HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > The KHL
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The KHL Discuss the Continental Hockey League (Kontinentalnaya Hokkeynaya Liga).

KHL Expansion part III

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2013, 03:12 PM
  #576
Jussi
No strings on me
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 48,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
40 million floor aside, one needs to understand something about KHL first. It is very diverse. Yet you can take successful examples and try to aspire to them. Also KHL is very fast growing league. Let's take SKA Saint Petersburg as the most successful example.

5 years ago their average attendance was around 6k people. Average ticket price was about $10. And their marketing was nonexistent. This year, they will make more than 10 million on merchandise sales (that's last season figure before new year's break, they continue to grow this season ). They're number 1 hockey team in Europe in that regard. And that was before they made a deal with Reebok. Compared to the 3 years ago the sales have grown about 15 times.

They have a 12300 arena which they sell out almost every game, and that's with increased ticket prices - $25-50 per ticket. They make about 200k per game, but that's because they don't own the arena and have to share their revenue. They have plans to build their own bigger (18-20k) arena in the future. Having your own arena is a key.

Now, that's without TV revenues, as KHL doesn't share them with teams yet, explaining that KHL is still at startup stage, and that they reinvest everything back. Most of the revenue comes from two channels which KHL owns - KHL TV and KHL TV HD with more than 12 million subscribers (reach to more than 45 million people). Also there are foreign sales. This will change in the future, so every KHL team will have TV income.

One way to increase revenue is to increase number of games, there are only 27 home games right now. 70 games in total per season sounds like a reasonable figure.

And last but not least, KHL should lift, or at least increase foreigners limit as it would help to decrease the salaries of Russian players.

Combine all this and it doesn't look that bad.
But SKA are pretty much the exception. Aren't the other teams far behind? What works in one city, doesn't necessarily work in all the other, not to mention different countries.

Jussi is online now  
Old
12-07-2013, 03:13 PM
  #577
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
40 million floor aside, one needs to understand something about KHL first. It is very diverse. Yet you can take successful examples and try to aspire to them. Also KHL is very fast growing league. Let's take SKA Saint Petersburg as the most successful example.

5 years ago their average attendance was around 6k people. Average ticket price was about $10. And their marketing was nonexistent. This year, they will make more than 10 million on merchandise sales (that's last season figure before new year's break, they continue to grow this season ). They're number 1 hockey team in Europe in that regard. And that was before they made a deal with Reebok. Compared to the 3 years ago the sales have grown about 15 times.

They have a 12300 arena which they sell out almost every game, and that's with increased ticket prices - $25-50 per ticket. They make about 200k per game, but that's because they don't own the arena and have to share their revenue. They have plans to build their own bigger (18-20k) arena in the future. Having your own arena is a key.

Now, that's without TV revenues, as KHL doesn't share them with teams yet, explaining that KHL is still at startup stage, and that they reinvest everything back. Most of the revenue comes from two channels which KHL owns - KHL TV and KHL TV HD with more than 12 million subscribers (reach to more than 45 million people). Also there are foreign sales. This will change in the future, so every KHL team will have TV income.

One way to increase revenue is to increase number of games, there are only 27 home games right now. 70 games in total per season sounds like a reasonable figure.

And last but not least, KHL should lift, or at least increase foreigners limit as it would help to decrease the salaries of Russian players.

Combine all this and it doesn't look that bad.
What? You didn't respond to his question in any way. SKA St petersburg is apparantly going to be fine, that's the only thing you've stated in your post.

Let's go to the possible expansion teams, the one in norway, italy, england, france and even sweden.

Sweden has the interest, not the population, norway has neither, italy, england and france has no hockey interest so the population is pretty irrelevant. For any team to be able to sustain a 40mil minimum budget, KHL, russian companies or random rich russian people will have to fund a lot of the budget. It's not even remotely realistic to expect any team from those countries to have a budget even close to that. Unless we get another ice age and hockey popularity sky rockets in London and Paris, they won't be able to do it either.

Can we expect 20mil euros+ a year from the future TV deals?

Jonimaus is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 03:34 PM
  #578
CoolForumNamePending
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
Thanks... I appreciate the response with some actuall detail and not just vague references to "will power and money".

