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, expansion and relocation, and NHL revenues.

NHL to Expand 2 teams in Canada - THN

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-22-2012, 12:28 PM
  #701
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Seattle needs an owner, as does KC: If the NHL wants an easy solution to a problem that's been dragged out far longer than it should've been then they can just fold the team.

It may not be the best solution, but hey we're talking about a league that put a team in Atlanta twice and then threatened a crowd that's guaranteed to be sold-out for three years in Winnipeg.
Seattle has interested groups and has been mention by Daly while he was in town during the playoffs i think when Vancouver was in the Stanley cup finals. Its just there is nothing Seattle group can do until there is an arena.

Remember it is really hard to get sport facilities built in Washington. If hansen wasn't so generous or didn't appear wanting to built an arena it would had to be 100% privately funded to get it done and to attract two teams and that not including interest rates.

Since sodo arena requires a nba team before it gets built i just don't see NHL owner to be coming out until he knows its going to be built.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 12:50 PM
  #702
gordie
Registered User
 
gordie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
The level of hate Bettman gets from certain quarters just defies rationality
He wasn't born a Canadian just like President Obama wasn't born 100% white. There isn't any rationality for race,ethnic or nationality prejudice.

gordie is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 12:56 PM
  #703
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,258
vCash: 500
Bettman apologists on HF; who'da thunk it?

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 01:16 PM
  #704
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,736
vCash: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I've read expansion fees could be anywhere from $200m-$500m per franchise.

Relocation fees are about $60m.
What's your point? Just because relocation fees are less means they shouldn't take it and just let them fold?

How does that make any sense?

__________________
Kane One is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 01:52 PM
  #705
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,956
vCash: 1298
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
What's your point? Just because relocation fees are less means they shouldn't take it and just let them fold?

How does that make any sense?
The post I was responding to, asked why the NHL would expand instead of relocate teams.

I pointed out, that expansion fees are much higher then relocation fees and that is why the league probably prefers expansion to relocation.

and since my team is one that the relocation happy crowd, wants to see moved, I don't try to hide my preference for expansion

CREW99AW is online now  
Old
10-22-2012, 01:53 PM
  #706
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,956
vCash: 1298
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Bettman apologists on HF; who'da thunk it?
I prefer the term supporter

CREW99AW is online now  
Old
10-22-2012, 02:23 PM
  #707
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 32,974
vCash: 5113
I do agree that both Seattle and Portland make sense for the NHL, but Portland's only happening if Paul Allen's involved. Without him, Portland has as much of a chance as Albuquerque at getting a team. With him, they'd probably pole vault Seattle and Quebec City on the NHL's wish list for future markets. Battman, Daly, & Co. would be busy tripping over each other to get him a team before he changed his mind.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 02:28 PM
  #708
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
I've heard if as few as 8 teams agree with Bettman, what he says goes. So it wouldn't be hard for the bottom 8 revenue earners to band together and lose the season. It may be their best year financially and there isn't a thing the profitable teams could do about it.
Why would it be the bottom eight teams? You don't think Charles Wang would be STOKED by the last NHL proposal? Eligible for revenue sharing, can put their prospects in the AHL and have them count against the cap, and can trade cap space?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
What Conference gets Hamilton and which one gets QC though?
Easy. Hamilton replaces CBJ in the Central/Norris. CBJ joins the Atlantic/Patrick (to be paired with PIT); and Quebec joins the Northeast/Adams.

Adams: BOS, QUE, MON, OTT, TOR, BUF, FLA, TB
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, WAS, CAR, PIT, CBJ
Norris: HAM, DET, CHI, MIN, WIN, STL, DAL, NASH
Smythe: VAN, EDM, CAL, COL, SJ, ANA, LA, PHX/SEA


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustlechuck24 View Post
I would rather have a team in Quebec and a team in Seattle. Then divide the league into 4 eight team divisions

North East
Toronto-Quebec-Ottawa-Montreal-Boston-NYI-NYR-Buffalo

East
New Jersey-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-Columbus-Washington-Carolina-Tampa-Florida
Ugh, dividing the East on a North-South would be bad for so many reasons. If it's SEA/QUE, you do the exact same thing as above in the East; just slide COL to the Norris for Hamilton and put Seattle in the Smythe.

