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 Sacramento looking to finance new arena; UPD NBA rejects relocation to Seattle bid

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-25-2013, 09:46 PM
  #426
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,053
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
Wow. I ask a simple question. But instead of trying to educate me, you get all defensive, make random statements about other markets, state you have evidence that Sacramento is a supposedly strong hockey market but provide nothing to back up this claim and then turn around and proceed to scold me for even asking such a question. This is a clear indication to me that you talk big but can't provide me an answer to my question and back up your claim.

I'll ask you one more time. Is there any evidence to show that Sacramento has a strong history of supporting hockey which could indicate that it could become a lucrative hockey market? If there is, can you please provide it and educate us.
This coming from the guy that brought up Phoenix as some comparative market to Sacramento? Like I said before, you're only interested in pushing where you think hockey ought to be rather than look at the evidence, that I already presented mind you. You already came into this thread with your mind made up about it. It shows in your statement about there being zero evidence.

For a person like you who for some reason believes that a minor league team somehow determines worthiness of a franchise rather than real factors such as people in the market, corporate dollars, quality arena, ownership group, and how they'd do at the gate, the Stockton Thunder sells well at the ECHL level. Is one of the top attending teams for that league over their existence. The demographics in Stockton are similar to Sacramento except Sacramento has many more people and is not bankrupt.

There are many, many different variations of rec level hockey in this area whether it's ice, roller, or street that speak to the active interest people have in the sport. The market has always supported whatever franchise has been here well with regards to attendance and has sold out preseason Sharks games in the past.

I have presented plenty of evidence. I have also called you out on your garbage rhetoric about the region. You're more focused on being called out for your rhetoric than acknowledging the evidence. Pick any one of those and it blows the whole 'zero evidence' garbage you've spewed out of the water.

Pinkfloyd is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 09:52 PM
  #427
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
This coming from the guy that brought up Phoenix as some comparative market to Sacramento? Like I said before, you're only interested in pushing where you think hockey ought to be rather than look at the evidence, that I already presented mind you. You already came into this thread with your mind made up about it. It shows in your statement about there being zero evidence.

For a person like you who for some reason believes that a minor league team somehow determines worthiness of a franchise rather than real factors such as people in the market, corporate dollars, quality arena, ownership group, and how they'd do at the gate, the Stockton Thunder sells well at the ECHL level. Is one of the top attending teams for that league over their existence. The demographics in Stockton are similar to Sacramento except Sacramento has many more people and is not bankrupt.

There are many, many different variations of rec level hockey in this area whether it's ice, roller, or street that speak to the active interest people have in the sport. The market has always supported whatever franchise has been here well with regards to attendance and has sold out preseason Sharks games in the past.

I have presented plenty of evidence. I have also called you out on your garbage rhetoric about the region. You're more focused on being called out for your rhetoric than acknowledging the evidence. Pick any one of those and it blows the whole 'zero evidence' garbage you've spewed out of the water.
And for the last time, you refuse to answer my question with credible evidence, but rather just state vaguely that "we like hockey". I should start calling you Matty Hulsizer.

You have nothing. So with that, I bid you good night.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 09:53 PM
  #428
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,053
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
And for the last time, you refuse to answer my question with credible evidence, but rather just state vaguely that "we like hockey". I should start calling you Matty Hulsizer.

You have nothing. So with that, I bid you good night.
Way to tuck tail and run while proving me right. See you around and keep living up to your name.

Pinkfloyd is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:00 PM
  #429
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Way to tuck tail and run while proving me right. See you around and keep living up to your name.
LOL. Oh Lord, talk about hypocracy.

This has been our conversation thus far:

Me: I don't think, IMO, that Sacramento can support an NHL team just because it's an American city with a million or so people.
You: Yes we can.
Me: Can you show me any evidence that Sacramento is a strong hockey market?
You: We are. Don't be such a straw-man argumentative person. You are ignorant.
Me: So in other words, you can't answer my question, right?
You: Shut up. I don't have to answer anything because I already have; you just don't listen to me. I won't answer your question.
Me: Again, I ask you, can you provide us with evidence that Sacramento has supported hockey and would make a good NHL hockey market? If so, I'm all ears.
You: People here skate and play hockey. It's a given. Stop asking this question.
Me: Again, you refuse to answer my question with credible evidence. I'm done.
You: You're a coward.