Even with using SKA, easily the current best case scenerio for the KHL, as an example you can see the revenues don't come close to affording some of the visions for the KHL that are getting thrown around in this thread. I imagine the successful brand SKA has built (at least compared to the rest of the league) has taken tens (hundreds?) of millions to get them to this point. For all the other current and future clubs to emulate that success is going to be expensive.

Without a billionaire coming along and buying a team in say Germany, Switzerland or Sweden and moving it to the KHL (regardless of what the club's current fans, sponsors, TV partners, etc want), I don't see why a club would jump to the league. On its own what can the KHL offer clubs that would make jumping to the KHL beneficial or even practical? A club probably isn't going to see a jump in revenue, at least not a big enough jump to cover the additional costs that would come along with playing in the KHL. Even some of the things that SKA has done well isn't really dependent on being in the KHL. A club doesn't have to join the KHL to try to sell more merchandise.

I guess you can point to Slovan as an example of a club that, without a billionaire's backing (at least as far as I know), successfully made the jump to the KHL.
Then again someone could also point out things like the Slovak league isn't as strong as the three other leagues listed above... The club is currently near the bottom of the league... The club is currently working with one of the smallest budgets in the league and if vorky's numbers are anywhere sort of close to reality they are either going to have to find a billionaire's backing or they are going to be out of the league.

CoolForumNamePending is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 03:50 PM
  #579
Ivan94
Registered User
 
Ivan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Country: Croatia
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolForumNamePending View Post

I guess you can point to Slovan as an example of a club that, without a billionaire's backing (at least as far as I know), successfully made the jump to the KHL.
Then again someone could also point out things like the Slovak league isn't as strong as the three other leagues listed above... The club is currently near the bottom of the league... The club is currently working with one of the smallest budgets in the league and if vorky's numbers are anywhere sort of close to reality they are either going to have to find a billionaire's backing or they are going to be out of the league.
medvescak have nearly same budget as slovan and is on 7th position in west.
riga and minst have almost equal budget. riga is on 4th, minsk on last position.

budget and payroll doesn´t win games.

Ivan94 is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:01 PM
  #580
Jussi
No strings on me
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 48,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan94 View Post
medvescak have nearly same budget as slovan and is on 7th position in west.
riga and minst have almost equal budget. riga is on 4th, minsk on last position.

budget and payroll doesn´t win games.
If Slovan was making profit only due to very high ticket prices and fail to make the playoffs this season, that will mean it's harder to sell tickets at high prices and therefore make profits. There is no way they can make that 40 million salary floor. Id' like to see a source for that by the way, vorky keeps throwing a lot of numbers in here without linking to the source.


Last edited by Jussi: 12-07-2013 at 04:11 PM.
Jussi is online now  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:18 PM
  #581
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
The whole KHL vs SHL debate doesn't make sense. Two different leagues, with two different mind sets, and two different goals.

KHL wants to become a rival league to the NHL, while SHL just wants to continue to be the stepping stone to the NHL.

I think a lot of people on this thread are missing the point, when it comes to KHL expansion into cities like Oslo, Paris, London, and Milan. Quite frankly it's impossible to tell how a future club will do. Take for example the LA Kings in the NHL. Took them a pretty long time to grow and become profitable but they have finally done that and there were naysayers all along, especially canadians (LA Kings are the success story). Than take for example the Coyotes of the NHL. An utter mess which quite frankly shouldn't be in the league. So far an obvious failure, but the NHL thinks they can turn it around (Time will tell). If there is a population, and people are willing to give it a shot, you gotta throw clubs around and see what kind of fans they draw.

As for the economic situation of the KHL, it'll get better. Big factor right now is they're still playing in arenas that were built during the Soviet era and house as many people as ECHL arenas. Modern day arenas around all of Russia will help and are coming. Before that happens though it's impossible to really gauge the KHL properly. Not to mention Moscow isn't being utilized by the KHL in the right light (too many teams) (which they'll be fixing soon). A little bit of Revenue Sharing, and cutting non profitable teams to the lower VHL will help. The KHL is a mass transition stage from the old KHL (a russian based hockey league) to a KHL that'll span Europe and I believe they're gauging what clubs will be able to "hang with the big boys".

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:21 PM
  #582
ult
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 1,753
vCash: 500
I can't help but notice that among all the numbers I've thrown into my post you've all missed the most important point - KHL is fast growing. Yes, SKA have outgrown the most, but not because everyone else did not improve, quite the opposite, it's impressive that they manged to stand out like that because the rest of the league have been rapidly developing as well. And that is only the beginning.

