The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
The option that fans/media in Sacramento was pushing, that they keep kings, and we get expansion...that looks like a non-starter.
Clarifying.... Are you saying that it's a non-starter that Seattle get an NBA team through expansion (at least at this point in time)?
If that's the case, I'm thinking I have an idea about why. They want any NBA team going into Seattle to have a competitive advantage or at least not a disadvantage against any NHL team that might be going there. If the NBA gets an expansion team, and the NHL puts a relocated team there, then immediately the NHL team would have a more competitive advantage.
Clarifying.... Are you saying that it's a non-starter that Seattle get an NBA team through expansion (at least at this point in time)?
If that's the case, I'm thinking I have an idea about why. They want any NBA team going into Seattle to have a competitive advantage or at least not a disadvantage against any NHL team that might be going there. If the NBA gets an expansion team, and the NHL puts a relocated team there, then immediately the NHL team would have a more competitive advantage.
I see what you guys are saying here. The other side of this issue, though, is that it wouldn't matter to the fan base because the fan support of the Sonics would be instantaneous and continuous, regardless of how they get another team. I'm a huge supporter of Seattle getting an NHL team, but it would still take some time to build that sucker up for the long-term in terms of fan support, even if they were given a relocated team that is already halfway decent. Stern & Co. have to know that...I should think this wouldn't be much of a concern to them, but maybe I'm wrong.
I see what you guys are saying here. The other side of this issue, though, is that it wouldn't matter to the fan base because the fan support of the Sonics would be instantaneous and continuous, regardless of how they get another team. I'm a huge supporter of Seattle getting an NHL team, but it would still take some time to build that sucker up for the long-term in terms of fan support, even if they were given a relocated team that is already halfway decent. Stern & Co. have to know that...I should think this wouldn't be much of a concern to them, but maybe I'm wrong.
I don't know about that. And of course, I truly don't know because I don't live there. But I think they'd be fairly equal, with the NBA slightly ahead, though the NHL could take away that slight advantage.
Last edited by MoreOrr: 02-14-2013 at 09:13 PM.
Reason: typo
Clarifying.... Are you saying that it's a non-starter that Seattle get an NBA team through expansion (at least at this point in time)?
If that's the case, I'm thinking I have an idea about why. They want any NBA team going into Seattle to have a competitive advantage or at least not a disadvantage against any NHL team that might be going there. If the NBA gets an expansion team, and the NHL puts a relocated team there, then immediately the NHL team would have a more competitive advantage.
No I think the expansion thing is a Dead issue in the NBA, Many Sactown fans want the NBA to give Seattle Expansion and keep NBA in Sactown. I mean what you say could be true, but I don't think that is the main reason.
HOUSTON – The NBA does not expect legal challenges, whether from minority owners of the Kings or groups in Seattle, to be a serious impediment to a potential move, league sources said Thursday as the debate over the proposed sale and relocation to Washington state moved to All-Star weekend.
While Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson has been in constant contact with top NBA officials, he is expected in town as part of lobbying efforts for the daunting task of convincing owners to vote down the sale of the Kings to a Seattle-based group led by Chris Hansen and Steve Ballmer. Others efforts in the California capital include possible legal action from the minority owners who claim their initial agreement came with a right of first refusal on a purchase if the team is ever put up for sale.
But, sources familiar with the thinking high in the league office said, those possible roadblocks, along with lawsuits in Seattle trying to stop construction of the proposed arena, could be an afterthought by summer. It is not clear whether NBA leadership, with several lawyers among the ranks, thinks the legal action has no merit or whether the concerns will be addressed in other ways.
I don't know about that. And of course, I truly don't know because I don't live there. But I think they're be fairly equal, with the NBA slightly ahead, though the NHL could take away that slight advantage.
Some suggest that the Seattle gets NHL expansion, so we have several years to build up excitement/interest. Where as Sonics would be day one interest, there would be a difference, even though I think both would work well
I don't know about that. And of course, I truly don't know because I don't live there. But I think they're be fairly equal, with the NBA slightly ahead, though the NHL could take away that slight advantage.
