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
Notices

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.

The Question that continually gets danced around

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-21-2004, 06:30 AM
  #26
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,922
vCash: 500
Movie are a poor example, because the product is fixed, it's identical no matter where you are.

A better example would be real estate. Does a guy paying $250K for a house in New York have the right to expect a better house than a guy paying $100K in Edmonton?

Of course not. They're two completely unrelated markets, charging whatever the market will bear.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 07:33 AM
  #27
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
Movie are a poor example, because the product is fixed, it's identical no matter where you are.

A better example would be real estate. Does a guy paying $250K for a house in New York have the right to expect a better house than a guy paying $100K in Edmonton?

Of course not. They're two completely unrelated markets, charging whatever the market will bear.
Yes that's a better example but both go to show just how ridiculous the question is.

Pepper is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 07:37 AM
  #28
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
In the real world, no.
Is that necessarily true?

In Philadelphia I can pay $5 to watch a high school hockey game, $15 to watch the AHL, and $50 to watch the NHL.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 08:01 AM
  #29
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???
I dunno. Gallon of gas in Tuscaloosa is $1.68. Gallon of gas in Phoenix is $1.98. Does the guy paying $1.98 have a right to expect a better gallon of gas?

D'oh! End of that argument.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 09:27 AM
  #30
Paul Martin Jones
DontTouchMyDonskoi!
 
Paul Martin Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat
It is important to the league that the majority of the teams can compete, or else the league falls appart. .
ok, understood. but clearly the majority of NHL teams can compete. this lock out is about raising the franchise values, nothing else.

dr

Paul Martin Jones is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 10:06 AM
  #31
HockeyCritter
Registered User
 
HockeyCritter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???
No.

The market in Detroit allows them to charge more for a seat than Edmonton.

Furthermore, paying for a ticket (regardless of price) entitles to purchaser entrance to a game, that's it. There is no guarantee of wins, quality of product, or level of competition - - such is the nature of the sports beast.

HockeyCritter is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 10:12 AM
  #32
Kaiped Krusader
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rylan up the Opposition
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
In Philadelphia I can pay $5 to watch a high school hockey game, $15 to watch the AHL, and $50 to watch the NHL.
This statement basically answers your original question. You can compare prices within a market but you can't necessarily compare them between two different markets. If you pay $50 for a Flyers ticket, you have every right to expect a better "product" or experience than someone paying $20 for admission to the exact same game. That most likely will come in the form of better seats but may also include other amenities. If you pay $50 for a Flyers ticket and a Canes fan can get the exact same experience for $20 in Raliegh it doesn't mean you're getting ripped off, it just means there's a lot less demand for NHL hockey in North Carolina.

Kaiped Krusader is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 11:17 AM
  #33
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCritter
No.

The market in Detroit allows them to charge more for a seat than Edmonton.

Furthermore, paying for a ticket (regardless of price) entitles to purchaser entrance to a game, that's it. There is no guarantee of wins, quality of product, or level of competition - - such is the nature of the sports beast.

I didn't say that is does entitle him to a better/more expensive team. Obviously it doesn't.

The question is, should it entitle him to witness a better product.

Let's say that the average owner puts 60% of ticket revenue back into the payroll. Should owners that draw 99% capactiy and charge more money for tickets put the same % of ticket revenue back into the team than the owner that only fills 70% of his building and charges an average priced seat ???

IMO a fan of a team like the Red Wings that fills their building every night should expect the team payroll to be higher than it is in a place like Chicago that has trouble drawing fans.

The other side to that story would be:

I'd be ticked off if I was an owner in Calgary that nearly fills the building, but due to the cdn. $, being in a smaller city and playing in an older building ... that in order to compete with the higher revenue teams I have to spend a much higher % of my ticket revenue than other teams.


IMO both sides are correct in their thinking ...... and that's part of the reason we're not playing hockey.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 10:53 PM
  #34
IWD
...
 
IWD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 5,845
vCash: 500
To clarify, my point wasn't so much if Joe pays 10 bucks in Detroit, but Jack pays 5 bucks in Edmonton, so Joe deserves a better product because he paid more for his ticket. Although, that is part of it too. Rather, my point was more that if you have a larger fanbase, then you should be able to put it to good use. They do, however, coincide if you think about it.