And some narrow-minded individuals keep fixating on Billionaires spending their money. The problem is that they can't be bothered to try to earn some of that money back, that's how much they don't care about the losses. In some cities they could increase their revenues tenfold if only they would actually try.

Now you keep throwing 40 million salary floor. You don't need that kind of money to stay competitive. Especially foreign teams who don't have a foreigners limit. KHL won't force teams to increase their budget 4 times. The goal is to have teams to come to it naturally. When the market is there. That is well down the road, more so for some than others.

If foreign teams want to be a part of something new, bigger, fast growing and ambitious, they're welcomed to KHL. And as we can see there are already 8 countries in the KHL. So looks to me like they see something interesting in KHL.

ult is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:24 PM
  #583
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
I can't help but notice that among all the numbers I've thrown into my post you've all missed the most important point - KHL is fast growing. Yes, SKA have outgrown the most, but not because everyone else did not improve, quite the opposite, it's impressive that they manged to stand out like that because the rest of the league have been rapidly developing as well. And that is only the beginning.

And some narrow-minded individuals keep fixating on Billionaires spending their money. The problem is that they can't be bothered to try to earn some of that money back, that's how much they don't care about the losses. In some cities they could increase their revenues tenfold if only they would actually try.

Now you keep throwing 40 million salary floor. You don't need that kind of money to stay competitive. Especially foreign team who don't have a foreigners limit. KHL won't force teams to increase their budget 4 times. The goal is to have teams to come to it naturally. When the market is there. That is well down the road, more so for some than others.

If foreign teams want to be a part of something new, bigger, fast growing and ambitious, they're welcomed to KHL. And as we can see there are already 8 countries in the KHL. So looks to me like they see something interesting in KHL.
So who is right? You or vorky? Or are you both wrong? Man KHL must be handing out some tricky informtion that is hard to understand if there is this much confusion even amongst russian posters.

Jonimaus is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:27 PM
  #584
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
I can't help but notice that among all the numbers I've thrown into my post you've all missed the most important point - KHL is fast growing. Yes, SKA have outgrown the most, but not because everyone else did not improve, quite the opposite, it's impressive that they manged to stand out like that because the rest of the league have been rapidly developing as well. And that is only the beginning.

And some narrow-minded individuals keep fixating on Billionaires spending their money. The problem is that they can't be bothered to try to earn some of that money back, that's how much they don't care about the losses. In some cities they could increase their revenues tenfold if only they would actually try.

Now you keep throwing 40 million salary floor. You don't need that kind of money to stay competitive. Especially foreign team who don't have a foreigners limit. KHL won't force teams to increase their budget 4 times. The goal is to have teams to come to it naturally. When the market is there. That is well down the road, more so for some than others.

If foreign teams want to be a part of something new, bigger, fast growing and ambitious, they're welcomed to KHL. And as we can see there are already 8 countries in the KHL. So looks to me like they see something interesting in KHL.
This is dead on. No longer are the days of second rate hockey in Europe. The KHL will become a first rate hockey league. The NHL players have even begun using the KHL as leverage (especially Russians). The KHL doesn't even have to have the ability to lure players from the NHL to play in the KHL, they just need to grow enough, become stable and the future Datsyuks and Ovechkins will just stay in the KHL.

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:30 PM
  #585
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevreelander View Post
This is dead on. No longer are the days of second rate hockey in Europe. The KHL will become a first rate hockey league. The NHL players have even begun using the KHL as leverage (especially Russians). The KHL doesn't even have to have the ability to lure players from the NHL to play in the KHL, they just need to grow enough, become stable and the future Datsyuks and Ovechkins will just stay in the KHL.
Whoa slow down there. Even if all Russians left to KHL, NHL would still be the best league by far. Don't kid yourself, KHL is still many many many years away from being even comparable to the NHL.

Russians might be using it as levarage, and while NHL would miss Ovechkin and Malkin for sure, it wouldn't be a big blow. It will hurt russias hockey development more than it helps since NHL might be hesistant to draft russian players, and players in NHL competing against the best will obviously get better.

Jonimaus is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:42 PM
  #586
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
Whoa slow down there. Even if all Russians left to KHL, NHL would still be the best league by far. Don't kid yourself, KHL is still many many many years away from being even comparable to the NHL.

