HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Bill Daly on Wang / Isles

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2010, 05:39 PM
  #51
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
They have already come out saying it is in their best interest to keep the Isles here as it expands ad revenue and visibility futher.

We have a great deal, no doubt, but it's not hurting cablevision at all.
OTH first question is, do you work for Cablevision or any of it's affiliates?

I will merely let these 2 articles speak for themselves. I don't understand where you base your views from.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...-Violated.html

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...A90994D0494D81

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2010, 07:35 PM
  #52
periferal
Registered User
 
periferal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles727 View Post
Scroll down to 1:39 where Pierre Lebrun mentions that Glen Healy is getting info that Nelson Peltz wants to buy the Islanders. Hope and pray this is true.

Here is the link.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...t-at-noon-et-2





Did you actually read the article about this guy?

periferal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2010, 08:22 PM
  #53
Isles727
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 29
vCash: 500
I did. He is an absolute horror show. He also has been mentioned in the past as being interested in Montreal and Ottawa before they were sold. I think the Islanders need a better owner than that. Otherwise we are better off with Wang. Opinions?

Isles727 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 02:50 AM
  #54
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
OTH first question is, do you work for Cablevision or any of it's affiliates?

I will merely let these 2 articles speak for themselves. I don't understand where you base your views from.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...-Violated.html

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...A90994D0494D81
So when discussing the role in France's resistance movement in countering the Germans in 1940's war torn Paris streets, you bring up Brie cheese and fine skiing. I have absolutely no idea what you're getting at. Cable pays the Islander owner du jour A TON of money, nearly the most in the NHL.

I do not and will never have cablevision, but that is as relevant as your first article. Or Camambert in a physics discussion. Also, the Dolans put us on the second rate channel rather than the prime channel when we're the second rate team (or third rate). They just pay the team more than they do the other two metro teams doing better and getting better exposure. A well.

But again, I have no idea whatsoever what relevance you are trying to bring and no idea why the me-working-for-Dolan jibe was made. Regardless, I think Normandie would have been less bloodier if we went with a spreadable port wine with toasted baguette slices instead of the smoked Edam Patton insisted on.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 02:53 AM
  #55
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by periferal View Post



Did you actually read the article about this guy?
Yeah, imagine waking up and replacing syphilis with gonorrhea.

Devil's Advocate: Could we handle life with a sane owner we didn't eventually hate anyway?

Again, PASS.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 10:15 AM
  #56
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Dear OTH:

Your original post said Quote:
"They have already come out saying it is in their best interest to keep the Isles here as it expands ad revenue and visibility futher. We have a great deal, no doubt, but it's not hurting cablevision at all."


What I was getting at with the 2 articles was showing the picture of Cablevision culture of lies, deception, and borderline illegal monopolistic behavior.

In the first article they looked to block the Jets Westside Railyard Stadium project in any way possible, enough so to cause the Jets to file a lawsuit against them. My point there is are they blocking our development deal in any way?

Second article paints the picture of how the Islanders have been mistreated by Cablevision. If the Islanders are given second rate grainy coverage or none at all as the article depicted then eventually that will cause the new or casual fan to be turned off to the Islanders viewing. We already know that most new and old fans are turned off to going to see the Islanders in person right (arena issues)?? Cablevision could be slowly helping to kill the fanbase inorder to keep the Islanders weak and controlable, (no arena = less fans, less fans = less revenue, less revenue = less good players, less good players = less fans). IMO Cablevision is paying 20 Million per to slowly destroy the Islander Brand and eventually will improve the Rangers Brand in the process.

So now lets get to the point of WHY??? The Diehard Fans on either side of this Islander vs. Ranger battle could never be changed to root for the other team. The longer we are kept weak as a franchise in coverage, arena, etc. the weaker our fan base becomes. As far as the revenue that Cablevision gets from ads would they not get the same revenues if the Islanders left the area? Would the same advertisers not advertise with the Rangers?? As for visability that was so funny I almost fell out of my chair. Are we to say that with the Islanders Cablevision is getting more visability?? They have no need for such visability believe me, especially not for 20 mill a season.

