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.
NHL no longer denying relocation a possibility for the Coyotes?
Someone mentioned this as a caller on the Team 1200 in Ottawa this morning. And it makes so much sense I don't know why I never thought of it before. He didn't go into a deep thought on it, or if he did I did not pay attention... sort of caught it out of the corner of my ear!!! I am making up the details myself.
The Leafs and MLSE are owned by Rogers AND Bell. As is the ACC arena and the Toronto Raptors. Rogers owns the Blue Jays and the Skydome/Rogers Centre.
It only makes sense for one of Bell or Rogers to sell it's share in MLSE and then by the new expansion/or Coyotes Toronto expansion team.
Both have major TV and new media interests in owning an NHL team outright.
They spent around $2 billion together to buy MLSE.
Let's assume that they split the assets. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Bell gets the Leafs, the Raptors and the ACC. Bell buys out Rogers to the tune of $1 billion. Rogers builds the best arena in the NHL in Markham. ($300M... maybe $100-150M from city), Pays $350 million to the NHL in expansion/relocation,purchase of Phoenix fees. Rogers gets a brand new NHL team... a "New York Mets" team and they pocket $350 million vs owning half of MLSE.
Toronto gets another 20,000 seat arena for concerts and shows and stuff.
So it is all winners. Buffalo doesn't see a team close to them. Bell wins, Rogers wins, Toronto wins, NHL wins. I agree that the Leafs would not want a second team in the NHL... except that it is owned by two multi-billion dollar broadcasting media companies.
You could switch it the other way with Rogers getting the Leafs and Raptors and ACC and Bell getting the new franchise and arena.... it doesn't matter.
Someone mentioned this as a caller on the Team 1200 in Ottawa this morning. And it makes so much sense I don't know why I never thought of it before. He didn't go into a deep thought on it, or if he did I did not pay attention... sort of caught it out of the corner of my ear!!! I am making up the details myself.
The Leafs and MLSE are owned by Rogers AND Bell. As is the ACC arena and the Toronto Raptors. Rogers owns the Blue Jays and the Skydome/Rogers Centre.
It only makes sense for one of Bell or Rogers to sell it's share in MLSE and then by the new expansion/or Coyotes Toronto expansion team.
Both have major TV and new media interests in owning an NHL team outright.
They spent around $2 billion together to buy MLSE.
Let's assume that they split the assets. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Bell gets the Leafs, the Raptors and the ACC. Bell buys out Rogers to the tune of $1 billion. Rogers builds the best arena in the NHL in Markham. ($300M... maybe $100-150M from city), Pays $350 million to the NHL in expansion/relocation,purchase of Phoenix fees. Rogers gets a brand new NHL team... a "New York Mets" team and they pocket $350 million vs owning half of MLSE.
Toronto gets another 20,000 seat arena for concerts and shows and stuff.
So it is all winners. Buffalo doesn't see a team close to them. Bell wins, Rogers wins, Toronto wins, NHL wins. I agree that the Leafs would not want a second team in the NHL... except that it is owned by two multi-billion dollar broadcasting media companies.
You could switch it the other way with Rogers getting the Leafs and Raptors and ACC and Bell getting the new franchise and arena.... it doesn't matter.
And hypothetically, assuming such a decision could be made and within 3 months shovels go in the ground. When would said arena be ready? And when will the Coyotes need to be relocated?
Someone mentioned this as a caller on the Team 1200 in Ottawa this morning. And it makes so much sense I don't know why I never thought of it before. He didn't go into a deep thought on it, or if he did I did not pay attention... sort of caught it out of the corner of my ear!!! I am making up the details myself.
The Leafs and MLSE are owned by Rogers AND Bell. As is the ACC arena and the Toronto Raptors. Rogers owns the Blue Jays and the Skydome/Rogers Centre.
It only makes sense for one of Bell or Rogers to sell it's share in MLSE and then by the new expansion/or Coyotes Toronto expansion team.
Both have major TV and new media interests in owning an NHL team outright.
They spent around $2 billion together to buy MLSE.
Let's assume that they split the assets. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Bell gets the Leafs, the Raptors and the ACC. Bell buys out Rogers to the tune of $1 billion. Rogers builds the best arena in the NHL in Markham. ($300M... maybe $100-150M from city), Pays $350 million to the NHL in expansion/relocation,purchase of Phoenix fees. Rogers gets a brand new NHL team... a "New York Mets" team and they pocket $350 million vs owning half of MLSE.
