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, and NHL revenues.

OT: NBA receives Seattle/Hansen offer for Sacramento

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2013, 08:57 PM
  #51
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
I really doubt the NHL puts another team in Northern California.

Ernie is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 10:57 PM
  #52
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard Washington View Post
Stop, just stop. The NHL is not going to give Cali 4 NHL teams. And if they did, it would be San Diego.
Not until there's a new arena, which will happen approximately when Hades reaches thermal equilibrium with absolute Zero. That said, I don't even think that a third NHL team in San Diego would necessarily be a good idea. The (LA) Kings' AHL team here? Sure. But I can't see there being ENOUGH corporate and season ticketholders to support the third Southern California team -- much as I'd love to have one.

HansH is offline  
Old
01-21-2013, 11:13 PM
  #53
Brodie
watcher on the walls
 
Brodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 12,168
vCash: 500
To paraphrase the guy in that CSN Bay Area article, there are a lot of NBA and NHL caliber cities out there (more and more with each census, in fact). And Sacramento, whatever it's advantages, isn't anywhere close to the best option out there for either of them.

As to the NHL's status as a gate driven league... that's not a reason to put teams just anywhere, as the league has learned the hard way. They get viewers from Sacramento and that's good enough.

Brodie is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 12:30 AM
  #54
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Ontario already has two teams.
Yes and California has 3; adding another before adding one in Ontario makes no sense.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:22 AM
  #55
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Yes and California has 3; adding another before adding one in Ontario makes no sense.
Sure it does because there is three times as many people in California than there is in Ontario.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:24 AM
  #56
Bucky_Hoyt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Singapore
Country: Canada
Posts: 327
vCash: 500
Relocate the As to Sacramento?

Bucky_Hoyt is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 08:43 AM
  #57
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucky_Hoyt View Post
Relocate the As to Sacramento?
Sacramento would have to build a brand new baseball stadium to get a professional baseball team and they just spent a lot of money building Raley Field in 2000. Chances of them making that happen after only 13 years are slim to none.

Pinkfloyd is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 12:18 PM
  #58
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 12,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Sure it does because there is three times as many people in California than there is in Ontario.
If your really going to make an argument for a 4th team in California over a 3rd one in Ontario, I simply don't know what to tell you.

htpwn is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 12:34 PM
  #59
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
If your really going to make an argument for a 4th team in California over a 3rd one in Ontario, I simply don't know what to tell you.
If nds90 is correct in that the league is moving away from being attendance driven to TV deal driven, then it's a pretty good argument to stay away from over-saturated markets.

Arrch is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 03:24 PM
  #60
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
Not to mention you'd be eating into potential TV money for the Sharks.

Ernie is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:06 PM
  #61
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Sure it does because there is three times as many people in California than there is in Ontario.
Again, you are making the assumption that because there are more people in California, that it automatically means that there are more hockey fans. I have yet to see any proof of that.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:09 PM
  #62
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Sacramento would have to build a brand new baseball stadium to get a professional baseball team and they just spent a lot of money building Raley Field in 2000. Chances of them making that happen after only 13 years are slim to none.
Pinkfloyd:

Where was the Sac River Cats, which is the A's AAA Club, btw, and knew something about the history of ARCO/Power Balance/Sleep Train arena/pavilion, you'd realize that there was supposed to be a dual purpose facility alongside the current Kings arena....that stadium was supposed to be what Raley Field later became....

why have the Maloofs been advocating almost since their arrival from KC in 1985, that the current arena is outdated.... why was the Sprint Center the 'it' DESTINATION in KC as it did replace Kemper Arena...

the other factor which all of you are missing is, Don Levin isn't part of these discussions, and believe me, what NHL Franchise is up for sale that isn't spoken for... (Phoenix is off the table, if the NHL approves Jamison)....

how would Rosemont fans feel if the Wolves bolted the Chicagoland market for Seattle?

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:18 PM
  #63
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Sure it does because there is three times as many people in California than there is in Ontario.
So there will certainly be three times as many hockey fans in California than there are in Ontario, right?

LA sells tickets for three times the amount of Toronto because of the population difference, right?