Adams: BOS, QUE, MON, OTT, TOR, BUF, FLA, TB
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, WAS, CAR, PIT, CBJ
Norris: DET, CHI, MIN, WIN, STL, DAL, NASH, COL
Smythe: VAN, EDM, CAL, SEA, SJ, ANA, LA,

KevFu is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 02:35 PM
  #709
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,267
vCash: 500
I agree with Seattle but their is more to hockey than economic strenght its called culture.You can drive through Every smaller city in Canada and people will Know what the memorial Cup is and what major Junior Hockey means to those cities.Bobby Clarke Bobby Orr Guy Lafleur their all known in the cities they played in there like icons.Thats what real hockey means to millions of Canadians from Newfoundland to BritishColumbia

thom is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 02:38 PM
  #710
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
I do agree that both Seattle and Portland make sense for the NHL, but Portland's only happening if Paul Allen's involved. Without him, Portland has as much of a chance as Albuquerque at getting a team. With him, they'd probably pole vault Seattle and Quebec City on the NHL's wish list for future markets. Battman, Daly, & Co. would be busy tripping over each other to get him a team before he changed his mind.
While Portland would be good in general but would they be better option than Seattle? I say let Seattle have a team first and see how it is for hockey in the northwest than decide on Portland. Note Portland being 2 hours (guessing) south of Seattle is an disadvantage for Portland for its nearest rival being Vancouver is about 4-5 hour travel. If Portland gets a team then Seattle needs to get a team. Scheduling would be much easier that way.

This is what MLS did with the northwest. They expanded to Seattle and realized it was a gold mine for soccer (equivalent of hockey being a gold mine in canada) and then expanded into Portland and Vancouver.


Last edited by gstommylee: 10-22-2012 at 02:44 PM.
gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 03:10 PM
  #711
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
While Portland would be good in general but would they be better option than Seattle? I say let Seattle have a team first and see how it is for hockey in the northwest than decide on Portland. Note Portland being 2 hours (guessing) south of Seattle is an disadvantage for Portland for its nearest rival being Vancouver is about 4-5 hour travel. If Portland gets a team then Seattle needs to get a team. Scheduling would be much easier that way.

This is what MLS did with the northwest. They expanded to Seattle and realized it was a gold mine for soccer (equivalent of hockey being a gold mine in canada) and then expanded into Portland and Vancouver.
The NHL has a long history of expanding to give teams partners:
LA and Oakland Seals; PIT and PHI; STL to go with CHI; ANA to go with LA; TB and FLA; ATL to go with CAR
(arena politics prevented HOU to go with DAL). SEA to go with VAN, and PORT to go with SEA/VAN makes sense.

That's how you PROPERLY expand to grow the game. When you look at the NHL's first wave of expansion, and the list of candidates, their plan was obvious: start in the extreme South and add teams to bridge the gaps.

The ideal 90s expansion plan would have been:
OTT, TB, FLA, ANA for phase one.
Norm Green and Peter Karamanos (neither of whom sold their teams to be moved) were hell bent on relocation.
Save WIN and QUE.
Second wave: Denver, Seattle, Houston and Minnesota for 30:

VAN, EDM, CAL, SEA, COL
SJ, LA, ANA, DAL, HOU
DET, CHI, STL, MIN, WIN
OTT, QUE, MON, TOR, BUF
BOS, NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI
PIT, WAS, CAR, TB, FLA

That's a pretty solid plan.

But obviously Quebec and Winnipeg moved, Houston's arena situation turned political and took them off the table and the Sonics owner torpedo'd the city's NHL bid by remodeling Key Arena. Leaving us with PHX, NASH, CBJ and Atlanta.