Not a very productive arguement, is it. Waste of time.


Last edited by Puckschmuck*: 03-25-2013 at 10:05 PM.
Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:06 PM
  #430
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
As has been mentionned numerous times, start off with a level of hockey like the AHL and physically demonstrate that there is a demand for hockey. After a few decades or so, if there appears to be a demand that is consistent, then test the waters with a team.
So according to you, Quebec should never get a team (failed AHL and NHL franchise, there's your history demonstration) and Houston should be next in line (very successful AHL franchise with decades and decades of success).

Cool. Thanks. Unless you have some kind of ulterior motive based purely on where hockey "belongs". But no you would never have that right?

__________________


Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:11 PM
  #431
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
So according to you, Quebec should never get a team (failed AHL and NHL franchise, there's your history demonstration) and Houston should be next in line (very successful AHL franchise with decades and decades of success).

Cool. Thanks. Unless you have some kind of ulterior motive based purely on where hockey "belongs". But no you would never have that right?
Oh right. Okay. Let's just drop random teams in random cities all over and hope they all flourish. That seems to be the NHL way of thinking here. That way of thinking is catching up to them in certain markets, ala Phoenix.

BTW, I am actually for NHL teams in Seattle and Houston before Quebec City (though I think down the road they will get one eventually). Just not Sacramento.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:19 PM
  #432
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
Oh right. Okay. Let's just drop random teams in random cities all over and hope they all flourish. That seems to be the NHL way of thinking here. That way of thinking is catching up to them in certain markets, ala Phoenix.

BTW, I am actually for NHL teams in Seattle and Houston before Quebec City (though I think down the road they will get one eventually). Just not Sacramento.
Well of note Phoenix had a LOOONG history of minor league success before Coyotes.

Honestly, I have not much looked into Sacremento. I'm not sure.

But it's much much more complicated than having a history of minor league hockey. There are way more factors than that. Places like San Jose had no history and did great, places like Phoenix had one and did terrible. So many factors need to come into it, I just think it is waaaay too simplistic to look at a market and say, no minor league team, no NHL team. That's my only point.

Holden Caulfield is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:35 PM
  #433
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,053
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
LOL. Oh Lord, talk about hypocracy.

This has been our conversation thus far:

Me: I don't think, IMO, that Sacramento can support an NHL team just because it's an American city with a million or so people.
You: Yes we can.
Me: Can you show me any evidence that Sacramento is a strong hockey market?
You: We are. Don't be such a straw-man argumentative person. You are ignorant.
Me: So in other words, you can't answer my question, right?
You: Shut up. I don't have to answer anything because I already have; you just don't listen to me. I won't answer your question.
Me: Again, I ask you, can you provide us with evidence that Sacramento has supported hockey and would make a good NHL hockey market? If so, I'm all ears.
You: People here skate and play hockey. It's a given. Stop asking this question.
Me: Again, you refuse to answer my question with credible evidence. I'm done.
You: You're a coward.


Not a very productive arguement, is it. Waste of time.
It's not productive because you continue to pass along misinformation and willfully ignore evidence. Sacramento is not a place with a million or so people. The MSA is around 2.5 million people. You've repeatedly spewed out about having to have some farm-level hockey history as a prerequisite for an NHL team. There are plenty of instances where it is untrue and plenty of instances where even if you had it, it doesn't make a difference. The Sacramento area has a wealthy man that would likely want to have a hockey team here since he's already part owner of another team currently. I've shown evidence of the area's interest in the sport with use of the Stockton Thunder which would align with your silly theories about lower level league interest proving something as well as sellouts of preseason hockey games in Arco.

You obviously don't want to acknowledge it. Whatever reason that may be, I don't really care but stating that there is zero evidence is factually incorrect.

Pinkfloyd is online now  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:39 PM
  #434
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Well of note Phoenix had a LOOONG history of minor league success before Coyotes.

Honestly, I have not much looked into Sacremento. I'm not sure.

But it's much much more complicated than having a history of minor league hockey. There are way more factors than that. Places like San Jose had no history and did great, places like Phoenix had one and did terrible. So many factors need to come into it, I just think it is waaaay too simplistic to look at a market and say, no minor league team, no NHL team. That's my only point.
I have nothing against Sacramento. This isn't personal. But I do question it's validity of being an NHL market. Every potential city that is thrown out there for an NHL market is being questioned. Seattle, Quebec City, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Houston, Omaha, GTA 2, Hamilton, etc. We all know Winnipeg was questionned to death. Everywhere should be questionned, and rightfully so. Sacramento should be no different. And if you are going to say I'm a nationalistic homer that wants a team in Saskatoon just because it's Canadian, think again because I'm not.

