HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Atlanta to move to Winnipeg?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2011, 07:24 PM
  #76
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,900
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by flashy View Post
Biggest difference, Salary cap and Revenue sharing, 2 things that wern't around when the jets left. This is why teams like florida, atlanta ect are still around. even if the dollar drops, canadian teams will survive.
but the nhl wants to get away from as much revenue sharing that is going on. Most teams want to get away from the hand outs and have teams being to survive on their own

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:49 PM
  #77
Behind Enemy Lines
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 3,767
vCash: 500
Another consideration is that players are a partner and have a financial stake in increasing the NHL gate. A move to Winnipeg may not be enticing for fair weather players like Bryz but full houses at premium ticket prices grows the bottom line.

Atlanta, Florida, Phoenix all have significantly lower ticket prices and struggle to draw fans in very, very crowded sport marketplaces. Rink capacity size only means something if it is consistently filled with fans.

The NHL is making some headway with the 'golden fleece' American tv contract. The pie is growing but propped up weak sister franchises don't add value to anyone.

Winnipeg can work with a committed billionaire owner, stable management, monopoly market. Why not place the game and teams where they are primed to succeed. Pretty simple, fundamental business practice.

Behind Enemy Lines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 01:01 AM
  #78
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,900
vCash: 1000
here is a question

"how does going back to the Peg help with the Growth of the Game"?

Business is about growth

While a move to the peg MAY hault how large the red ink is--but would the peg team remain in the black as the cap went up? also. The Peg has the same problem and image that Edmonton has when it comes to attracting players and so they would have to over spend. Even with the new TV contract(the figures each team will get each year is open for debate as if you go beyond the deal it is quite a complicated deal and the 2bill may not be 2bill)


There are problems with moving the team back to the peg. People keep bringing up the revenue sharing now in the nhl--the nhl wants teams to be self suportive--so I think using that arguement maybe counter productive(so instead of giving someone ten bucks a week you are giving them 5). The problem with some teams is that they brought in people who may of understood business but they failed to understand the hockey side. Atlanta has been around for 12 years now and have only drafted 2 players who scored more then 200pts in their career. If Atlanta was better at developing players they would be a better team.

While short term it makes sense to move either team to the peg to stop the bleeding, there is more long term growth where the money losers are. There is not much growth in moving a team to the peg.

I personally believe the "if you win, they will come" mataphor for pro sports. How many teams have we seens struggle for attendance when they team sucked? Look at the hawks--how bad their attendance was when they were losing. If there were more things to do in Edmonton in the winter time i am sure the oilers would not be getting 16k per game and unless they start winning soon we will se thier attendence go down.

Also, the arguement about the peg arena and it sitting of 15.5k(with an addition 1.5k with renovations) causes some concern. Edmonton has some of the highest tickets prices and that is with a 16.5k arena and we are screaming for a new one. For the peg to work--the entire copperate sector would need to step up

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 01:08 AM
  #79
Toydarian
Registered User
 
Toydarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStig View Post
here is a question

"how does going back to the Peg help with the Growth of the Game"?

Business is about growth

While a move to the peg MAY hault how large the red ink is--but would the peg team remain in the black as the cap went up? also. The Peg has the same problem and image that Edmonton has when it comes to attracting players and so they would have to over spend. Even with the new TV contract(the figures each team will get each year is open for debate as if you go beyond the deal it is quite a complicated deal and the 2bill may not be 2bill)


There are problems with moving the team back to the peg. People keep bringing up the revenue sharing now in the nhl--the nhl wants teams to be self suportive--so I think using that arguement maybe counter productive(so instead of giving someone ten bucks a week you are giving them 5). The problem with some teams is that they brought in people who may of understood business but they failed to understand the hockey side. Atlanta has been around for 12 years now and have only drafted 2 players who scored more then 200pts in their career. If Atlanta was better at developing players they would be a better team.

While short term it makes sense to move either team to the peg to stop the bleeding, there is more long term growth where the money losers are. There is not much growth in moving a team to the peg.

I personally believe the "if you win, they will come" mataphor for pro sports. How many teams have we seens struggle for attendance when they team sucked? Look at the hawks--how bad their attendance was when they were losing. If there were more things to do in Edmonton in the winter time i am sure the oilers would not be getting 16k per game and unless they start winning soon we will se thier attendence go down.