KevFu is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 03:15 PM
  #712
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
But obviously Quebec and Winnipeg moved, Houston's arena situation turned political and took them off the table and the Sonics owner torpedo'd the city's NHL bid by remodeling Key Arena. Leaving us with PHX, NASH, CBJ and Atlanta.
IF Seattle had the guts to tell the late sonics owner it has to be a NHL arena as well we may have lost the sonics then but gotten a NHL team but ironically here we are 17 years later sonics have left and we are working towards getting a NHL arena built.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 03:33 PM
  #713
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 32,974
vCash: 5113
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
While Portland would be good in general but would they be better option than Seattle? I say let Seattle have a team first and see how it is for hockey in the northwest than decide on Portland. Note Portland being 2 hours (guessing) south of Seattle is an disadvantage for Portland for its nearest rival being Vancouver is about 4-5 hour travel. If Portland gets a team then Seattle needs to get a team. Scheduling would be much easier that way.

This is what MLS did with the northwest. They expanded to Seattle and realized it was a gold mine for soccer (equivalent of hockey being a gold mine in canada) and then expanded into Portland and Vancouver.
I actually have questions about Portland being large enough to simultaneously support the NHL and the NBA (as they would be the smallest market with teams in both leagues if they landed an NHL team), but that qualm doesn't really matter. Allen is a mega-rich individual with a history of owning professional sports teams (notably the Seattle Seahawks and the Portland Trail Blazers), and any league would love to have him as an owner. Instant credibility for a team, deep pockets, past experience running profitable sports franchises, and deep roots in the area to make a team there likely a safe and sustainable franchise.

In other words, everything that the NHL wants in an owner. Not to mention that he owns an NHL-suitable arena where they could play, so the start-up costs would be negligible compared to Seattle and Quebec City having to build new arenas.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 03:39 PM
  #714
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
I actually have questions about Portland being large enough to simultaneously support the NHL and the NBA (as they would be the smallest market with teams in both leagues if they landed an NHL team), but that qualm doesn't really matter. Allen is a mega-rich individual with a history of owning professional sports teams (notably the Seattle Seahawks and the Portland Trail Blazers), and any league would love to have him as an owner. Instant credibility for a team, deep pockets, past experience running profitable sports franchises, and deep roots in the area to make a team there likely a safe and sustainable franchise.

In other words, everything that the NHL wants in an owner. Not to mention that he owns an NHL-suitable arena where they could play, so the start-up costs would be negligible compared to Seattle and Quebec City having to build new arenas.
Paul Allen is minority owner of the Sounders. But your reason is why i don't see Portland getting a team unless Seattle gets a team.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:23 PM
  #715
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Paul Allen is minority owner of the Sounders. But your reason is why i don't see Portland getting a team unless Seattle gets a team.
I don't think anyone sees Portland getting a team and Seattle not getting one.

Although, I suppose that if the NHL added Quebec and Hamilton for like 2016, and then Rogers/Bell split to put a team in Markham, you'd need at least one more but really three more teams and you'd want those three to be Western teams. If Seattle isn't ready to go, and Portland is, I could see that, I suppose.

KevFu is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:23 PM
  #716
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Why would it be the bottom eight teams? You don't think Charles Wang would be STOKED by the last NHL proposal? Eligible for revenue sharing, can put their prospects in the AHL and have them count against the cap, and can trade cap space?



Easy. Hamilton replaces CBJ in the Central/Norris. CBJ joins the Atlantic/Patrick (to be paired with PIT); and Quebec joins the Northeast/Adams.

Adams: BOS, QUE, MON, OTT, TOR, BUF, FLA, TB
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, WAS, CAR, PIT, CBJ
Norris: HAM, DET, CHI, MIN, WIN, STL, DAL, NASH
Smythe: VAN, EDM, CAL, COL, SJ, ANA, LA, PHX/SEA


Ugh, dividing the East on a North-South would be bad for so many reasons. If it's SEA/QUE, you do the exact same thing as above in the East; just slide COL to the Norris for Hamilton and put Seattle in the Smythe.

Adams: BOS, QUE, MON, OTT, TOR, BUF, FLA, TB
Patrick: NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, WAS, CAR, PIT, CBJ
Norris: DET, CHI, MIN, WIN, STL, DAL, NASH, COL
Smythe: VAN, EDM, CAL, SEA, SJ, ANA, LA,
Nashville should move East before CBJ.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:24 PM
  #717
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
I don't think anyone sees Portland getting a team and Seattle not getting one.