Last point, remember the Rags hated us for coming into there backyard and that was when they were not owned by Cablevision that actually has there corporate headquarters in Nassau County. If we moved away EVENTUALLY all new hockey fans on the Island would become Ranger Fans and in the long run if you were Cablevision which scenario would you prefer?

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 02:40 PM
  #57
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Dear OTH:

Your original post said Quote:
"They have already come out saying it is in their best interest to keep the Isles here as it expands ad revenue and visibility futher. We have a great deal, no doubt, but it's not hurting cablevision at all."


What I was getting at with the 2 articles was showing the picture of Cablevision culture of lies, deception, and borderline illegal monopolistic behavior.

In the first article they looked to block the Jets Westside Railyard Stadium project in any way possible, enough so to cause the Jets to file a lawsuit against them. My point there is are they blocking our development deal in any way?

Second article paints the picture of how the Islanders have been mistreated by Cablevision. If the Islanders are given second rate grainy coverage or none at all as the article depicted then eventually that will cause the new or casual fan to be turned off to the Islanders viewing. We already know that most new and old fans are turned off to going to see the Islanders in person right (arena issues)?? Cablevision could be slowly helping to kill the fanbase inorder to keep the Islanders weak and controlable, (no arena = less fans, less fans = less revenue, less revenue = less good players, less good players = less fans). IMO Cablevision is paying 20 Million per to slowly destroy the Islander Brand and eventually will improve the Rangers Brand in the process.

So now lets get to the point of WHY??? The Diehard Fans on either side of this Islander vs. Ranger battle could never be changed to root for the other team. The longer we are kept weak as a franchise in coverage, arena, etc. the weaker our fan base becomes. As far as the revenue that Cablevision gets from ads would they not get the same revenues if the Islanders left the area? Would the same advertisers not advertise with the Rangers?? As for visability that was so funny I almost fell out of my chair. Are we to say that with the Islanders Cablevision is getting more visability?? They have no need for such visability believe me, especially not for 20 mill a season.

Last point, remember the Rags hated us for coming into there backyard and that was when they were not owned by Cablevision that actually has there corporate headquarters in Nassau County. If we moved away EVENTUALLY all new hockey fans on the Island would become Ranger Fans and in the long run if you were Cablevision which scenario would you prefer?
The entity Cablevision provides a rich revenue stream and visibility to area fans. We are the worst team they cover and thus put on the third rate network. When we were better we got better airing. MSG/Dolan/NYR makes money with the NYR/NYI rivalry as does the NYI. Now that is irrelevant.

What is relevant?

We make $22M a year increasing each year until 2030.

Yes, from the BAD GUYS.


The bad guys. Yes, I said it, the bad guys. Who wins? Are we paying THEM or are they forced to PAY THE GOOD GUYS?

And Dolan has stated publicly he wants the rivalry to continue. It's good business.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 02:50 PM
  #58
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
The entity Cablevision provides a rich revenue stream and visibility to area fans. We are the worst team they cover and thus put on the third rate network. When we were better we got better airing. MSG/Dolan/NYR makes money with the NYR/NYI rivalry as does the NYI. Now that is irrelevant.

What is relevant?

We make $22M a year increasing each year until 2030.

Yes, from the BAD GUYS.


The bad guys. Yes, I said it, the bad guys. Who wins? Are we paying THEM or are they forced to PAY THE GOOD GUYS?

And Dolan has stated publicly he wants the rivalry to continue. It's good business.
I think I have painted the picture as to how Cablevision benefits financially in the long run from our demise, move and cancelation of that contract. I have to believe that contract is not benefiting them to the point that they want to see it liveout its lifetime.

You still have not made clear how them absorbing our revenue streams when we are gone and not having that contract as an expenditure is not better for them.

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 03:13 PM
  #59
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
OTH"

P.S. The statement by Dolan that he wants to see the rivalry continue and it is good business is window dressing. The rivalry is losing significance at an alarming rate. We would need to be good and have a large fan base that could inflate The Gardens ticket sales for it to be good business for Dolan and Cablevision. We are not good and I doubt Dolan would rather pay 20+ mill a year for the next 20 years so he could sell a few extra garden tickets then see our team leave his market!!! Give me a break.

Oh I get it the Rangers are such a bad draw at the Garden that it is worth while for Dolan to pay us 20+ mill a season so that he has our fan base to invade the Garden and that will more then make up for his outlay on our TV rights.