People bring up real estate, movies and taxation, but the problem is we're dealing with an entirely differently situations. It's convenient to bring those types of situations up to support an argument. The NHL is a business, so let's stick to businesses since they're the closest analogy to what type of market the NHL falls under. Shouldn't the investors of Volkswagon expect to have a better product than Kia?

As John put it nicely, if you're spending the money, chances are you'd rather see it go to improving your team than going into the pockets of your owner or towards buying players for Calgary or Nashville.

IWD is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 11:22 PM
  #35
Potatoe1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
I hope you all realize how utterly pointless this thread is.

Potatoe1 is offline  
Old
12-21-2004, 11:47 PM
  #36
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
 
Jaded-Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 38,059
vCash: 500
Should the Guy who paid $20 for a movie ticket in Manhattan expect to see the Lord of the Rings that we all saw while the guy who went to the movie theater in Decatur, GA who went same first day of release to his local house 'o Movies and paid $7 for his ticket, should he instead be stuck with a puppet show with sock puppets?

The NHL has two choices, and only two. Only have teams in perhaps 5 markets (Good luck with that concept btw - ) or realize that the sport has big and small cities and if there is going to be a 'league' all need to be able to see the same product.

I for one would refuse to watch a sock puppet NHL, except when I am 'blessed' to see the Detroits of the world come to town.

Jaded-Fan is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 12:14 AM
  #37
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,344
vCash: 500
I met with the head of marketing for the Habs a few months back. He explained it pretty well.

The people who pay $100+ for tickets in Montreal do get a better show than other places. The Bell Centre is one of the nicest arenas in the league, and the show they put on it fun for everyone there. The focus of the marketing team is to keep the fans of the team comming back, and to get the casual fan to become a fanatical fan. It works, too.

If you go to a hockey game in an arena like the Bell Centre or the ACC, etc...You will have a good time. You will have a good time regardless if the home team loses or wins. They work to make the game enjoyable, even if you don't like hockey.

Unfortunately, this isn't the case for all venues. The fans of the Habs don't continuously fill up the arena because they are simply fans of the game. There is a reason that a 6 year old kid will go to a Habs game and leave as a fan for life.

waffledave is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:07 AM
  #38
quat
winsome, loathsome
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 11,757
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
ok, understood. but clearly the majority of NHL teams can compete. this lock out is about raising the franchise values, nothing else.

dr
Well, I don't think it's just one and only one thing, althought this statement certainly does cover a great deal of ground... but it comes off as being extremely negative when that doesn't have to be the case. A healthy league benifits players and owners.

quat is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:11 AM
  #39
Paul Martin Jones
DontTouchMyDonskoi!
 
Paul Martin Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat
A healthy league benifits players and owners.
fair enough. the health of the league is being jeapordized by the owners refusal to find a pro active solution to their needs.

ramming it down the players throats doesnt seem to be working very well "in the best interest of a healthy league", i think if they really cared about the NHL, they would be more diligent in their search for a solution.

dr

Paul Martin Jones is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:27 AM
  #40
SwisshockeyAcademy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
fair enough. the health of the league is being jeapordized by the owners refusal to find a pro active solution to their needs.

ramming it down the players throats doesnt seem to be working very well "in the best interest of a healthy league", i think if they really cared about the NHL, they would be more diligent in their search for a solution.

dr
And we know the players care, bending at every turn to do their part for a season.

SwisshockeyAcademy is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:37 AM
  #41
Paul Martin Jones
DontTouchMyDonskoi!
 
Paul Martin Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwisshockeyAcademy
And we know the players care, bending at every turn to do their part for a season.
the owners brought on the work stoppage, not the players. if this was a strike, the burden would be on the players.

dr

Paul Martin Jones is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:44 AM
  #42
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,082
vCash: 500
if i offered my employer 24% of my salary back, i'd consider this bending, in order to be able to go to work !!!

anyways, should i feel sympathy to an owner of a have-not franchise such as...oh, say.. nashville ... who's players are offering 24% of their salaries back ... when the guy is the world's 36th richest person ?