Some markets may make a go of it, some may not. It's a risk, but it should be a calculated risk. Personally, I would want to make damn well sure that if I were going to purchase an NHL franchise and run it somewhere, I would do my due diligence as best as possible to make sure that I don't go bankrupt. It's about making smart business decisions, as I've learned over the years. And a huge part of that decision, if it were me, would be to put it in a place that has demonstrated in the past that it can support pro hockey and won't bleed significant amounts of money. The league isn't on the most stable ground right now, especially when it comes to the fans. If I were GB, I'd be very careful how to proceed with relocation/expansion for the next little while.

But then again, this is the NHL we are talking about here, and common sense isn't the norm much of the time. I don't make any decisions, and people can do what they will with teams they purchase.

Puckschmuck* is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 10:48 PM
  #435
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,621
vCash: 500
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/03/25/529...#mi_rss=Sports
Quote:
The downtown properties that Sacramento officials are proposing to give to developers as part of a $448 million arena deal will increase sharply in value once the arena is built, several commercial real estate experts said.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
03-25-2013, 11:58 PM
  #436
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,505
vCash: 50
Sacramento has been the best selling team in AAA for years and the Kings have sold every ticket in 16 of their 27 seasons. This market loves it's teams, and can in no way be compared to Phoenix.

Clowe Me is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:00 AM
  #437
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,505
vCash: 50
Plus, Stockton is part of the Sacramento MSA and sales very well.

Clowe Me is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:23 AM
  #438
Jetsfan79
Registered User
 
Jetsfan79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
Yet another investor joins the fight for Sacremento's bid:


http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2013/3...investor-group

It looks likes they are assembling a dream team of investors

Jetsfan79 is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:32 AM
  #439
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,241
vCash: 500
I think sacramento has one huge disadvantage here. Relocation fee. Hansen paying a relocation fee (currently rumored 75m) directly to NBA pockets. If that fee is somehow more than 75m though i have a hard time NBA voting no to Hansen.

gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:43 AM
  #440
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
I also had another thought: I wonder if the NBA is going to look at the big picture in Seattle with the NHL. Surely they want to get back to the emerald city, but if Sacramento can get a new arena in place, would the NBA consider keeping the Kings in Sacramento, so they can block the NHL from Seattle? The NBA could always grant an expansion franchise to Seattle later.
The NBA doesn't have to go there. They can just try to extort an arena from Milwaukee by using Sacramento...

...and make it a condition of the Hansen purchase being allowed that no NHL may appear. That doesn't mean that either the NBA or Hansen can't tout the possibility of NHL in the building. An excuse can always be found once the arena is built to then keep the NHL out.

Also, don't forget that the NHL has shown they'll take an arena their team controls over sharing with the NBA in a somewhat larger market. If they get all the revenues out of Quebec while Seattle or Houston or Portland or (insert city here) can't match, they may very well be headed north, with only TV revenue as an offsetting issue.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:44 AM
  #441
Shaz
Registered User
 
Shaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Tacoma, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 122
vCash: 500
Relocation fee plus the 30 mil it gave the Maloofs (That's also a Binding agreement for the Kings)

Sacramento is playing for a future team at this point

Shaz is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:45 AM
  #442
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
The NBA doesn't have to go there. They can just try to extort an arena from Milwaukee by using Sacramento...

...and make it a condition of the Hansen purchase being allowed that no NHL may appear. That doesn't mean that either the NBA or Hansen can't tout the possibility of NHL in the building. An excuse can always be found once the arena is built to then keep the NHL out.

Also, don't forget that the NHL has shown they'll take an arena their team controls over sharing with the NBA in a somewhat larger market. If they get all the revenues out of Quebec while Seattle or Houston or Portland or (insert city here) can't match, they may very well be headed north, with only TV revenue as an offsetting issue.

Not going to happen. NBA can't make that kind of demand cause thats how it will kill the arena from being built at all period. Hansen needs the NHL to make the arena work financially. NBA will not tell hansen that NHL is not allowed. NBA is begging for litigation if they attempted it.