I don't know about you but I pay Cablevision and would continue to pay the same price if the Islanders were aired by one of Cablevisions sports channels or not

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 03:37 PM
  #60
periferal
Registered User
 
periferal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
OTH"

P.S. The statement by Dolan that he wants to see the rivalry continue and it is good business is window dressing. The rivalry is losing significance at an alarming rate. We would need to be good and have a large fan base that could inflate The Gardens ticket sales for it to be good business for Dolan and Cablevision. We are not good and I doubt Dolan would rather pay 20+ mill a year for the next 20 years so he could sell a few extra garden tickets then see our team leave his market!!! Give me a break.

Oh I get it the Rangers are such a bad draw at the Garden that it is worth while for Dolan to pay us 20+ mill a season so that he has our fan base to invade the Garden and that will more then make up for his outlay on our TV rights.

I don't know about you but I pay Cablevision and would continue to pay the same price if the Islanders were aired by one of Cablevisions sports channels or not

Bing...***...O


periferal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2010, 04:19 PM
  #61
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
You asked, insinuated Cablevision and the Isles do not benefit one another and I disagreed. Then you post about your dislike of Cable/NYR and I agree but I say again: the Isles are taking the money. It is A LOT of money and Dolan is happy to pay it long term (but not if we suck forever.

But we both dislike both entities and I will never again have Cable in my home.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 06:39 AM
  #62
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 500
Who remembers years back when the Cablevision contract was to greatly increase exponentially and they changed it to include the verbiage that NYI must field a competitive and entertaining team for the contract to be honored? Wonder if the current fiasco really qualifies?

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 08:21 AM
  #63
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
Who remembers years back when the Cablevision contract was to greatly increase exponentially and they changed it to include the verbiage that NYI must field a competitive and entertaining team for the contract to be honored? Wonder if the current fiasco really qualifies?
Eventually That clause in the contract had to be dropped because The Islanders were scheduled to make 18 1/2 % off Sports Channel and Cablevision was about to merge it with MSG and did not want the Islanders getting such a large chunk. I think a flat fee was negotiated that was rather favorable to us in length and yearly dollar amount and of course did not require for us to be any good. The team and cable contract are separate assets and that is how Wang or any other owner can claim they are losing money on the team, (which they are), and pocket a fat Cablevision check every year. I think whoever owns the Isles has been basically sucking Cablevision dry and not iceing a good team. Read these 2 articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/11/sp...l?pagewanted=2

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...kett%22&st=cse

Looking at the second article they say:

Quote:

According to Financial World magazine, the Islanders' deal still dwarfs all others in the N.H.L.: The second biggest local cable deal is the Boston Bruins' $6 million, followed by the Toronto Maple Leafs' $4.9 million.

The article was written in 09/97 so who knowes by now but still I bet the rest of the NHL does not feel sorry for our on ice troubles. Between our Cable deal and 4 straight Cups I bet the rest of the league feel we are getting our just rewards.

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 01:55 PM
  #64
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
I believe only Toronto has a much bigger deal nowadays, better than ours. However....The Laffes happen to own Laffes TV in Ontario. If anyone knows if any team is raking in more money than us in TV rights, lemme know.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 01:58 PM
  #65
TheBoss22
Registered User
 
TheBoss22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Eventually That clause in the contract had to be dropped because The Islanders were scheduled to make 18 1/2 % off Sports Channel and Cablevision was about to merge it with MSG and did not want the Islanders getting such a large chunk. I think a flat fee was negotiated that was rather favorable to us in length and yearly dollar amount and of course did not require for us to be any good. The team and cable contract are separate assets and that is how Wang or any other owner can claim they are losing money on the team, (which they are), and pocket a fat Cablevision check every year. I think whoever owns the Isles has been basically sucking Cablevision dry and not iceing a good team. Read these 2 articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/11/sp...l?pagewanted=2

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...kett%22&st=cse

Looking at the second article they say:

Quote:

According to Financial World magazine, the Islanders' deal still dwarfs all others in the N.H.L.: The second biggest local cable deal is the Boston Bruins' $6 million, followed by the Toronto Maple Leafs' $4.9 million.