Toronto gets another 20,000 seat arena for concerts and shows and stuff.
So it is all winners. Buffalo doesn't see a team close to them. Bell wins, Rogers wins, Toronto wins, NHL wins. I agree that the Leafs would not want a second team in the NHL... except that it is owned by two multi-billion dollar broadcasting media companies.
You could switch it the other way with Rogers getting the Leafs and Raptors and ACC and Bell getting the new franchise and arena.... it doesn't matter.
yeah, this isnt a new sentiment. If you go back to all the MLSE sale threads, and even the burke firing threads, we talked about this a lot. You have two of canada's largest companies, competitors in every single one of their products, partnering to buy the leafs and having to split the content (right now splitting radio 50/50, and probably the same for tv eventually). The logical end to this is a divorce at some point, with the loser getting their own team somewhere else in SO.
So... why the oft-repeated statement that the Copps won't do for NHL hockey, when that's precisely what the building was made to do? I think Markham does complicate Hamilton's chances, but I wouldn't count the Steel City out altogether.
So... why the oft-repeated statement that the Copps won't do for NHL hockey, when that's precisely what the building was made to do? I think Markham does complicate Hamilton's chances, but I wouldn't count the Steel City out altogether.
It's a fine rink, but it was built in the 80's. It doesn't have the boxes, lounges, concession space, restaurants, wine cellars (!) and other amenities etc. that the next wave of rinks got. And that's revenue being left on the table, revenue that's needed to make the franchise competitive and sustainable, revenue needed to keep the team in Hamilton long term.
So you need a new rink, or need to do a big redesign/renovation. Neither is cheap and neither could be done overnight.
So... why the oft-repeated statement that the Copps won't do for NHL hockey, when that's precisely what the building was made to do? I think Markham does complicate Hamilton's chances, but I wouldn't count the Steel City out altogether.
copps isnt NHL-ready now.
It needs extensive upgrades to be NHL-ready, and there are no plans to do that at the moment. The problem hamilton faces is that the NHL wants to go to a city where the arena is already approved and everything, and hamilton will only do that once the NHL comes. Compared to quebec and seattle, hamilton would just be a headache.
Indy isn't bigger than Columbus, it's essentially the same size.. and the Jackets can marginally draw from Cleveland, Cincy and Dayton, whereas Indy could draw from.... Lafayette? or Cincy too? I think if Columbus was an unquestionable success, the NHL might consider places like Indy, but right now it still looks a bit shaky.
"it's not the stupidest thing ever said on this board" -- well that really isn't saying much, is it?
Indianapolis is slightly larger in both city proper and CSA populations and it's growing faster. I highly doubt Columbus draws many if any fans from cities 2+ hours away like Cleveland and Cincinnati, they live and die based on their own market which is more than large enough to support a single big 4 team.
Indianapolis is too similar to Columbus to ever be a plausible option, I agree, and it's likely tapped out for pro sports already. But I do believe the Great Lakes region is underserved by the NHL compared to the Northeast.
Not to mention that the main guy associated with bringing the NHL to Hamilton did everything within his power to tick off all the owners already and tried to make it into a sensationalist Canadian nationalist argument for more teams to embarrass the league into letting it happen.
Copps is in the same boat as the bradley center, Built in the 80s and lacks the modern amenities newer places have. As stated in the hockey in Wisconsin thread, Milwaukee would probably need the Bucks to leave to have a shot at being a success in the NHl, or at least not be a huge money pit ala Phoenix. the Great Lakes reguion is underserved, and wisconsin deserves a team. Natural rivalries with Wild, blackhawks, and Red Wings, would probably need to indemnify Chicago (something like 50 million on top of the expansion or relocation fee), and then theres the matter of a name.
There was a time when I would tie Hamilton/QC and Winnipeg as potential markets the NHL will get into.
Now, Hamilton is out; the NHL doesn't want to go there and as a Hamilton resident it sucks. Markham is a new big player and will likely be where the NHL expands into.
What does an AHL team have to do with anything? Plenty of cities got teams without having an AHL team first. I don't exactly see Quebec & Seattle fielding teams to prove their worth, Houston has though.
same issue Karmanos got tired of waiting on, a new version of the XL Center, which continues to age every year, wildthing202, different era, when comparing leagues from the 70s on, Houston has outlasted 3 leagues but thrived, and been accepted into the next league---WHA-IHL-AHL....