Trust me, as a former Washingtonian who lived just south of Seattle for a good decade, the NBA will have the significant advantage from day one. I don't really care for the NBA or the Sonics--personally I'm just hoping Seattle gets an NHL team--but they would be selling our like crazy even if the team was an expansion team. The Sonics WERE Seattle for years until Schultz did his best impression of Art Modell and all but guaranteed their relocation because he didn't think the deal through. It had nothing to do with fans' support or lack thereof.
There are a lot of NHL fans in the northwest and having the NHL in the northwest will be a huge thing, but it will take time for them to become a proven commodity that people in the northwest will go nuts for on an annual basis just because there's no real NHL tradition there (Metropolitans and Totems don't really count, people, so don't harp on me for that point). Even if the team is a good relocated Coyotes club, it will still take time.
Stern might be on his way out the door, but he knows the Seattle market (and this NBA/NHL arena situation) well enough to know that the NBA will be the top dog in that building no matter how this deal shakes out, be it through expansion or relocation via Sacramento. The NBA will always have the advantage in that city even if they aren't the more competitive team, but the NBA and NHL are going to appeal to different kinds of people so there won't really be a ton of competition for fan bases or anything.
I don't know about that. And of course, I truly don't know because I don't live there. But I think they're be fairly equal, with the NBA slightly ahead, though the NHL could take away that slight advantage.
the NHL isn't as interested in Seattle, unless an owner steps forward which has been rumored even when Bellevue collapsed (Levin), MO, AND even then, say it is Levin, then we go through the same protacted review that Chipman/Thomson did when acquiring Atlanta, w/o relinquishing the franchise they built prior to that....
In other words, as others have said, it's an NBA Territory, WHERE that vote 5 days from now is a fait accompli, no matter what KJ and Sacramento are doing, KJ is as equivalent to Howard Schultz and his last-second failed effort to reacquire the Sonics to keep them there in Seattle 4 years ago.
keep in mind, if there's no NBA team in Seattle, the arena for SODO is just that a proposal.
The option that fans/media in Sacramento was pushing, that they keep kings, and we get expansion...that looks like a non-starter.
Considering the binding agreement that was signed between the Maloofs and the Seattle ownership group to buy the Sacramento Kings and a Request for Relocation to move the team to Seattle has been filed, any discussion on NBA expansion to resolve this situation is, as you've written, a non-starter, lawsuits and other matters, notwithstanding.
Quote:
I don't know about that. And of course, I truly don't know because I don't live there. But I think they're be fairly equal, with the NBA slightly ahead, though the NHL could take away that slight advantage.
This is all speculation on my part despite being a resident of the region two seasons before the Seattle SuperSonics moved to Oklahoma City. It would be fair to say that support for, specifically, an NBA team returning to Seattle, is getting more airtime than a new NHL team. That's not to say that there are no NHL fans in the Seattle area. Having attended a few WHL games in Seattle and Everett, there are a sizable number of supportive hockey fans from both teams (the Thunderbirds and Silvertips) and, at least from my perspective, a smattering number of attendees wearing various NHL team jerseys.
I would like to believe that interest in an NHL team in Seattle is similar to what happened when Major League Soccer began play in Seattle in 2008. Attendance for many Sounders FC games have been at record levels for the past 5 seasons. (Sports attendance for so many Seattle-based teams is another story.)
It's fair to say that getting an NBA team in Seattle is a priority. (MOU .pdf) At the same time, in my opinion, an NHL team in Seattle would be another good thing for the region. It would not surprise me if NHL officials are paying very close attention to what's going on with the Sacramento Kings likely move to Seattle. Will interest in the NHL be even or surpass the NBA? It's hard to answer that question until the NBA returns and the NHL arrives in the region.
Even if the team is a good relocated Coyotes club, it will still take time.
As much as it would be a great achievement, I don't expect a team to relocate to Seattle and end up winning a Stanley Cup in the first season. It's not impossible (Colorado Avalanche) but highly unlikely.