Last edited by gstommylee: 03-26-2013 at 12:50 AM.
gstommylee is online now  
Old
03-26-2013, 01:00 AM
  #443
PCSPounder
Registered User
 
PCSPounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Portland. So there.
Country: United States
Posts: 847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Not going to happen. NBA can't make that kind of demand cause thats how it will kill the arena from being built at all period. Hansen needs the NHL to make the arena work financially. NBA will not tell hansen that NHL is not allowed. NBA is begging for litigation if they attempted it.
How long has it been since this country enforced anti-trust laws?

You should be right about that, but I've already thought of a few snake-like workarounds that courts won't touch. Courts are bought and gutless anymore.

More important, the notion that Hansen needs the NHL to make the arena work is bogus. All Hansen has to do is grab half of the Tacoma Dome's concert business. (Oh, everyone else, that's not as easy as it sounds) OR, there's any number of other options. If the Kansas City arena can make money simply being the second home of KU basketball plus other events, Seattle can easily work around NHL in a new arena. I'd say second home of Gonzaga for starters, though one wonders how long that will last after this tournament.

PCSPounder is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 01:00 AM
  #444
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,088
vCash: 500
Phoenix is a bad example anyways. "Phoenix" doesn't have an NHL team. The suburb of Glendale Arizona does. Many people that live in Phoenix believe the arena location is at the root of the problem. The money is nowhere near Glendale. The median income in PHX is probably more of an issue than in Sacramento...

That said, you have to understand that Sacramento does sound a little odd as an NHL destination to people unfamiliar with the area. For a metro centre of 2.5 million it's not exactly a very well known place. It is not a traditional hockey market even by Californian standards. Personally, I knew that it was the capital of Ca and was inland but that's about it. I have a couple of friends that moved there for work but had no idea that Sacramento had an NBA team or that kind of population until recently. I can probably name just about every team in the top 4 NA leagues otherwise.

silvercanuck is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 07:17 AM
  #445
snovalleyhockeyfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Bend, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post
How long has it been since this country enforced anti-trust laws?

You should be right about that, but I've already thought of a few snake-like workarounds that courts won't touch. Courts are bought and gutless anymore.

More important, the notion that Hansen needs the NHL to make the arena work is bogus. All Hansen has to do is grab half of the Tacoma Dome's concert business. (Oh, everyone else, that's not as easy as it sounds) OR, there's any number of other options. If the Kansas City arena can make money simply being the second home of KU basketball plus other events, Seattle can easily work around NHL in a new arena. I'd say second home of Gonzaga for starters, though one wonders how long that will last after this tournament.
Gonzaga hosts an annual game in Seattle and has done so for the past several years; I don't see that changing anytime soon as that is a mechanism for them to allow their alums on the west side of the Cascades to see them play. Same goes for Washington State University, even though their team is nowhere near as good. And about the anti-trust, we out here seem to be the experts in this area, having got the Mariners and kept the Seahawks from leaving as a result of just threatening such action.

snovalleyhockeyfan is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 11:43 AM
  #446
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 17,505
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaz View Post
Relocation fee plus the 30 mil it gave the Maloofs (That's also a Binding agreement for the Kings)

Sacramento is playing for a future team at this point
Except everything in this arena deal is dependant on the team staying in Sacramento....

Clowe Me is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 11:45 AM
  #447
superdeluxe
Seattle SuperSonics
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sodo, Wa
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,364
vCash: 500
Relocation Fee is going to be a blank check, we will see how high Hansen/Ballmer go.

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 11:47 AM
  #448
superdeluxe
Seattle SuperSonics
 
superdeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sodo, Wa
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCSPounder View Post

More important, the notion that Hansen needs the NHL to make the arena work is bogus.
I'll take Hansen's word over yours.

superdeluxe is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 12:37 PM
  #449
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Private Equity
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,818
vCash: 500
Let's keep the discussion within good measure folks. Thanks

Major4Boarding is offline  
Old
03-26-2013, 01:08 PM
  #450
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Sacremento should get to keep there team. They have the new arena coming and strong ownership. In Bettman's standard, this team would stay in Sacramento, especially that its in the southern US. Those fans there deserve this. Come on Stern, make it happen for the good folks in Sacremento!!

Undertakerqc 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 06:58 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.