Again, your logic makes zero sense.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:20 PM
  #64
AdmiralsFan24
Registered User
 
AdmiralsFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 5,078
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AdmiralsFan24
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
Pinkfloyd:

Where was the Sac River Cats, which is the A's AAA Club, btw, and knew something about the history of ARCO/Power Balance/Sleep Train arena/pavilion, you'd realize that there was supposed to be a dual purpose facility alongside the current Kings arena....that stadium was supposed to be what Raley Field later became....

why have the Maloofs been advocating almost since their arrival from KC in 1985, that the current arena is outdated.... why was the Sprint Center the 'it' DESTINATION in KC as it did replace Kemper Arena...

the other factor which all of you are missing is, Don Levin isn't part of these discussions, and believe me, what NHL Franchise is up for sale that isn't spoken for... (Phoenix is off the table, if the NHL approves Jamison)....

how would Rosemont fans feel if the Wolves bolted the Chicagoland market for Seattle?
What the hell are you rambling about?

AdmiralsFan24 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:35 PM
  #65
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
Again, you are making the assumption that because there are more people in California, that it automatically means that there are more hockey fans. I have yet to see any proof of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
So there will certainly be three times as many hockey fans in California than there are in Ontario, right?

LA sells tickets for three times the amount of Toronto because of the population difference, right?

Again, your logic makes zero sense.
Do you try to sell a new smart phone to a dozen tech-savvy consumers, or to three dozen dumb-phone users?

I don't necessarily think that Sacramento is a good place for an NHL franchise, but you don't sell more product by focusing on saturated markets.


Last edited by Arrch: 01-22-2013 at 04:44 PM.
Arrch is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 04:53 PM
  #66
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrch View Post
Do you try to sell a new smart phone to a dozen tech-savvy consumers, or to three dozen dumb-phone users?

I don't necessarily think that Sacramento is a good place for an NHL franchise, but you don't sell more product by focusing on saturated markets.
Again: Your view is skewed. The GTHA Market is not saturated; it's underserved. You're leaving money on the table by not having teams in Hamilton and Quebec (the NHL has even admitted such in court). I would lump Seattle in with those two as well (although they are less-likely, imo, they're still a very smart choice).

There are at the very least 20,000 people in Ontario who have money to spend on the NHL that currently can't. There aren't 20,000 fans in Sacramento that will fill the arena; they don't even do so for their current NBA team.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 05:09 PM
  #67
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrch View Post
Do you try to sell a new smart phone to a dozen tech-savvy consumers, or to three dozen dumb-phone users?

I don't necessarily think that Sacramento is a good place for an NHL franchise, but you don't sell more product by focusing on saturated markets.
If you are referring to Canada, the popularity of the NHL in Canada is not at it's peak because it is still growing according to many. So since Canada isn't a saturated market as of yet, then there is still room for the league to grow the game north of the 49th. Same deal with several northern states.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 05:24 PM
  #68
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Again: Your view is skewed. The GTHA Market is not saturated; it's underserved. You're leaving money on the table by not having teams in Hamilton and Quebec (the NHL has even admitted such in court). I would lump Seattle in with those two as well (although they are less-likely, imo, they're still a very smart choice).
There are at the very least 20,000 people in Ontario who have money to spend on the NHL that currently can't. There aren't 20,000 fans in Sacramento that will fill the arena; they don't even do so for their current NBA team.
I have no doubt that a second team would sell out easily, but you're not going to see much of an increase in $$ when it comes to TV deals and merchandise. That's not even considering the whole money out-of-the-pocket of MLSE issue...

Quote:
There aren't 20,000 fans in Sacramento that will fill the arena; they don't even do so for their current NBA team.
I refer you to my previous statement about Sacramento not being a viable NHL franchise at the moment. California is a good place to grow the game, but they need to do more grass roots tactics. ECHL is doing well out here, so finding a way to get an AHL division out here would be the next step.

Quote:
If you are referring to Canada, the popularity of the NHL in Canada is not at it's peak because it is still growing according to many. So since Canada isn't a saturated market as of yet, then there is still room for the league to grow the game north of the 49th. Same deal with several northern states.
I was referring to GTHA; I still think Quebec is a good (probably the best) market for a team.

Arrch is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 05:40 PM
  #69
Bucky_Hoyt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Singapore
Country: Canada
Posts: 327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Sacramento would have to build a brand new baseball stadium to get a professional baseball team and they just spent a lot of money building Raley Field in 2000. Chances of them making that happen after only 13 years are slim to none.
They do draw quite well though for a minor league team IIRC. Possible to renovate Raley Field to 35k+?

Bucky_Hoyt is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 05:47 PM
  #70
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmiralsFan24 View Post
What the hell are you rambling about?
and what does your post, AF24, have to do w/ the discussion?