I don't think Indianapolis is really such an awful idea... it's a rapidly growing city with a lot of transplants from the rest of the Great Lakes. It's essentially the same as Columbus only bigger and with basketball. If the arena situation was right, I'd say it'd be an okay target for the NHL. It has a snowball's chance in hell of ever happening, but it's not the stupidest thing ever said on this board by a long shot.
I'd prefer Milwaukee to any market in the US if not for the Bucks. It's not a 4 sport town (and the Packers are a Milwaukee team, make no mistake there) and can't possibly support both the NHL and NBA. Otherwise, Seattle and Portland in that order. Kansas City and Houston are both wastes of time that effectively add nothing to the league... the Pacific Northwest is the last area in which the NHL has absolutely nothing.
As a lifelong Hoosier, as much as I would love a team in Indy I really can't see it happening. It's true there is a number of folks there from areas that do have hockey, but to be it blunty, most people in Indiana don't even know what hockey is.
Edit- I don't think it's entirely impossible, but I think you might need IU or Purdue to start icing a serious team to satire up the necessary foundation for a future NHL club.
Yup, it's multi-use. Kentucky probably isn't the best place for the NHL, but Louisville is an underrated city.
Louisville, and Lexington, OKCDevil, are like OU and OSU, there in Oklahoma, except it's UK and Louisville.... highly doubtful after what USA Hockey/SVSE went through @ Rupp, barely surviving the 5 years from 1996-2001, and into 2003, Louisville, you might say, goes w/ your reservations about Tulsa competing w/ OKC, but they've been burned by the Afr debacle, ask Florida fans about their prospects getting shafted for the 2 seasons Louisville played in the AHL.... THE SAME ISSUE is now popping legally in WNY over Elmira's hockey future.
Toronto 3 has a better chance of happening than Indianapolis.
Portland and Houston are 100% contingent on their power brokers - Paul Allen and Les Alexander. If those guys want teams, they'll find a way to get one. If they don't...well those places aren't getting teams.
If I had to make a list of markets that I think could host hockey, and doing so only in a short-term window...
1. Quebec City - It's going to happen, be it the Coyotes or expansion. They're building an arena and they will come.
2. Seattle - Tons of money in the city, the demographics fit for the NHL, and the arena is going to be built...it's too attractive of a market for it not to happen.
3. Toronto 2 - Expansion. I'm not crazy about the idea of two teams being so close together...but the precedence has been set and the NHL isn't about to get rid of the Islanders, Devils, or Ducks...also the team will be insanely profitable. I question how much more money the team would bring in overall rather than just relocating funds from the Leafs to another team...but that is one arena that is a guarantee to sell out every night, regardless.
4. Houston - It's in Les Alexander's hands, really. He's shown little interest in an NHL franchise, and I don't think that'll change any time soon...but if it does Houston will have a team.
5. Portland - It's in Paul Allen's hands, really. He's shown absolutely no interest in an NHL franchise since he lost out on the Penguins in 1999 and seems to hold a vendetta against the league, and I don't think that'll change any time soon...but if it does Portland will have a team...and I think they'd be a huge success.
6. Kansas City - They need a solid ownership group for anything to happen, and there isn't one and there isn't any inkling that one will appear any time soon. The Spring Center has been insanely profitable without an anchor tenant, so they're hardly desperate enough to pull a Glendale situation and give a team huge financial breaks to play there. If someone came along and had the pockets to buy a franchise...they'd have the arena right there.
7. Milwaukee - If the Bucks leave they come into play...but as long as the Bucks are there it's too small of a market to hold teams in both leagues with any sort of success.
8. Hamilton - Copps is a dump, the city isn't exactly going through a boom era, they'd have a negative effect on Buffalo, the city isn't properly connected to Toronto...just too many negatives. That and the league will never allow Balsillie anywhere near a franchise. There are just too many negatives working against Hamilton.
This is a really strong list IMO. I'm really beginning to think the Coyotes are playing in Quebec next fall. KeyArena really won't do as a temporary facility I feel and Quebec getting a team back seems inevitable.
Utah anyone? They have supported the NBA for a very long time, I wonder if Salt Lake City is a viable option?
Other then that, I would like to see Seattle get a team, could be some fun weekend trips for me.
some of you need to broaden your horizons other than the NHL....
Utah ownership was involved in legal issues when it left the AHL(1 WAS Dallas, THEN THE Franchise turned its AHL Member status in after Phoenix had signed a 3 year contract after 1 season(which is why PHX landed in SA)... Tht franchise essentially replaced SVSE in Cleveland in '06 under Dan Gilbert. SVSE then went on to Worcester as the successor to the now Peoria Rivermen (Worcester Ice Cats).