Russians might be using it as levarage, and while NHL would miss Ovechkin and Malkin for sure, it wouldn't be a big blow. It will hurt russias hockey development more than it helps since NHL might be hesistant to draft russian players, and players in NHL competing against the best will obviously get better.
I get the slow down part but the KHL is dreaming big and this is what they want to do. I don't think you realize how close the gap is anyway. Sure not even the KHL big boys like Dynamo Moscow and SKA can compete with the Blackhawks or Sharks. But the big boys can beat the lower NHL teams. Gap is a lot closer than you think, especially on the offensive side.


I don't agree that the growth of the KHL will hurt Russian hockey development and since the KHL will span Europe, European hockey development, if anything it'll make it better. It's the fact that for the 90s and early 2000s hockey became almost an after thought to Russians. If you don't know the Russians dominated the Canadians for most of the 1950s-. Get the gene pool going, with the growth of the KHL the depth pool is going to go up. Than they won't have to compete with the NHL greats because they'll have greats of their own to compete with. In every country that the KHL is successful in the depth pool of hockey players coming out of that country will grow.

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:50 PM
  #587
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevreelander View Post
I get the slow down part but the KHL is dreaming big and this is what they want to do. I don't think you realize how close the gap is anyway. Sure not even the KHL big boys like Dynamo Moscow and SKA can compete with the Blackhawks or Sharks. But the big boys can beat the lower NHL teams. Gap is a lot closer than you think, especially on the offensive side.
The lower NHL teams are not really close to the top teams though. The gap is still fairly large, and unless pretty much every country except Canada says "screw the NHL, we'll send everyone to KHL!" (including USA), KHL will never be the best league, and even if that happened, Canada has enough players to make NHL competetive.

I'm not even sure teams like Buffalo would steamroll the top 3 SHL teams on big ice in a 7 game serie, so it doesn't say too much.

Jonimaus is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:56 PM
  #588
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
The lower NHL teams are not really close to the top teams though. The gap is still fairly large, and unless pretty much every country except Canada says "screw the NHL, we'll send everyone to KHL!" (including USA), KHL will never be the best league, and even if that happened, Canada has enough players to make NHL competetive.

I'm not even sure teams like Buffalo would steamroll the top 3 SHL teams on big ice in a 7 game serie, so it doesn't say too much.
I don't know how much you know about NHL teams but this isn't true at all. The Sabres are the only team that are the laughing stock of the league, everyone else has a legit shot, at making the playoffs. The second worst team in the league is the Islanders, and they made the playoffs last year and managed to push the Penguins to a Game 6. If Dynamo Moscow/SKA/Ak Bars/Barys/CSKA went up against the Islanders/Panthers/Predators/Oilers/Flames it'd be a pretty good game.

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 04:56 PM
  #589
CoolForumNamePending
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
I can't help but notice that among all the numbers I've thrown into my post you've all missed the most important point - KHL is fast growing. Yes, SKA have outgrown the most, but not because everyone else did not improve, quite the opposite, it's impressive that they manged to stand out like that because the rest of the league have been rapidly developing as well. And that is only the beginning.
This is a bit vague. Are you able to provide some numbers regarding these other clubs like you did with SKA?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
And some narrow-minded individuals keep fixating on Billionaires spending their money. The problem is that they can't be bothered to try to earn some of that money back, that's how much they don't care about the losses.
Actually I said in an earlier post that if the plan is to grow the league using billionaires who don't care about loses than the KHL will probably continue to expand and be perfectly fine. I only have questions when people start talking about all the revenue that will eventually be generated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
In some cities they could increase their revenues tenfold if only they would actually try..
Now you are really getting vague.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
In Now you keep throwing 40 million salary floor. You don't need that kind of money to stay competitive. Especially foreign teams who don't have a foreigners limit. KHL won't force teams to increase their budget 4 times. The goal is to have teams to come to it naturally. When the market is there. That is well down the road, more so for some than others.
Don't shoot the messenger.

I'll let vorky and yourself sort this out. According to him you will need 40 million to just stay in the league, nevermind being competitive.

Teams might not need 40 million to do well in the KHL but they might need 40 million to keep their home grown star players from going to NA and I thought that is one of the goals of the KHL? I think the big spending Russian clubs have fair amount NHL calibre on their rosters but it remains to be seen if a club like Slovan can do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
If foreign teams want to be a part of something new, bigger, fast growing and ambitious, they're welcomed to KHL. And as we can see there are already 8 countries in the KHL. So looks to me like they see something interesting in KHL.
Of course. To be honest up to this point I think the KHL has been a good thing for hockey. I'm just not convinced of some people's visions of its future.