Also, the arguement about the peg arena and it sitting of 15.5k(with an addition 1.5k with renovations) causes some concern. Edmonton has some of the highest tickets prices and that is with a 16.5k arena and we are screaming for a new one. For the peg to work--the entire copperate sector would need to step up
PHX has had consecutive seasons of 107 and 99 point seasons, respectively, and they still struggle to draw crowds.

Toydarian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 03:10 AM
  #80
pox
Registered User
 
pox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,409
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to pox
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStig View Post
here is a question

"how does going back to the Peg help with the Growth of the Game"?

Business is about growth
Think of the NHL in terms of a whole organization, Atlanta and Phoenix are spewing cash. They are taking up time and resources that could go to help the rest of the NHL as a whole. By moving one of them to Winnipeg you may not grow that area, but you stabilize a part of the NHL allowing it to spend the time and money to grow in other areas with more potential or strengthen areas they are already in.

pox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2011, 10:51 PM
  #81
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=364902

This isn't about Atlanta moving to Winnipeg, but about Phoenix. Basically, Glendale has offered to renew the contract with the NHL for one more year, offering the same 25 million to cover expected loses of the franchise next season.

First, where does the City of Glendale get this money from? Considering the Arizona area was one of the hardest hit areas during the recession, 25 million has got to be a lot of money for a cash-strapped city to pay.

Second, I thought Bettman shot down the notion that the NHL would operate the Coyotes for another season?

I admire the effort that Bettman is putting in to save hockey in Phoenix, but when does common sense prevail? Hockey has been incredibly unsuccessful from a business sense in Phoenix. The organization has been hemorrhaging money since they arrived in Phoenix, and the obvious attempts by the City of Glendale to cover the losses of the franchise indicate to me that they do not expect the franchise to ever be successful from a business perspective.

To me, this isn't even about Winnipeg anymore. This is about Gary Bettman working as hard as he can to keep a franchise in a toxic situation to cover his own reputation. For the NHL to be successful, each franchise needs to be placed in a situation where they CAN be successful, whether it be in a Canadian market or an American market.

I just don't get it.

McRib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2011, 11:51 PM
  #82
Teddy Peckman
Registered User
 
Teddy Peckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Teddy Peckman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagermeister View Post
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=364902

This isn't about Atlanta moving to Winnipeg, but about Phoenix. Basically, Glendale has offered to renew the contract with the NHL for one more year, offering the same 25 million to cover expected loses of the franchise next season.

First, where does the City of Glendale get this money from? Considering the Arizona area was one of the hardest hit areas during the recession, 25 million has got to be a lot of money for a cash-strapped city to pay.

Second, I thought Bettman shot down the notion that the NHL would operate the Coyotes for another season?

I admire the effort that Bettman is putting in to save hockey in Phoenix, but when does common sense prevail? Hockey has been incredibly unsuccessful from a business sense in Phoenix. The organization has been hemorrhaging money since they arrived in Phoenix, and the obvious attempts by the City of Glendale to cover the losses of the franchise indicate to me that they do not expect the franchise to ever be successful from a business perspective.

To me, this isn't even about Winnipeg anymore. This is about Gary Bettman working as hard as he can to keep a franchise in a toxic situation to cover his own reputation. For the NHL to be successful, each franchise needs to be placed in a situation where they CAN be successful, whether it be in a Canadian market or an American market.

I just don't get it.
I just don't get what the big deal is. Teams move in all different sports, they always have, and always will.

Teddy Peckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2011, 12:21 AM
  #83
oilfaninvan
Registered User
 
oilfaninvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: van
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
If I lived in Glendale I'd be absolutely up in arms over this whole thing. What a huge waste of money. $25million? No thanks, I'll get NHL Centre Ice and take some paved roads or a rec centre.

oilfaninvan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2011, 10:08 AM
  #84
Phaedrus
Registered User
 
Phaedrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,674
vCash: 500
The NHL to a southern U.S. market...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdh70xdZHK0

Phaedrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2011, 01:05 PM
  #85
Teddy Peckman
Registered User
 
Teddy Peckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Teddy Peckman
The largest group of Coyotes fans recorded in public showed up rallying to save their team:

Teddy Peckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2011, 07:20 PM
  #86
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,900
vCash: 1000
for those following the boucing balls KC has a 20k arena built and is quietly looking for a team