The article was written in 09/97 so who knowes by now but still I bet the rest of the NHL does not feel sorry for our on ice troubles. Between our Cable deal and 4 straight Cups I bet the rest of the league feel we are getting our just rewards.
Those cable deals are vastly outdated. The Coyotes have a $5.0 million dollar deal and they still lose 30+million/year.

TheBoss22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 02:21 PM
  #66
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBoss22 View Post
Those cable deals are vastly outdated. The Coyotes have a $5.0 million dollar deal and they still lose 30+million/year.
They play in a desert. They should make players drill for oil to break even. Sell water. Drive around as coyotes.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 02:24 PM
  #67
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
I believe only Toronto has a much bigger deal nowadays, better than ours. However....The Laffes happen to own Laffes TV in Ontario. If anyone knows if any team is raking in more money than us in TV rights, lemme know.
Key point Who is making more money then us on our TV rights deal? My research is somewhat outdated but reading it gives me the impression it was/is?? far superior to most other teams in sports let alone hockey.

I desperately want to know the answer to this next question and in it I think holds the fate of the location of our team long term. Here goes:

If the Islanders move out of the NY Metro area is this landmark Cablevision TV rights contract null and void???

I would think so but you never know. Imagine if the Islanders when they negotiated the contract were able to make the contract stick no matter where they played. Maybe Cablevision would have wanted to keep our rights no matter where we played because some day they felt they would be a national provider.

Either way if we find out the answer to that question then we figure out Chuck's (or New Owners) next move. 20+ mill a year till 2030 is a hell of alot of money to walk away from for a new arena in KC. And you know in our current state we would not get something like that on a new TV rights deal.

If in fact it would be null if Islanders were to leave NY Metro then I think the Wilpons and Willets Point are our next stop if the TOH says no go on the full scale LHP.

Anybody ever think maybe Kate Murray knows the answer to this question already and figures it might be in Chucks interest to stay local?

Please anyone lets find that answer if possible!!!!

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 02:32 PM
  #68
TheBoss22
Registered User
 
TheBoss22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,765
vCash: 500
As per Botta's Twitter account:

Quote:
ChrisBottaNHL Charles Wang and Garth Snow are on the Gary Bettman show on Thursday at 6pm on Sirius/XM
Yowzers!! Haters get the phone # on speed dial (assuming they'll take, or pass on call in questions).

TheBoss22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 02:45 PM
  #69
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Key point Who is making more money then us on our TV rights deal? My research is somewhat outdated but reading it gives me the impression it was/is?? far superior to most other teams in sports let alone hockey.

I desperately want to know the answer to this next question and in it I think holds the fate of the location of our team long term. Here goes:

If the Islanders move out of the NY Metro area is this landmark Cablevision TV rights contract null and void???

I would think so but you never know. Imagine if the Islanders when they negotiated the contract were able to make the contract stick no matter where they played. Maybe Cablevision would have wanted to keep our rights no matter where we played because some day they felt they would be a national provider.

Either way if we find out the answer to that question then we figure out Chuck's (or New Owners) next move. 20+ mill a year till 2030 is a hell of alot of money to walk away from for a new arena in KC. And you know in our current state we would not get something like that on a new TV rights deal.

If in fact it would be null if Islanders were to leave NY Metro then I think the Wilpons and Willets Point are our next stop if the TOH says no go on the full scale LHP.

Anybody ever think maybe Kate Murray knows the answer to this question already and figures it might be in Chucks interest to stay local?

Please anyone lets find that answer if possible!!!!
The answer is yes, the contract is done, over and dead. They have to play in the metro area.

Looking back, though....Pickett had a deal in place with DOLAN to buy the Islanders but it fell through because Pickett, who would sell the Isles 99% stake, insisted on the Gang Of Four running the team with his 1% stake and Dolan said no, later buying the Rag$.

Ah well....but the cable deal was lengthened in 1996 with the Spano purchase (almost) from 2012 to 2030 and paid $13M (roughly) per year that first year, and has escalated to $22M this year, and will go up to $25M or more (I can't find an old link that tells the exact amount but needless to say it's enough to build a new arena and then some).

