HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Contraction a necessary evil for survival of NHL says economist

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2012, 09:52 PM
  #226
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire11 View Post
This is only because you don't realize the value of having these teams in the league. Unless you want the leafs to play a schedule of 41 games vs Montreal and 41 games vs NY Rangers. I'm sure that league will draw well.
I didn't shed a single tear when atlanta became the jets 2.0. When the coyotes move, I'm fine with that. Once the landing markets are saturated and there are still teams crying poor if the choice is cut and run or continue perpetual subsidies, I chose the former. Not because I resent the non traditional markets but because it is best for the league.

Methinks you are dramatically overestimating the value of the weak sister teams, the NHL does not need these markets in any sense of the word.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 09:58 PM
  #227
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top 6 Spaling View Post
To be fair, 2 other rinks were being planned right before the big recession, and both had to be scrapped. Believe me, we all wish that was different, but it's the best we can do. Still....

http://unitedstatesofhockey.com/2012...up-in-2011-12/



I would say the Preds are helping. Are they as high as Montreal? No. But growing at 12% per year...good things will happen sooner rather than later.

I regard the city paying the Preds as a necessary evil. Just like I assume your owners regard revenue sharing.
12% of about 3000 which is about 360 new registrants for the entire state for the entire year which is about 15 new teams at all levels. I can see why people aren't clamoring to build new rinks.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 10:04 PM
  #228
Top 6 Spaling
Registered User
 
Top 6 Spaling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Smashville
Country: United States
Posts: 10,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
12% of about 3000 which is about 360 new registrants for the entire state for the entire year which is about 15 new teams at all levels. I can see why people aren't clamoring to build new rinks.
The point is that it's growing significantly and exponentially because of the Predators. These things take time.

Top 6 Spaling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 10:12 PM
  #229
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top 6 Spaling View Post
The point is that it's growing significantly and exponentially because of the Predators. These things take time.
Exponential growth is not sustainable, especially in an environment with very limited resources. 360 people in the entire state is no something to crow about. If you have 100 players and bump it up to 150 in the entire state, that 50% increase could be a bus of kids coming down from Ontario for a tournament.

And i know these things take time, I don't deny it. But you don't have unlimited time, the rest of the league is not going to prop you up for the next two or three decades so that you go from 3000 registered players to 5000.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:10 PM
  #230
predfan98
Registered User
 
predfan98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
oh, this is the pile on Nashville thread...... got it.....

why should the league have propped up the Edmonton Oilers in the 1990's? They had less than 10,000 season ticket holders?

They are a small gate driven market..... whose owner is asking the city to provide major financing to build a new arena... sounds like they need to be moved. \\ contracted...LOL.

predfan98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:18 PM
  #231
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by predfan98 View Post
oh, this is the pile on Nashville thread...... got it.....

why should the league have propped up the Edmonton Oilers in the 1990's? They had less than 10,000 season ticket holders?

They are a small gate driven market..... whose owner is asking the city to provide major financing to build a new arena... sounds like they need to be moved. \\ contracted...LOL.
Because the people of edmonton give a damn about the game ? Because the fans of edmonton didnt expect the rest of the league to prop them up for 40 years?

Revenue sharing should be to help shore up teams temporarily. When do you anticipate that non traditional southern markets will get off revenue sharing from established markets? Is 30 years enough?

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:21 PM
  #232
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by echlfreak View Post
Contraction is not needed at all. The NHL just has to recognize a dying team in Phoenix...they have tried to keep this dying coyote alive for too long. After Phx finally gains some momentum with a great playoff run, they lockout and kill any chance of growth. They are killing their own team!

Moves instead of contraction:

Phx to Quebec
Carolina to Markham
Columbus to Seattle


Why would you contract when you can move the exact same team to a more traditional hockey market first?

Re-location makes NHL more money with re-loc fee. Plus a hockey market creates more ticket sales and all the revenue of new merch, business sponsors etc.
In my opinion they should contract some teams and move other teams.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:23 PM
  #233
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
Contraction would make it harder to score, because the players who would not be playing would largely be the worst defenders. GM's and coaches are not dummies. They know that there's two ways to help a team win -- improve your ability to score, and impede that of your opponents. And every GM in the league that's any good is doing everything he can along both vectors.