A guy named Paul Mcgannon is in charge of a group called nhl 21 to bring back a team to KC--


Last edited by jumptheshark: 05-07-2011 at 07:37 PM.
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2011, 08:53 PM
  #87
oh_canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfaninvan View Post
If I lived in Glendale I'd be absolutely up in arms over this whole thing. What a huge waste of money. $25million? No thanks, I'll get NHL Centre Ice and take some paved roads or a rec centre.
Well its not that simple the city uses a ticket tax of some sort to fund the building development that they are repaying. WHich is what Ive heard 30M annually trying to find a link so I think along with the 11M for upkeep its cheaper than the alternate for the big white elephant. Along with that is the 30 year deal to keep the Coyotes in pheonix...

A little info on the building
http://hockey.ballparks.com/NHL/Phoe...s/newindex.htm

http://www.ci.glendale.az.us/documen...ated122010.pdf

oh_canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 03:30 AM
  #88
Auguste Escoffier
Registered User
 
Auguste Escoffier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 5,643
vCash: 500
When it comes to American markets, I am tired of hearing "You build a winner, they will come."

Auguste Escoffier is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 11:48 AM
  #89
Gone
Fire KLowe
 
Gone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,550
vCash: 500
I would almost met my life that Winnipeg, Quebec City or any other Canadian location will NEVER get an NHL franchise. The NHL and Betman clearly see no room to grow in the Canadian market, they allready own it, and people in Winnipeg will spend monies on an NHL owned AHL affilate, or on being Leaf, Canuck, Oiler or even Flames merchanidse.

The NHL strategy under Betman has always been about growth, they went from 21 teams in 1990 (Betman joined in 93) to the current 30. They will sacrifice anything to get into the massive US markets, and I suspect you will see a European Division before you see any movement into Canada. Watch Atlanta - Phoneix etc. move to Berlin - Paris - etc.

Gone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 04:55 PM
  #90
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,900
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by IvyEyezPK View Post
When it comes to American markets, I am tired of hearing "You build a winner, they will come."

well it is true

both Tampa and Carolina are examples of that--ducks as well

there is a direct path that leads from winning to selling tickets

Some canadians act like it is canada's god given right to be the center of the universe when it comes to hockey

bottom line is--that for growth and development of the game--there is not much area for growth and development in Canada for the game

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 05:59 PM
  #91
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStig View Post
well it is true

both Tampa and Carolina are examples of that--ducks as well

there is a direct path that leads from winning to selling tickets

Some canadians act like it is canada's god given right to be the center of the universe when it comes to hockey

bottom line is--that for growth and development of the game--there is not much area for growth and development in Canada for the game
How do you justify this statement though. I might also ask would the NHL revenues increase or decrease if the Oilers, Calgary and Ottawa packed up and moved south. In particular would merchandise increase/decrease, national TV dollars increase/decrease, national sponsorship, etc.

My point here is to ask why it is that we know there is no more room to grow in Canada and that the current market is exactly right? How exactly does Pheonix or KC or Houston put more money in the owners pockets than a team in Hamilton or QC or Winnipeg. It might be the case, but you should be prepared to back it up, because having asked this question for five years now I am yet to get a single answer.


Last edited by Fourier: 05-08-2011 at 06:11 PM.
Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 06:11 PM
  #92
oilfaninvan
Registered User
 
oilfaninvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: van
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
The population of Winnipeg will grow faster than hockey interest in Phoenix.

oilfaninvan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 06:38 PM
  #93
Tarus
Fire Mact
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,444
vCash: 500
There is probably far more growth left in canada and the northern american cities for hockey than there is in any of the southern market areas. Just because there are large populations of people, doesn't mean you can effectively sell a prohibitively expensive cold weather sport to people who have never seen snow, let alone sustained cold weather that allows for large sheets of ice of which to play hockey on. Add in competition with pick up and play sports like soccer, baseketball and even baseball, it's easy to see why the southern belt franchises are financial failures that struggle to gain anything more than a transient foothold on the collective consciousness of the southern american fanbases.

The NHL expanded too quickly in the wrong areas and proved the old saying "if you build it, they will come" wrong, and even dropped from 3rd to 4th as a major sport in the US despite wider coverage(watering down the sport and creating the deadpuck era didn't help of course). At some point the NHL will have to come to terms with the fact that they are a novelty sport to the majority of americans and start playing to their strengths, even if it means working out european expansion.

Tarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2011, 11:25 PM
  #94
Six in O6
Registered User
 
Six in O6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfaninvan View Post
The population of Winnipeg will grow faster than hockey interest in Phoenix.
/end thread. Nothing else to say. When it comes to growth, I strongly believe this. Especially after the last 15 years.

Six in O6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 01:34 PM
  #95
Teddy Peckman
Registered User
 
Teddy Peckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Teddy Peckman
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...ver-six-years/

Teddy Peckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 02:01 PM
  #96
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teddy Peckman View Post

Sounds like the NHL needs to appoint a vice-president in charge of scrounging money for doomed franchises.

Halibut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 02:55 PM
  #97
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,059
vCash: 500
Columbus is a hurting franchise that is ripe for the picking.

1) lame duck GM - this is his last year before getting fired. He needs to make the playoffs or he is gone.

2) losing money and losing fan interest.

3) they have three bad contracts preventing them from having the money to fix the team- Mason, Commodore and Paulson. Combined 9.3 mill next year and 2.9 the year after.

We have an owner with deep pockets. We can bury the contracts in the minors. We also have a short term need for a 2nd goalie and a 3rd line cetre.

We have Hemsky whom their GM loves according to Matheson. They have the #8 pick which could be a big part of our rebuild.

There must be a way to speed allong this rebuild.

Mr Sakich is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 08:54 PM
  #98
Herman72
Keep the baggage.
 
Herman72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
I understand the business stand point of growing a sport where the largest potential is, but I think it's fundamentally flawed and misguided when it comes to hockey. Sure, there is more potential for growth in larger southern markets such as Phoneix and Atlanta, but in accepting only that idea, you are essentially ignoring reality. Bigger markets mean more potential fans, bigger potential TV deals and all that other wonderful stuff that Gary Bettman has been chasing all across the bible belt for the last 20 years. However, it has been proven time and again that hockey is a tough sell in the southern United States and that putting a franchise in a southern market is seemingly tantamount to throwing money in the toilet. The potential is always there for a bigger bottom line, but it seems that an owner would have an easier time wringing blood from a turnip than they would turning a profit in a southern market. Hockey works where it works and fails where it fails. It failed once in Atlanta. It is currently failing there again, and it's also failing in Phoenix. Is Winnipeg the answer to all the financial hardship that these franchises have somehow endured? Maybe, maybe not. But, the goal in business is to perpetually turn a profit, and these southern franchises have perpetually eaten funding from the league and bled nothing but red ink. From a common sense point of view, isn't it better to sink your money in a business that is assured at least a semblance of financial stability that is more likely to be provided in a Canadian market than to pitch money at something that has never turned a profit?

Herman72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 09:00 PM
  #99
Schai
Registered User
 
Schai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 612
vCash: 500
Gary Bettman would never allow US teams move to Canada, but he won't heistate if Oilers want to move to US.

Schai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2011, 09:03 PM
  #100
Herman72
Keep the baggage.
 
Herman72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebowski44 View Post
I understand the business stand point of growing a sport where the largest potential is, but I think it's fundamentally flawed and misguided when it comes to hockey. Sure, there is more potential for growth in larger southern markets such as Phoneix and Atlanta, but in accepting only that idea, you are essentially ignoring reality. Bigger markets mean more potential fans, bigger potential TV deals and all that other wonderful stuff that Gary Bettman has been chasing all across the bible belt for the last 20 years. However, it has been proven time and again that hockey is a tough sell in the southern United States and that putting a franchise in a southern market is seemingly tantamount to throwing money in the toilet. The potential is always there for a bigger bottom line, but it seems that an owner would have an easier time wringing blood from a turnip than they would turning a profit in a southern market. Hockey works where it works and fails where it fails. It failed once in Atlanta. It is currently failing there again, and it's also failing in Phoenix. Is Winnipeg the answer to all the financial hardship that these franchises have somehow endured? Maybe, maybe not. But, the goal in business is to perpetually turn a profit, and these southern franchises have perpetually eaten funding from the league and bled nothing but red ink. From a common sense point of view, isn't it better to sink your money in a business that is assured at least a semblance of financial stability that is more likely to be provided in a Canadian market than to pitch money at something that has never turned a profit?
tl;dr

Herman72 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 10:41 AM.

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.