This is a really strong list IMO. I'm really beginning to think the Coyotes are playing in Quebec next fall. KeyArena really won't do as a temporary facility I feel and Quebec getting a team back seems inevitable.
I keep repeating this, but again,... Yes, that does look like a fairly good list, BUT I don't see the logic of Toronto2 on the list, not if we're talking a Coyotes team to be potentially relocated in this year.
I keep repeating this, but again,... Yes, that does look like a fairly good list, BUT I don't see the logic of Toronto2 on the list, not if we're talking a Coyotes team to be potentially relocated in this year.
I think it's just a general list for future relocation and/or expansion. Not just moving the Coyotes even though that's what this thread is titled.
If Gary Bettman gave me a franchise tomorrow, and said no Canada, and money was no object...
Portland.
Of course, the people pointing out that Paul Allen is THE roadblock are mostly right (actually, I think Vulcan's accountants run the show more than anyone and will probably have data showing that it's not nice to mess with the Blazers). Also, money is most definitely an object. However, Portland's track record is really better, Seattle does have a lot of money tied up in the Seahawks and Mariners that Portland doesn't really have in the Blazers, the young hipster market is right up there with Seattle's...
...and the health watch on Paul Allen is underway. Just saying, though I still maintain that a good portion of the value to be purchased by someone buying the Blazers is in practically owning the market. Now, if rumors are true that there's a Portland consortium with Merritt Paulson as the Ops guy trying to buy the Blazers, will the Rose Garden still be in lockdown? I don't know... but I do know Paulson runs sports mostly by the book and, I suspect, not necessarily make it easier for NHL in Portland.
I also think, the further this has gone along, the more Chris Hansen has very subtly inched back (just a few inches) from assuring he'll want NHL in the building without doing what Allen has done. I don't think the rent would be cheap. However, Seattle is more promising than almost all the markets this side of the 49th.
If the Coyotes must move soon, it will be Quebec. If the NHL stalls, I bet they go to Seattle.
Utah: the former Delta Center is perhaps worse than US Airways in Phoenix in regards to sightlines, and the former E Center is too small and perhaps too new.
Oh, one more thing: the "slowness" with the Kings to Seattle is programmed. That's going to happen. They're not going to make a big deal out of anything until after the NBA All Star break. If there's hedging to be had, it's from Seattle (environmental review, I-91 lawsuit) than from the NBA.
Utah anyone? They have supported the NBA for a very long time, I wonder if Salt Lake City is a viable option?
Right now, they have zero chance. Still too small of a market to simultaneously have an NBA and an NHL team.
That being said, it is very wealthy, very fast growing, and is already very well suited and equipped for winter sports, so I honestly do highlight them as a future expansion/relocation candidate.... just not for a few decades, though.
So not on the table for the Yotes or if the NHL decided to expand in the next 5-10 years.
I don't think Indianapolis is really such an awful idea... it's a rapidly growing city with a lot of transplants from the rest of the Great Lakes. It's essentially the same as Columbus only bigger and with basketball. If the arena situation was right, I'd say it'd be an okay target for the NHL. It has a snowball's chance in hell of ever happening, but it's not the stupidest thing ever said on this board by a long shot.
I'd prefer Milwaukee to any market in the US if not for the Bucks. It's not a 4 sport town (and the Packers are a Milwaukee team, make no mistake there) and can't possibly support both the NHL and NBA. Otherwise, Seattle and Portland in that order. Kansas City and Houston are both wastes of time that effectively add nothing to the league... the Pacific Northwest is the last area in which the NHL has absolutely nothing.
Columbus is actually bigger, albeit by a relatively small margin
Columbus is actually bigger, albeit by a relatively small margin
And even bigger when it comes to disposable income, as Columbus essentially only had the Buckeyes as a hometown spending choice before the Jackets moved in, while Indy has the Colts, Pacers, Butler, and Indiana (if you add relatively close-by) already.
Columbus had some open room, Indy is very oversaturated already.
I know tons of people who would instantly buy season tickets and more would go to some games if the whalers came back...and none of them are going to see the baby rangers in Hartford right now in the AHL....you cannot compare Wolfpack/whale attendence with Whalers passion...........but Its ALL about money...if there was an ownership group and plans for a new/renovated area Hartford would have the NHL back...
