News Corp. Even though its traded on the NYSE it does (more or less) what Rupert Murdoch wants it to do, included running the Sunday Times of London at a substantial loss year after year after year.

Teddy10Beers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:34 PM
  #673
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 651 View Post
I just realized, MTS doesn't even have Club level, is that correct? That's not good. My friend used to work on club level when I was a STH and I would get a VIP on there all the time. How nice it was! I seriously look at the pictures of MTS and the best rink in the league in the X and think Squidz' comments hold some merit.

Also, does anyone remember the complaints people were having about the restroom facilities at MTS during the games? The X's are ridiculously larger and we still have to wait in line during intermission, albeit not very long at that. I understand it's a horribly long wait at MTS that the fans have made a stink about already this year.

Anyway, I just wish Manitobans the best and really look forward for one of the best rivalries in the entire league, with truly the greatest hockey state in America (MN, of course) playing Winnipeg (Canada) regularly. How cool. The sooner these two teams get a "Winter Classic" the better *drools*.

Regards.

That's not correct. MTS Centre has club seating and has had it since the days of the Moose. Don't understand the complaints about the bathrooms as the games I've been too I haven't had to wait. I've never been to the Excel but from friends I've been told its really nice and probably nicer than the MTS Centre, but the metro area of Minneapolis-St. Paul has over 3 million while Winnipeg has less than 1 million so you obviously build a facility that makes sense for where you are. The Winnipeg Jets are run by very successful business people and they know the market and didn't rush into this endeavour.

cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:46 PM
  #674
NHL1674
Whatever...
 
NHL1674's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 12,092
vCash: 500
I'm having flashbacks of social studies class.

NHL1674 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 05:38 PM
  #675
Teddy10Beers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
And the Loonie appreciating at a completely unsustainable rate for a decade means it must continue that way for the next decade right? I mean, that's exactly what happened with housing prices, and that's why they're at the highest levels ever right now right? Oh wait.
Somebody doesn't know how the Federal Reserve works. :
Short term currency valuations (and yes, with post-Breton-Woods floating exchanges, 10 years can be described as short term) are determined by speculation. Long term currency valuations are determined by economics. You can bubble your currencies up all you want by tracking your circular references to drive values higher and higher, but we all know how bubbles end.
What do think happens when the Fed engages in two rounds of Quantitative Easing and purchases RMBS and Treasuries to the tune of $1.8 Trillion. Where do you think the Fed gets the dollars to make those purchases? They print them.

When the Fed floods the market with dollars do you think that is bullish or bearish for the relative value of the USD?

You should open up a Forex account and and do some trades to test your theory that CAD is a risk-off currency.

Teddy10Beers 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 08:05 AM.

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.