Another thought I heard/read was if Hansen does get approved, there were rumblings that Larry Bird might be brought in as head of basketball operations;

latest from Sacramento is KJ has lined up 19 heads of business leaders to try to keep the Kings there.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:09 PM
  #71
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrch View Post
I have no doubt that a second team would sell out easily, but you're not going to see much of an increase in $$ when it comes to TV deals and merchandise. That's not even considering the whole money out-of-the-pocket of MLSE issue...
They'll get a 50+ mil expansion fee with broadcasting rights to offset the negative value to Buds, imo.

Quote:
I refer you to my previous statement about Sacramento not being a viable NHL franchise at the moment. California is a good place to grow the game, but they need to do more grass roots tactics. ECHL is doing well out here, so finding a way to get an AHL division out here would be the next step.
That's a realistic and smart idea, imo.

Quote:
I was referring to GTHA; I still think Quebec is a good (probably the best) market for a team.
I think the GTHA will do better financially, but I do agree that QC will happen first or at the same time (obviously that's less likely).

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:09 PM
  #72
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 12,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrch View Post
If nds90 is correct in that the league is moving away from being attendance driven to TV deal driven, then it's a pretty good argument to stay away from over-saturated markets.
Just because a market has a team does not necessarily mean it is over-saturated. Such an assumption seems incredibly simplistic.

The merits of a second team in Southern Ontario has been discussed at length over the past several years here and I don't feel like rehashing everything. In short though, the Golden Horseshoe is the 4th largest urban area in North America with a population of 8.7 million and makes up over a quarter of Canada's GDP. It has a mere 3 major professional sports franchises and there is an incredible amount of demand for NHL hockey that one franchise cannot fill. The NHL is arguably losing ground in the region because of precisely that. Over 1 million people moved to the region in the past decade alone, many turned away from hockey because of the high prices and scarcity of Leafs tickets. By the NHL's own estimates, revealed during the Coyotes bankruptcy, Southern Ontario has 45% more hockey fans than New York City (keeping in mind, there's 3 teams in NY) and a second team in the region would almost assuredly be Top 5 in revenues.

Doesn't sound like an over-saturated market to me, but since your so concerned, perhaps the discussion should shift to markets that are over-saturated. An all too common refrain against more teams in Canada is this 'growing the game,' 'over-saturation' argument, yet arguably and ironically the biggest impediment to that is New York and Los Angeles. Both could be served fine with one less team.

htpwn is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:16 PM
  #73
beenhereandthere
Registered User
 
beenhereandthere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Evergray State
Posts: 638
vCash: 500
Off topic, but, Sacramento isn't totally unexposed to hockey (lived there for a brief period, I know). However, it's way down the pecking order as far as the NHL is concerned.
I have mixed feelings about Hansen "completing" this sale. Too bad Buttman didn't get off his arse and at least expand to Seattle, even if a team didn't actually start until 2014 or 2015. The Sonics returning, makes it a little more difficult (but still a good shot) for an NHL team to do well in Seattle. The bitterness that NBA fans felt over the Sonics moving, will of course, fade away.
Something tells me though, IMO, that Sacramento, could still come up with something, to keep them there.
I recall, when, the NBA, in 1994, had a similar situation, with Minnesota moving to New Orleans and the buyers/sellers announced it, however, that still fell through.

beenhereandthere is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:21 PM
  #74
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beenhereandthere View Post
Off topic, but, Sacramento isn't totally unexposed to hockey (lived there for a brief period, I know). However, it's way down the pecking order as far as the NHL is concerned.
I have mixed feelings about Hansen "completing" this sale. Too bad Buttman didn't get off his arse and at least expand to Seattle, even if a team didn't actually start until 2014 or 2015. The Sonics returning, makes it a little more difficult (but still a good shot) for an NHL team to do well in Seattle. The bitterness that NBA fans felt over the Sonics moving, will of course, fade away.
Something tells me though, IMO, that Sacramento, could still come up with something, to keep them there.
I recall, when, the NBA, in 1994, had a similar situation, with Minnesota moving to New Orleans and the buyers/sellers announced it, however, that still fell through.
So the NBA puts themselves into a BIGGER PR nightmare and blackeye shafting seattle a 2nd time just so Sac can keep their kings?

The Timerwolves sale/recol fell apart due to financial plan issues. You do realize the sonics have to return for the arena to be built. There is no NHL only option to built the arena.

gstommylee is offline  
Old
01-22-2013, 06:22 PM
  #75
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,526
vCash: 500
If discussion will got off topic so quickly, we'll just leave you to the megathreads.

LadyStanley 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 03:19 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.