As far as expansion goes, from my own experience of cheering for the NY Islanders when I lived on Long Island during their Stanley Cup years, their first playoff appearance occurred after their third season and their first Stanley Cup appearance and win was after their seventh season.
Looking briefly at other expansion teams playoff histories, it took the Los Angeles Kings 44 years to win their first Stanley Cup. On the other hand, the St. Louis Blues have never won a final after their first 3 appearances and there are 6 current teams that have never appeared in a Stanley Cup finals.
The ownership group that takes the risk to introduce the NHL in Seattle will have to have some patience. I hope that within that group, there will be some savvy people who know how to properly market the NHL and the new team to sports fans in the city of Seattle and the surrounding region.
As much as it would be a great achievement, I don't expect a team to relocate to Seattle and end up winning a Stanley Cup in the first season. It's not impossible (Colorado Avalanche) but highly unlikely.
As far as expansion goes, from my own experience of cheering for the NY Islanders when I lived on Long Island during their Stanley Cup years, their first playoff appearance occurred after their third season and their first Stanley Cup appearance and win was after their seventh season.
Looking briefly at other expansion teams playoff histories, it took the Los Angeles Kings 44 years to win their first Stanley Cup. On the other hand, the St. Louis Blues have never won a final after their first 3 appearances and there are 6 current teams that have never appeared in a Stanley Cup finals.
The ownership group that takes the risk to introduce the NHL in Seattle will have to have some patience. I hope that within that group, there will be some savvy people who know how to properly market the NHL and the new team to sports fans in the city of Seattle and the surrounding region.
Oh no doubt. I wouldn't actually expect them to win in their first season. That Avs/Nordiques team was a unique situation which is not likely to be duplicated again.
As much as it would be a great achievement, I don't expect a team to relocate to Seattle and end up winning a Stanley Cup in the first season. It's not impossible (Colorado Avalanche) but highly unlikely.
As far as expansion goes, from my own experience of cheering for the NY Islanders when I lived on Long Island during their Stanley Cup years, their first playoff appearance occurred after their third season and their first Stanley Cup appearance and win was after their seventh season.
Looking briefly at other expansion teams playoff histories, it took the Los Angeles Kings 44 years to win their first Stanley Cup. On the other hand, the St. Louis Blues have never won a final after their first 3 appearances and there are 6 current teams that have never appeared in a Stanley Cup finals.
The ownership group that takes the risk to introduce the NHL in Seattle will have to have some patience. I hope that within that group, there will be some savvy people who know how to properly market the NHL and the new team to sports fans in the city of Seattle and the surrounding region.
But something à la Columbus where after expansion (or even relocation) team resides in the bottoms of the league for a quite good number of years and is unable to make playoffs, all while loosing Overall 1st round picks by various NHL conspiracies (Pittsburgh, Edmonton) is not the best way to build up a fanbase's hype.
the NHL isn't as interested in Seattle, unless an owner steps forward which has been rumored even when Bellevue collapsed (Levin), MO, AND even then, say it is Levin, then we go through the same protacted review that Chipman/Thomson did when acquiring Atlanta, w/o relinquishing the franchise they built prior to that....
keep in mind, if there's no NBA team in Seattle, the arena for SODO is just that a proposal.
I am thinking/hoping that this is a behind the scenes negotiations as has most of the SODO arena negotiations have been. The MOU states that Hansen's group has considerable financial contributions (40% of overall public money) if NHL comes. They do not get that money if there isn't NHL. Hansen's group came out to bring back the Sonics but NHL has been a part of the deal from the beginning. They kept quiet about how they were getting NBA until recently. Once the Kings (or other are concerned) I could see the NHL wheels moving into high gear as soon as the NBA is confirmed to come to Seattle.
In the best scenario, NBA team would be an expansion team and NHL would be relocation to get the best fan support for both teams. Unfortunately relocation of an NBA team and expansion by NHL is more likely at present. I am still holding on to the hope that the Coyotes move to Seattle and NHL cleans up with huge $$$ form expansion to Quebec & Toronto2. Seattle group wouldn't come close to the $$ as those two Canadian cities would provide.