I also find some KHL advocates attitudes toward other leagues hypocritical. It also seems some think that hockey in Europe has been in decline in recent years and only the KHL can fix it. Looking at things like club attendance now to figures from a decade ago shows hockey, even outside of the KHL/Russia, is doing well and even growing.


Last edited by CoolForumNamePending: 12-07-2013 at 05:05 PM.
CoolForumNamePending is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 05:02 PM
  #590
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevreelander View Post
I don't know how much you know about NHL teams but this isn't true at all. The Sabres are the only team that are the laughing stock of the league, everyone else has a legit shot, at making the playoffs. The second worst team in the league is the Islanders, and they made the playoffs last year and managed to push the Penguins to a Game 6. If Dynamo Moscow/SKA/Ak Bars/Barys/CSKA went up against the Islanders/Panthers/Predators/Oilers/Flames it'd be a pretty good game.
Based on this post I seem to know the NHL a hell lot better than you at least.

If you seriously think teams like Calgary, Edmonton and Florida to name some has legit playoff chances I doubt you follow the league at all.

Jonimaus is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 05:24 PM
  #591
Ivan94
Registered User
 
Ivan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Country: Croatia
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
So who is right? You or vorky? Or are you both wrong? Man KHL must be handing out some tricky informtion that is hard to understand if there is this much confusion even amongst russian posters.
vorky isn´t a russian poster

Ivan94 is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 05:40 PM
  #592
SoundAndFury
Registered User
 
SoundAndFury's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevreelander View Post
The Sabres are the only team that are the laughing stock of the league, everyone else has a legit shot, at making the playoffs.
Jay Feaster, is this you?

No KHL team (maybe Dinamo but that's still unlikely) would even challenge any NHL team in 7 game series if they were given time to adapt to bigger ice.

To me the factor which exemplifies it the best is that any D in the NHL is good enough to play in the K meanwhile K has no more than 20 D who could be a legit NHL players. And 20 is actually very, very optimistic calculation.

__________________
no kind of logic, intelligence or philosophy can ever win a fight against ignorance, superstition or stupidity (Justinov) - a thing to remember on HFBoards

Last edited by SoundAndFury: 12-07-2013 at 05:46 PM.
SoundAndFury is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 06:40 PM
  #593
metmag
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nepean
Country: Canada
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolForumNamePending View Post
This is a bit vague. Are you able to provide some numbers regarding these other clubs like you did with SKA?

I also find some KHL advocates attitudes toward other leagues hypocritical. It also seems some think that hockey in Europe has been in decline in recent years and only the KHL can fix it. Looking at things like club attendance now to figures from a decade ago shows hockey, even outside of the KHL/Russia, is doing well and even growing.
I think it is rather obvious that the KHL has been fast growing. I am not sure what is vague about the growth of the league but I see growth in every sense. Some numbers/thoughts that come to mind first and foremost are the average and total attendances of the clubs. Then the KHL TV subscriptions that have been increasing. Indeed there is even growth with the number of providers broadcasting the KHL. There are a growing number of teams, a growing number of nations joining, and an increasing number of foreign professionals from NA. Paul Maurice and Mike Keenan are big names that instantly come to mind, and although I dont want to speculate, I cant exactly imagine them or others similar to them taking jobs in the RSL. This is evidence, in my opinion in the growth of the repuation of the league.
In infrastructure there is nothing but growth. The parity in the league has grown tremendously and for every Ak-Bars and SKA, there is the Medvescak and Riga that are raising eyebrows. Avangard Omsk hasn't been in a playoff position this year, while Avtomobilist may clinch a spot coming from last, last year; this would have been unheard of just 5 years ago. The evidence is overwhelming.