Unless they relocate out of the vicinity.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 07:01 PM
  #70
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Here is a recent article referring to dollar amounts for NHL TV rights in persent day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/sp...08meeting.html

Quote:

Versus pays about $75 million a year for rights to N.H.L. games. NBC pays no fee to the N.H.L. but splits advertising revenue with the league.

If the Whole League gets just 75 mill a year in TV rights and we get like 22 mill a year for our TV rights then what we get from Cablevision is about 30% of the value of the entire leagues TV rights contract. The fact that we are at the league minimum is pathetic. What is more pathetic is that we are suppose to believe freeagents will not come here because of our arena. Free agents won't come here because we are cheep from the front office all the way down the line.

Sorry let me rephrase, If your name is not Alexei Yashin or Rick DiPietro we are cheap.

Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 07:32 PM
  #71
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Here is a recent article referring to dollar amounts for NHL TV rights in persent day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/sp...08meeting.html

Quote:

Versus pays about $75 million a year for rights to N.H.L. games. NBC pays no fee to the N.H.L. but splits advertising revenue with the league.

If the Whole League gets just 75 mill a year in TV rights and we get like 22 mill a year for our TV rights then what we get from Cablevision is about 30% of the value of the entire leagues TV rights contract. The fact that we are at the league minimum is pathetic. What is more pathetic is that we are suppose to believe freeagents will not come here because of our arena. Free agents won't come here because we are cheep from the front office all the way down the line.

Sorry let me rephrase, If your name is not Alexei Yashin or Rick DiPietro we are cheap.
Furthermore, Yashin playing here is not why they left. Yashin playing here and getting NO HELP on wing is why. 15 year deals are not why they don't come here. 15 year deals to unproven guys is. A rebuild is not the reason they didn't come here. A rebuild by GARTH SNOW is why. Young players we draft don't fail here. Young players we do nothing to HELP develop here is.

It's not the arena, it's the lack of people in it or the complete lack of reason to fill it that is the problem.

When you're not a winner, you're a LOSER. THAT is why no one signs here. And we hire scrubs for jobs we need top talent in as a form of ritual.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 08:50 PM
  #72
periferal
Registered User
 
periferal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlTimeHockey View Post
Furthermore, Yashin playing here is not why they left. Yashin playing here and getting NO HELP on wing is why. 15 year deals are not why they don't come here. 15 year deals to unproven guys is. A rebuild is not the reason they didn't come here. A rebuild by GARTH SNOW is why. Young players we draft don't fail here. Young players we do nothing to HELP develop here is.

It's not the arena, it's the lack of people in it or the complete lack of reason to fill it that is the problem.

When you're not a winner, you're a LOSER. THAT is why no one signs here. And we hire scrubs for jobs we need top talent in as a form of ritual.

OTH-

I wish you would stop posting 4,000 posts a day so that when you write one as on target as this one people would pay full attention.

periferal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2010, 10:31 PM
  #73
Drivefor5
Registered User
 
Drivefor5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Meet the location of your 2015 New York Islanders


Drivefor5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2010, 05:08 AM
  #74
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Meet the location of your 2015 New York Islanders

From your keyboard to God's ears. Amen.

Bert Marshall days is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2010, 02:36 PM
  #75
TheBoss22
Registered User
 
TheBoss22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drivefor5 View Post
Here is a recent article referring to dollar amounts for NHL TV rights in persent day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/sp...08meeting.html

Quote:

Versus pays about $75 million a year for rights to N.H.L. games. NBC pays no fee to the N.H.L. but splits advertising revenue with the league.

If the Whole League gets just 75 mill a year in TV rights and we get like 22 mill a year for our TV rights then what we get from Cablevision is about 30% of the value of the entire leagues TV rights contract. The fact that we are at the league minimum is pathetic. What is more pathetic is that we are suppose to believe freeagents will not come here because of our arena. Free agents won't come here because we are cheep from the front office all the way down the line.

Sorry let me rephrase, If your name is not Alexei Yashin or Rick DiPietro we are cheap.
The Versus amount is only a drop in the bucket.

CBC / TSN / Rogers Sportsnet - pay way more than Versus for the right to broadcast NHL games.

Plus they also have deals with overseas broadcasters to show NHL games.

TheBoss22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:26 AM.

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.