But something à la Columbus where after expansion (or even relocation) team resides in the bottoms of the league for a quite good number of years and is unable to make playoffs, all while loosing Overall 1st round picks by various NHL conspiracies (Pittsburgh, Edmonton) is not the best way to build up a fanbase's hype.
Sorry for going OT.
Conspiracy? Are we really going this route? The NHL does a lottery for top 5 right?
So basically the conspriacy comes down to a lottery in 2005 in which both teams had an equal chance and an Oilers team who just happened to win the lottery in 2012.
Back on topic, I wouldn't mind seeing Seattle get a team but you just can't rush it. Let the honeymoon end with the Sonics first(2-3 years) then get a team up there.
In the best scenario, NBA team would be an expansion team and NHL would be relocation to get the best fan support for both teams. Unfortunately relocation of an NBA team and expansion by NHL is more likely at present. I am still holding on to the hope that the Coyotes move to Seattle and NHL cleans up with huge $$$ form expansion to Quebec & Toronto2. Seattle group wouldn't come close to the $$ as those two Canadian cities would provide.
Excuse if this has been explained before but could someone explain the expansion $$ and why Canadian cites would provide larger $$$ than Seattle. Serious question.
I am thinking/hoping that this is a behind the scenes negotiations as has most of the SODO arena negotiations have been. The MOU states that Hansen's group has considerable financial contributions (40% of overall public money) if NHL comes. They do not get that money if there isn't NHL. Hansen's group came out to bring back the Sonics but NHL has been a part of the deal from the beginning. They kept quiet about how they were getting NBA until recently. Once the Kings (or other are concerned) I could see the NHL wheels moving into high gear as soon as the NBA is confirmed to come to Seattle.
In the best scenario, NBA team would be an expansion team and NHL would be relocation to get the best fan support for both teams. Unfortunately relocation of an NBA team and expansion by NHL is more likely at present. I am still holding on to the hope that the Coyotes move to Seattle and NHL cleans up with huge $$$ form expansion to Quebec & Toronto2. Seattle group wouldn't come close to the $$ as those two Canadian cities would provide.
At the ASG, Stern essentially killed the notion of Expansion, even stating that the Owners had possibly been looking at contraction.
Excuse if this has been explained before but could someone explain the expansion $$ and why Canadian cites would provide larger $$$ than Seattle. Serious question.
Just from what I have read (here), the thought is that the expansion fee would coincide with the Market, or value of the team? So the prevailing thought is that the market/value of team would be worth more in Toronto/Quebec, hence larger Expansion fee?
So basically the conspriacy comes down to a lottery in 2005 in which both teams had an equal chance and an Oilers team who just happened to win the lottery in 2012.
Back on topic, I wouldn't mind seeing Seattle get a team but you just can't rush it. Let the honeymoon end with the Sonics first(2-3 years) then get a team up there.
Not saying I agree with a "conspiracy" but the assumption that the lottery occurs is the conspiracy and it was pretty believable after the Crosby lottery.
Excuse if this has been explained before but could someone explain the expansion $$ and why Canadian cites would provide larger $$$ than Seattle. Serious question.
Simply because of potential revenue.
If your potential revenue is $100M in USCity#1 but it's $200M in CanCity#1 the guy buying the team for the Canadian city will be willing to pay more because he wants to increase it's chances of actually buying the team.
Now, among many other sources, ticket prices and sales are a reason of better potential revenues. When you take all 23 US teams, take their ticket prices and do an average and if you do the same for 7 CAN teams, their average will be higher.
Now, the same would be true if you would isolate the Northeastern US market (NYC, Bos, Phi, Pitts, Buff).
Add to the fact that some teams (once again, N-East) have lower expenses (travel being the biggest one) which also help toward potential higher revenue.
But something à la Columbus where after expansion (or even relocation) team resides in the bottoms of the league for a quite good number of years and is unable to make playoffs, all while loosing Overall 1st round picks by various NHL conspiracies (Pittsburgh, Edmonton) is not the best way to build up a fanbase's hype.