As for the last paragraph in the quote, I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Europe was doing 'well'. KHL aside I would strongly disagree with that. As a sport it is quite small and very niche. There are continents where people dont even know what hockey is(!). North America, being the lead in the hockey word sees Europe only as a very distant second with teams/leagues at just the ECHL level. So what do you consider doing well? The fact that over the past decade European attendance rose an average of 500 viewers? Or the fact there are more Europeans in the NHL now than there were 15 years ago?
Personally I think for a developed continent like Europe , with many hockey roots, and countries with higher GDP per capita than the USA, the state of hockey was and remains abysmal. With international medals being cycled between the same handful of teams that you can count on one hand. And I, for one would like to see that changed for the better. And not just in Europe, but also in Asia and in the world in general. I see the KHL as a step in that direction. Whether or not a Swedish club or two join is inconsequential. Moreover The recent scrambling of the ECC and the IIHF to establish a larger and more meaningful European competition has been driven and is a direct result of KHL's growth and increasing influence. In the end its more beneficial for hockey and I'm grateful for that.


Last edited by metmag: 12-07-2013 at 06:48 PM.
metmag is offline  
Old
12-07-2013, 07:34 PM
  #594
Jussi
No strings on me
 
Jussi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 48,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
As for the last paragraph in the quote, I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Europe was doing 'well'. KHL aside I would strongly disagree with that. As a sport it is quite small and very niche. There are continents where people dont even know what hockey is(!). North America, being the lead in the hockey word sees Europe only as a very distant second with teams/leagues at just the ECHL level. So what do you consider doing well? The fact that over the past decade European attendance rose an average of 500 viewers? Or the fact there are more Europeans in the NHL now than there were 15 years ago?
Personally I think for a developed continent like Europe , with many hockey roots, and countries with higher GDP per capita than the USA, the state of hockey was and remains abysmal. With international medals being cycled between the same handful of teams that you can count on one hand. And I, for one would like to see that changed for the better. And not just in Europe, but also in Asia and in the world in general. I see the KHL as a step in that direction. Whether or not a Swedish club or two join is inconsequential. Moreover The recent scrambling of the ECC and the IIHF to establish a larger and more meaningful European competition has been driven and is a direct result of KHL's growth and increasing influence. In the end its more beneficial for hockey and I'm grateful for that.
I'm sorry but if you think KHL will suddenly make hockey a bigger sport in Europe in countries that don't care about it, you've severely delusional. Hockey will always be a small sport in the biggest European countries. Football, basketball and handball reign in the team sports department during winter. If you include individual sports, the biathlon World Cup events get viewership hockey can only dream of.

Jussi is online now  
Old
12-07-2013, 09:25 PM
  #595
metmag
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nepean
Country: Canada
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
I'm sorry but if you think KHL will suddenly make hockey a bigger sport in Europe in countries that don't care about it, you've severely delusional. Hockey will always be a small sport in the biggest European countries. Football, basketball and handball reign in the team sports department during winter. If you include individual sports, the biathlon World Cup events get viewership hockey can only dream of.
Please do elaborate.

metmag is offline  
Old
12-08-2013, 12:50 AM
  #596
CoolForumNamePending
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
I think it is rather obvious that the KHL has been fast growing. I am not sure what is vague about the growth of the league but I see growth in every sense. Some numbers/thoughts that come to mind first and foremost are the average and total attendances of the clubs. Then the KHL TV subscriptions that have been increasing. Indeed there is even growth with the number of providers broadcasting the KHL. There are a growing number of teams, a growing number of nations joining, and an increasing number of foreign professionals from NA. Paul Maurice and Mike Keenan are big names that instantly come to mind, and although I dont want to speculate, I cant exactly imagine them or others similar to them taking jobs in the RSL. This is evidence, in my opinion in the growth of the repuation of the league.
In infrastructure there is nothing but growth. The parity in the league has grown tremendously and for every Ak-Bars and SKA, there is the Medvescak and Riga that are raising eyebrows. Avangard Omsk hasn't been in a playoff position this year, while Avtomobilist may clinch a spot coming from last, last year; this would have been unheard of just 5 years ago. The evidence is overwhelming.
Ya... I don't think anyone is going to deny the KHL is growing. I think you can understand though that when a poster is giving specifics like within a few years the KHL will have a salary floor of 40M and a cap of 70M people are going to be wondering exactly how. If the general opinion around here is that vorky is dreaming or it is going to be largely funded by something other than league revenue then I am totally cool with dropping the subject right now.

And now on to the more intersting off topic part of the conversation...

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
As for the last paragraph in the quote, I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Europe was doing 'well'. KHL aside I would strongly disagree with that. As a sport it is quite small and very niche.
Hockey is niche in places like Sweden, Switzerland, Czech Rep, etc?