Goal differential is the OBP of hockey. Every team pays attention to it. Every team knows that while a 7-5 game is as much of a win as a 3-2 win, it's even better to win 7-2. If a player can't or won't help a team stop the puck, get the puck, and/or move it up the ice, he plays less, or goes to a team that doesn't care about goal differential -- which then goes on to suck.
But history shows that if there's more good players per teams, the game is usualy better.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:24 PM
  #234
predfan98
Registered User
 
predfan98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
LOL.... the Preds haven't been around for even 15 years.....

maybe you didn't know that..... you know, non traditional southern markets are all the same and are the whole problem...

predfan98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:24 PM
  #235
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 6,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Because the people of edmonton give a damn about the game ? Because the fans of edmonton didnt expect the rest of the league to prop them up for 40 years?

Revenue sharing should be to help shore up teams temporarily. When do you anticipate that non traditional southern markets will get off revenue sharing from established markets? Is 30 years enough?
What team has had 30 years, let alone 40? Calm down there strawman.

bluesfan94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:28 PM
  #236
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
What team has had 30 years, let alone 40? Calm down there strawman.
There are preds fans in this very thread that have suggested this, if not more. If you want i can point them out.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:31 PM
  #237
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
But history shows that if there's more good players per teams, the game is usualy better.
1980's 1990's...until the lockout.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:32 PM
  #238
0123456789*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top 6 Spaling View Post
The point is that it's growing significantly and exponentially because of the Predators. These things take time.
Growth in a new market is always high at the beginning and then tails off. With a growth of only 12% from a base of 3000 I would be more concerned then pleased. With such a small base that is a very slow growth that can lose momentum rather quickly.

0123456789* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:32 PM
  #239
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by predfan98 View Post
LOL.... the Preds haven't been around for even 15 years.....

maybe you didn't know that..... you know, non traditional southern markets are all the same and are the whole problem...
1998 to today is what, 14 years. Oooh you got me on that one, well played sir! You think that the preds are profitable without a subsidy from the league and the city when the league starts back up?

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:36 PM
  #240
Soundgarden
Registered User
 
Soundgarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 6,199
vCash: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Because the people of edmonton give a damn about the game ? Because the fans of edmonton didnt expect the rest of the league to prop them up for 40 years?

Revenue sharing should be to help shore up teams temporarily. When do you anticipate that non traditional southern markets will get off revenue sharing from established markets? Is 30 years enough?
I'm sure having Gretzky and countless HHOF'ers in the first decade of their existence certainly helped a small sized Canadian team like Edmonton. Compared to Nashville, who had to wait a decade before one of their players was nominated for an award that didn't have to do with an injury.

Don't think for a second that people in TN, or in any southern market don't love the game. Or that they can't learn to love the game like someone from the north.

Contraction isn't the answer when there are plenty of good relocation options.

Soundgarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:43 PM
  #241
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundgarden View Post
I'm sure having Gretzky and countless HHOF'ers in the first decade of their existence certainly helped a small sized Canadian team like Edmonton. Compared to Nashville, who had to wait a decade before one of their players was nominated for an award that didn't have to do with an injury.

Don't think for a second that people in TN, or in any southern market don't love the game. Or that they can't learn to love the game like someone from the north.

Contraction isn't the answer when there are plenty of good relocation options.
I dont question individual devotion to the game, never have never will. I do question whether there are enough of these types of fans to support a team. This isnt a north vs south thing, its a butts in the seats thing. Demand, not passion. I hope that nasville makes a run of it, but the first 14 years are not fantastically promising.

Edmonton had supported a horrible but young team so the notion that early success is enough to cement a new team, you want to explain tampa bay ?

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:48 PM
  #242
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,257
vCash: 500
The piling on NSH has to stop. I and others am talking about franchises that cannot or wont get it together. I have my problems with Nashville as a city but they are a good hockey market.

Edmonton, Calgary also took from Toronto too. In the late 1990's

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:49 PM
  #243
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
I only point out the Nashville situation because it highlights a team that is not self-sufficient. Reigning in the cap is a way to achieve that goal. Another is to build fanbase support. But that takes time. The players dont want any part of that. They want the owners and the fans/taxpayers to foot the bill. Im from Toronto and supported the introduction of the cap even though it meant my local team would suffer as a result. LEafs havent made the playoffs in 7+ yrs now? Not a total coincidence. Fans here have made a sacrifice for the good of the 30 franchises in this league. I expect the players to do likewise.

DuklaNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:50 PM
  #244
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
I read an article a while ago that the state & city governments had given the 'team' more than $115m over the yrs. I guess most businesses would be 'fine' if they had received similar treatment. Dont be fooled in most recent data, the teams have to function in peak & trough periods. Whats the cumulative net income status of that franchise excluding govt or league assistance?
For sure. The economy has exposed the paperweight cities that's for sure.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:51 PM
  #245
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
But history shows that if there's more good players per teams, the game is usualy better.
What history? When was the last time a major league contracted a team?

And define "better?" You seem to be leaping to a definition of "better = more offense." There's very good reasons to expect the exact opposite.

There's more good players per team now with 30 teams than there was 40 years ago with half that many. It's just that 40 years ago they were concentrated on a handful of dynastic teams we remember, while the rest of the league consisted of shallow, cash-strapped also-rans that we don't.

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:52 PM
  #246
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
It's even a niche sport in big market eastern cities, probably including Canada. NHL fans in those cities, where most NHL fans live, barely watch any other team but their own. They might watch another O6 team, but that's it. All the blame for a small TV contract doesn't go to just the non-traditional hockey markets.

If more NHL fans in the northeast corridor watched NHL hockey, there would probably be a bigger TV contract. But they don't, so there isn't much reason to have any teams west of Chicago(lucky enough to be O6, because if they weren't, a central time zone team doesn't count) or south of Philly once Washington doesn't have Ovechkin.
Very true. I have said it before, many people would not care about hockey if their cities don't have teams.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:55 PM
  #247
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
I dont question individual devotion to the game, never have never will. I do question whether there are enough of these types of fans to support a team. This isnt a north vs south thing, its a butts in the seats thing. Demand, not passion. I hope that nasville makes a run of it, but the first 14 years are not fantastically promising.

Edmonton had supported a horrible but young team so the notion that early success is enough to cement a new team, you want to explain tampa bay ?
You seem to be assuming that a non-hockey fan will never be made into a hockey fan.

About the only difference between a Canadian hockey fan, and an American sports fan who doesn't give much of a hoot about hockey, is that a lot of the groundwork has already been done to convince the Canadian fan to spend his entertainment dollars on hockey. That hardly means it can't be done in the south, just that it hasn't yet.

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:55 PM
  #248
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
The piling on NSH has to stop. I and others am talking about franchises that cannot or wont get it together. I have my problems with Nashville as a city but they are a good hockey market.

Edmonton, Calgary also took from Toronto too. In the late 1990's
Sorry, how are they a good market ? Have they made any profit in 14 years ? If the subsidy from thr city or the league goes away what happens? They are in a market with two rinks and no outdoor ice which means that their continued success relies exclusively on people who have never played the game or transplants ?

I have no problem with any team getting a helping hand, including ottawa and canadian teams, but those teams wont be on this support forever.

sandysan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:56 PM
  #249
Soundgarden
Registered User
 
Soundgarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 6,199
vCash: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
I dont question individual devotion to the game, never have never will. I do question whether there are enough of these types of fans to support a team. This isnt a north vs south thing, its a butts in the seats thing. Demand, not passion. I hope that nasville makes a run of it, but the first 14 years are not fantastically promising.

Edmonton had supported a horrible but young team so the notion that early success is enough to cement a new team, you want to explain tampa bay ?
You are missing the growth that Nashville has shown, you are still focusing on Nashville 2004 and not Nashville 2008-present. Now that we have new ownership and have had a little success in the playoffs we have become as successful as any other "non-traditional" market, at least in a popularity sense. 97% attendance is promising for a team that you still consider "not together".

It's okay, a lot of people seem to think we have "pathetic offense" and "trap" too. I think it just takes a little while to stifle all the myths.

Soundgarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:56 PM
  #250
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
Very true. I have said it before, many people would not care about hockey if their cities don't have teams.
With the exception of the handful of bitter enders in the case of towns like Quebec and Atlanta and Hartford.

Dojji* 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 12:34 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.