Although, I suppose that if the NHL added Quebec and Hamilton for like 2016, and then Rogers/Bell split to put a team in Markham, you'd need at least one more but really three more teams and you'd want those three to be Western teams. If Seattle isn't ready to go, and Portland is, I could see that, I suppose.
I doubt Paul Allen will change his mind anytime soon.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:48 PM
  #718
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,736
vCash: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
The post I was responding to, asked why the NHL would expand instead of relocate teams.

I pointed out, that expansion fees are much higher then relocation fees and that is why the league probably prefers expansion to relocation.

and since my team is one that the relocation happy crowd, wants to see moved, I don't try to hide my preference for expansion
That wasn't what I was referring to. I already understood why they would expand, but I'm wondering why the two struggling teams would fold instead of relocate.

Kane One is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:54 PM
  #719
smitty10
Registered User
 
smitty10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Nashville should move East before CBJ.
Apparently Columbus has some big rivalry with Pittsburgh so they'd make sense. Plus they're in the EST zone and Nashville is Central (I believe).

smitty10 is online now  
Old
10-22-2012, 05:54 PM
  #720
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Nashville should move East before CBJ.
Why on earth would you do that? You don't serve geography with your divisions. You use divisions to generate dollars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty10 View Post
Apparently Columbus has some big rivalry with Pittsburgh so they'd make sense. Plus they're in the EST zone and Nashville is Central (I believe).
They don't, but they could have a rivalry with PIT. Moving CBJ into the Patrick with WAS, CAR, and the Atlantic teams serves everyone's interests the best, with the exception of Detroit. Since DET is the #5 revenue team, it's not like they need the bump of TV start times.

KevFu is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 06:43 PM
  #721
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shogunate of Nofunia
Country: Fiji
Posts: 32,974
vCash: 5113
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty10 View Post
Apparently Columbus has some big rivalry with Pittsburgh so they'd make sense. Plus they're in the EST zone and Nashville is Central (I believe).
If Columbus has a rivalry with Pittsburgh, it's entirely one-sided.

That being said, if any team is moved East without relocating, it'll be Columbus. No real entrenched rivalries with anyone in the West, no one would really miss them if they switched conferences beyond having a team they could more regularly beat up, and they'd probably benefit the most by being in a conference entirely made up of other eastern time zone teams.

No Fun Shogun is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 06:43 PM
  #722
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,956
vCash: 1298
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
That wasn't what I was referring to. I already understood why they would expand, but I'm wondering why the two struggling teams would fold instead of relocate.
I wasn't suggesting struggling teams fold.

I expect Bettman to support the franchises he has.To work towards having 30 healthy franchises. I think relocation should be the last option.

CREW99AW is online now  
Old
10-22-2012, 06:53 PM
  #723
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty10 View Post
Apparently Columbus has some big rivalry with Pittsburgh so they'd make sense. Plus they're in the EST zone and Nashville is Central (I believe).
Nashville is closer to the teams currently in the South East though, and Columbus fits in the Central better.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 06:54 PM
  #724
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I wasn't suggesting struggling teams fold.

I expect Bettman to support the franchises he has.To work towards having 30 healthy franchises. I think relocation should be the last option.
If that was the case that puts Seattle at a huge disadvantage in getting a team via expansion. With them going up against Quebec city and another Ontario team and i just don't see Seattle getting a expansion team against those 2.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 07:30 PM
  #725
KevFu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Orleans
Country: United States
Posts: 4,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Nashville is closer to the teams currently in the South East though, and Columbus fits in the Central better.
That doesn't matter. Divisions are to serve the league's interest, not serve the map.

#1 - They're moving towards a four-division setup: It's probable for the next season we play in; and practically definite if they add two teams.

#2 - In a six-division setup, the Predators would rather be in the Central and have 10 road games at 7 pm in Nashville than be in the Southeast and have two.

#3 - DET or CBJ wouldn't blink twice about joining the Southeast Division, despite being geographically out of place. They'd welcome having 32 road games start at 7 pm in their hometown instead of 12. In fact, I believe both offered to swap with WIN straight up for last season.

KevFu 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 10:39 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.