If you are talking about on a global scale than ya, hockey is niche. Just about all sports (especially team sports) are niche on a global level. Even a highly accessible sport like basketball played on at least a casual recreational level all over the world seems to be pretty limited when it comes to places that are both interested in regularly watching the sport in significant numbers and capable of producing a high volume of elite talent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
There are continents where people dont even know what hockey is(!).
So the next KHL expansion teams will be in Lagos and Caracas then?

I was (as were you in your first sentence) talking about Europe not Africa, South America, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
North America, being the lead in the hockey word sees Europe only as a very distant second with teams/leagues at just the ECHL level. So what do you consider doing well? The fact that over the past decade European attendance rose an average of 500 viewers? Or the fact there are more Europeans in the NHL now than there were 15 years ago?
Slow and steady growth might not be as sexy as Grazprom pouring millions into SKA but it's still growth.

For all the talk about the KHL's rising attendance 1/2 the teams in the league saw a decline last year and the league on average still doesn't draw significantly more (if at all) than some of the other leagues in Europe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
Personally I think for a developed continent like Europe , with many hockey roots, and countries with higher GDP per capita than the USA, the state of hockey was and remains abysmal.
For the countries with actual 'hockey roots' I think the sport all things considered is doing well. If in your opinion it isn't doing well could you please explain to me how the KHL changes this? How exactly does Jokerit going to the KHL reverse the apparent declining fortunes of hockey in Finland?

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
With international medals being cycled between the same handful of teams that you can count on one hand. And I, for one would like to see that changed for the better.
Sure... I think we all would. It obviously wouldn't hurt but I am not sure how a KHL team in say Madrid is going to lead to Spain becoming relevant in hockey and hockey becoming relevant in Spain. IMHO what countries need is handful of clubs that can produce talent. If you have that you should also eventually have the following two things that will lead to hockey becoming more popular in a country.

1) A competitive national team
2) A competitive national league

Over the past decade Denmark and Norway (hell... even France) have made pretty impressive progress on the 'world' stage and they did it without the KHL. If any additional country/league deserves credit for Denmark and Norway's progress it is the 'stagnate', 'unambitious', 'insignificant', 'abysmal' and 'declining' Swedish leagues. You could even argue both have passed Latvia and Belarus, two countries that have had teams in the KHL since the very beginning.

With all that said... In the 4 Olympic tournaments that have been 'best-on-best' 8 different countries hve played for a medal. IMHO that really isn't bad, but I get your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
And not just in Europe, but also in Asia and in the world in general. I see the KHL as a step in that direction.
I think what I said above applies here as well. A Pacific rim country trying to emulate Denmark might not be as exciting as its capital city getting a big budget KHL team but over the long term it could prove to be more successful in making it a 'hockey nation'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by metmag View Post
Whether or not a Swedish club or two join is inconsequential.
Moreover The recent scrambling of the ECC and the IIHF to establish a larger and more meaningful European competition has been driven and is a direct result of KHL's growth and increasing influence. In the end its more beneficial for hockey and I'm grateful for that.
Never thought of the ECC/KHL thing that way but it is interesting view point. If this dynamic is beneficial to hockey I wonder why some are rooting for the ECC to fail.


Last edited by CoolForumNamePending: 12-08-2013 at 01:00 AM.
CoolForumNamePending is offline  
Old
12-08-2013, 01:34 AM
  #597
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
Based on this post I seem to know the NHL a hell lot better than you at least.

If you seriously think teams like Calgary, Edmonton and Florida to name some has legit playoff chances I doubt you follow the league at all.
This whole comment shows your lack of knowledge of the NHL. Every year clubs go in and out of playoff contention and surprise people. The Panthers just 2 seasons ago faced off against the Devils in the first round of the playoffs, brought it to a game 7, there only key loss from that season is James Garrison, Jose Thedore, and Kris Versteeg (who they replaced with Cambell, Thomas, and Huberdeau). Some (including myself, will say the three they replaced them with are better than originals) The Devils went on to be the Eastern Conference champs that year, to show you how talented the Panthers are. Edmonton's first round picks (RNH, Taylor Hall, Yakupov) will mature at some point and I expect them to be at the top of the NHL sooner rather than later, especially when Darnell Nurse comes into swing. The signing of Bryzgalov really doesn't hurt there chances of rebounding this year at all either. Eakins will figure it out great head coach. As for Calgary, the lack of a viable goaltender hurts them big time this year but the club is young and will be contending soon.