Would Columbus have been in the playoffs and won a Stanley Cup or 2 or 5 in their 13 year history if they would've won all overall 1st round picks? It assumes that every player in the 1st round will be a superstar and, I believe, not every player is a quality 1st rounder. Also, not every team will win a championship. (It would be nice for every team to win one championship.)
I'm familiar with Columbus' lack of success in the regular season. I'm more familiar with the Islanders' history from my own personal experiences of attending games and the strong fan base that was developed in the late 1970s-early 1980s. It is a shame that the Islanders went into a downfall after their championships, which, among many other reasons, I blame on incredibly poor management decisions and also resulted in frustration for dedicated fans and general indifference from non-fans.
Will a potential Seattle NHL team be a incredibly quick success, like Colorado? Will it be a gradual success without making it to the final round, like San Jose? Will the team be in a long-term struggle for significance, like Columbus?
Some say "Conspiracy theory!"
Others say "Sheer dumb luck!"
Who knows.
At the ASG, Stern essentially killed the notion of Expansion, even stating that the Owners had possibly been looking at contraction.
How could there be a contraction? Seattle badly wants a team (or Sacramento if the Kings move to Seattle), and possibly Vancouver. Or are there that many NBA teams in trouble?
How could there be a contraction? Seattle badly wants a team (or Sacramento if the Kings move to Seattle), and possibly Vancouver. Or are there that many NBA teams in trouble?
On one hand, a contraction threat is how a league tries to badger a player's association, and perhaps wring concessions from cities for arena improvements. Reduce supply to increase demand. The problem: your league will likely take a big black mark in perception if the league does it.
That being said, my Twitter stream has seen a LOT of empty buildings this year. Milwaukee has been in the whisper mill for relocation, but there are shots this year I've seen from Detroit, Atlanta, New Orleans, Indiana, even Phoenix (where the Suns used to be THE team)... and more that make Sacramento's crowds look relatively substantial. I wouldn't trust announced attendance for at least half the league right now.
On one hand, a contraction threat is how a league tries to badger a player's association, and perhaps wring concessions from cities for arena improvements. Reduce supply to increase demand. The problem: your league will likely take a big black mark in perception if the league does it.
Agreed. That would be a last resort. Idle use of that threat would only rile up the players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder
That being said, my Twitter stream has seen a LOT of empty buildings this year. Milwaukee has been in the whisper mill for relocation, but there are shots this year I've seen from Detroit, Atlanta, New Orleans, Indiana, even Phoenix (where the Suns used to be THE team)... and more that make Sacramento's crowds look relatively substantial. I wouldn't trust announced attendance for at least half the league right now.
ASG losing Atlanta Hawks would be poetic justice, after what they did to the Thrashers. I wonder if the NBA charges them a $60 million "relocation fee" against their sale price.
Trust me, as a former Washingtonian who lived just south of Seattle for a good decade, the NBA will have the significant advantage from day one. I don't really care for the NBA or the Sonics--personally I'm just hoping Seattle gets an NHL team--but they would be selling our like crazy even if the team was an expansion team. The Sonics WERE Seattle for years until Schultz did his best impression of Art Modell and all but guaranteed their relocation because he didn't think the deal through. It had nothing to do with fans' support or lack thereof.
There are a lot of NHL fans in the northwest and having the NHL in the northwest will be a huge thing, but it will take time for them to become a proven commodity that people in the northwest will go nuts for on an annual basis just because there's no real NHL tradition there (Metropolitans and Totems don't really count, people, so don't harp on me for that point). Even if the team is a good relocated Coyotes club, it will still take time.
i disagree in somehow an NHL team needing time to develop a fan base in Seattle.
I live in the Tacoma area.
In Washington you have a large % of people who are transplants from northeast , midwest, and Canada.
Seattle area has 2 WHL teams, and in their actual market which would include Washington State and Portland there are 3 other WHL teams.
If you have cable in the Seattle area you get CBC aired (satelitte appears not to carry it).
Hockey will not have any issue in establishing a fanbase.
If hockey were to come in first they would get a head start on marketing than if they waited for an NBA team to come.