Hawker14 is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:47 AM
  #43
quat
winsome, loathsome
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 11,757
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
fair enough. the health of the league is being jeapordized by the owners refusal to find a pro active solution to their needs.

ramming it down the players throats doesnt seem to be working very well "in the best interest of a healthy league", i think if they really cared about the NHL, they would be more diligent in their search for a solution.

dr
I understood that the players had been approached several years ago, and more than once, with the owners desire to creat a different solution, and were rebuffed. That may part of the reason this negotiation seems quite acrimonious. It does seem that negotiations of this sort are rarely polite, and certainly the scope of this one is rather broad.

I don't really see the players suffering as much as you do in this deal, although they certainly will be sacrificing some concessions they had won in the last agreement.

quat is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:49 AM
  #44
SwisshockeyAcademy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawker14
if i offered my employer 24% of my salary back, i'd consider this bending, in order to be able to go to work !!!

anyways, should i feel sympathy to an owner of a have-not franchise such as...oh, say.. nashville ... who's players are offering 24% of their salaries back ... when the guy is the world's 36th richest person ?
In the real world a 24% rollback would be bending over backwards and then some. NHL is not real World business. Its a beast of its own.

SwisshockeyAcademy is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 02:55 AM
  #45
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
In the real world a 24% rollback would be bending over backwards and then some. NHL is not real World business. Its a beast of its own.
considering the wealth of the NHL owners, i don't think it gets any more real.

Hawker14 is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 03:15 AM
  #46
Hawker14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,082
vCash: 500
the nhl owners are playing a high stakes poker game, with the belief that they have the necessary cards up their sleeves.

however, i believe they've underestimated the players. most players come from middle class upbringings who's parents had to earn everything they've ever made.

the players, for the most part, know exactly how lucky they are to be earning the salaries they do, but they also realize that without them, there is no NHL.

the nhl could re-start next year with scabs, but after a few weeks no one will pay to see AHL/ECHL calibre players at NHL ticket prices. i believe this because i won't even pay to watch the AHL more than a couple times per year myself, even with a new arena.

i'm very interested to see Bettman's actions over the next few weeks as I believe his job will ultimately be decided by it, notwithstanding the support certain owners are publicly providing in the media (of course, league sanctioned...mr. jacobs !!!).

Hawker14 is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 04:38 AM
  #47
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Is that necessarily true?

In Philadelphia I can pay $5 to watch a high school hockey game, $15 to watch the AHL, and $50 to watch the NHL.
Is what necessarily true? That ticket prices are function of local supply and demand? That consumers in Manhattan have more discretionary income to spend than consumers in Calgary? That consumers value some event tickets higher than others? That hockey competes with other forms of entertainment? That winning teams generally draw better than losers? Is what necessarily true?

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 04:39 AM
  #48
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawker14
the nhl owners are playing a high stakes poker game, with the belief that they have the necessary cards up their sleeves...
They do. They're holding the trump cards.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 07:16 AM
  #49
quat
winsome, loathsome
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 11,757
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawker14
the nhl owners are playing a high stakes poker game, with the belief that they have the necessary cards up their sleeves.

however, i believe they've underestimated the players. most players come from middle class upbringings who's parents had to earn everything they've ever made.

the players, for the most part, know exactly how lucky they are to be earning the salaries they do, but they also realize that without them, there is no NHL.

the nhl could re-start next year with scabs, but after a few weeks no one will pay to see AHL/ECHL calibre players at NHL ticket prices. i believe this because i won't even pay to watch the AHL more than a couple times per year myself, even with a new arena.

i'm very interested to see Bettman's actions over the next few weeks as I believe his job will ultimately be decided by it, notwithstanding the support certain owners are publicly providing in the media (of course, league sanctioned...mr. jacobs !!!).
And with no pucks there can be no hockey either.... to say nothing of the sticks and nets !

quat is offline  
Old
12-22-2004, 10:36 AM
  #50
Paul Martin Jones
DontTouchMyDonskoi!
 
Paul Martin Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat
I understood that the players had been approached several years ago, and more than once, with the owners desire to creat a different solution, and were rebuffed.
Brian Burke was asked if the situation was reversed and the last CBA was killing the players, not the owners, would the owners have agreed mid deal to change it ?

he said not a chance.

so, whats good for the goose ...

dr

Paul Martin Jones is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:20 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.