Do I think the top teams of the KHL can compete with the lesser teams of the NHL? Of course I do, especially in the offensive side of the game.

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-08-2013, 01:37 AM
  #598
thevreelander
Registered User
 
thevreelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundAndFury View Post
Jay Feaster, is this you?

No KHL team (maybe Dinamo but that's still unlikely) would even challenge any NHL team in 7 game series if they were given time to adapt to bigger ice.

To me the factor which exemplifies it the best is that any D in the NHL is good enough to play in the K meanwhile K has no more than 20 D who could be a legit NHL players. And 20 is actually very, very optimistic calculation.
I don't know when I ever through in a 7 game series. I will go out a limb here and say it's not far fetched to believe the top KHL teams are better offensively than some of the bottom NHL teams though.

I will also agree with the second half, the D is where the division between the KHL and NHL is clear. But it's not by as big a margin as you say.

thevreelander is offline  
Old
12-08-2013, 02:16 AM
  #599
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ult View Post
40 million floor aside, one needs to understand something about KHL first. It is very diverse. Yet you can take successful examples and try to aspire to them. Also KHL is very fast growing league. Let's take SKA Saint Petersburg as the most successful example.

5 years ago their average attendance was around 6k people. Average ticket price was about $10. And their marketing was nonexistent. This year, they will make more than 10 million on merchandise sales (that's last season figure before new year's break, they continue to grow this season ). They're number 1 hockey team in Europe in that regard. And that was before they made a deal with Reebok. Compared to the 3 years ago the sales have grown about 15 times.

They have a 12300 arena which they sell out almost every game, and that's with increased ticket prices - $25-50 per ticket. They make about 200k per game, but that's because they don't own the arena and have to share their revenue. They have plans to build their own bigger (18-20k) arena in the future. Having your own arena is a key.

Now, that's without TV revenues, as KHL doesn't share them with teams yet, explaining that KHL is still at startup stage, and that they reinvest everything back. Most of the revenue comes from two channels which KHL owns - KHL TV and KHL TV HD with more than 12 million subscribers (reach to more than 45 million people). Also there are foreign sales. This will change in the future, so every KHL team will have TV income.

One way to increase revenue is to increase number of games, there are only 27 home games right now. 70 games in total per season sounds like a reasonable figure.

And last but not least, KHL should lift, or at least increase foreigners limit as it would help to decrease the salaries of Russian players.

Combine all this and it doesn't look that bad.
Great post.

I recommend KHL haters to read this article http://webhokej24.sk/rusko/khl-rozsi...ych-klubov-nhl

What is SKA today, all clubs will be in future (cca 5 yrs) as minimum.

KHL will have its salary cap at 80% of NHL´s salary cap for respective season. The problem is that there is not free tranfer market with NHL.

Table 1

You can see salary budget of russian KHL teams which will stay in KHL. Every club will reach today´s SKA budget (37M euro). Sedem clubs has salary budget at 20-25M euro (Torpedo not final budget). Adding 10M euro is not a problem, especially when you get money from KHL or you have marketing like SKA. If Traktor and SKA are able to get cca 10M euro from merchandising/tickets, so the same can do in Kazan, Ufa etc.

Table 2

Amount of money which are spent for players salaries.

Table 3

As we know, russia has lower taxes. This table is about it, KHL clubs have bonus of 20%. So, 1M in NHL = 0,8 in KHL.

I posted a link with Shalaev interview. Would be great if posters (not you ult) to listen it and then discuss. There is said almost everything.

vorky is offline  
Old
12-08-2013, 03:34 AM
  #600
robwangjing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Beijing
Country: China
Posts: 206
vCash: 500
Can't questions and discussions about the KHL's future, strenght, Gazprom, defencemen and general economy be held in another thread instead of a thread mainly about expansion teams?

I come here to read about rumors and news about new teams that will join or old teams that will leave the KHL, not to read about the future salary caps, how strong the KHL is in comparison to the NHL, how sad the Finnish and Swedish "fans" are etc.

Not trying to offend anyone, but the last 5 pages or so has been totally off-topic in my opinion. No discussion what so ever about the Norwegian team that is now in Russia to talk about a future potential expansion.

So please, make a new thread.

Any news about this Norwegian team?

robwangjing 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 02:11 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.