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

Terry Jones thinks it will not be a success

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-25-2004, 09:20 PM
  #26
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
You don't think calling someone a "blithering idiot" is disrespectful? There's nothing wrong with thinking he is incorrect, or misinformed, or whatever you grievance is, but there was no reason to take that sort of shot. His spectacularly poor grammar certainly didn't forward his cause.

Allan is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:33 PM
  #27
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Narnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Narnia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matts
there's no place in Edmonton for dissenting opinons, I can damn well tell you that!!!!!

I don't think it's gonna work either but it's from the perspective that the people in Edm are already doing a lot to keep the Oilers here.

I just don't know how much there is to give.
Are you by any chance related to Terry Jones. Seems you agree with most everything this idiot says. Terry Jones has been critical of the Oilers since Slats left. Every article Terry Jones has written about the Oilers or the Oilers organization has mostly been negative.

I remember some 20 years ago, Terry Jones having to eat crow when he said the Eskimos don't have a chance to win a Grey Cup when the Grey Cup was played in the east.

__________________
"He just ate up Robyn Regehr for dinner, a spectacular play by Hemsky, and Robyn Regehr has got doo doo all over his face" - Rod Phillips call on Hemsky's goal vs the Flames
Narnia is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:36 PM
  #28
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allan
You don't think calling someone a "blithering idiot" is disrespectful?
I don't think calling a columnist a blithering idiot is the worst thing in the world. It might not be the best way to get your point across, but I think I've referred to columnists as worse. I think when you put yourself in front of the public eye you can expect those types of shots (same with politicians, celebs, etc.).

And if poor grammar is an offense here, then I'm certainly in trouble.

I don't know, I realize we've seen a lot of trolls here lately, but if someone from a city that has two AHL teams comes to this board and agrees with a post that a regular has posted on that subject... I don't think he deserves to get run.

I just thought Elvis Lives took his post way too seriously, and I hope we're not creating a place where outsiders aren't comfortable posting their opinion.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:38 PM
  #29
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,483
vCash: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Whoa, are you related to Terry Jones by any chance?

This guy was in no way disrespectful to anyone here. I don't know what your problem is.
I'm with Elvis and Allan on this one. That article was nothing more than the opinion of Terry Jones. I don't happen to agree with a lot of it, but I don't think Jones is a blithering idiot for his "take" on the situation. He made some valid points.
But, thats just my opinion.

guymez is online now  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:38 PM
  #30
Elvis Lives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 87
vCash: 500
Jones

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Whoa, are you related to Terry Jones by any chance?

This guy was in no way disrespectful to anyone here. I don't know what your problem is.
Here's my problem: You don't have to be related to anybody to get sick of people tossing insults around like it's their right to do so. Nothing disrespectful in calling somebody a blithering idiot? Give your head a shake.

As has already been posted, agree or disagree with somebody if you like, but hold the insults. And frankly, as somebody who reads both papers, it seems like Jones and Brownlee and Matheson and the other writers in town take a lot of ***** on this board. These are not stupid people. They are not "blithering idiots" just because you disagree. Period.

Elvis Lives is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:44 PM
  #31
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guymez
I'm with Elvis and Allan on this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvis Lives
They are not "blithering idiots" just because you disagree. Period.
Fair enough.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:50 PM
  #32
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Narnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Narnia
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
I don't think calling a columnist a blithering idiot is the worst thing in the world. It might not be the best way to get your point across, but I think I've referred to columnists as worse. I think when you put yourself in front of the public eye you can expect those types of shots (same with politicians, celebs, etc.).

And if poor grammar is an offense here, then I'm certainly in trouble.

I don't know, I realize we've seen a lot of trolls here lately, but if someone from a city that has two AHL teams comes to this board and agrees with a post that a regular has posted on that subject... I don't think he deserves to get run.

I just thought Elvis Lives took his post way too seriously, and I hope we're not creating a place where outsiders aren't comfortable posting their opinion.
I'm with you on this one. Why is it that poster get away with calling players names? Yet when a media person is called an idiot fans complain that he shouldn't be called a name.

Some players on the Oilers have been called every name in the book and nothing is said. But when TJ is called an idiot, posters complain.

If Terry Jones can't be called names, then neither should players, management or coaches of the Oilers/Roadrunners and the organizations be called names either.

Narnia is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 10:02 PM
  #33
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
I get annoyed when anybody gets called names, but I don't have the time or inclination to get involved every time. Most of the posters who have something interesting to say avoid that sort of behavior, and most of the ones who do get involved in name-calling do get called on it on a regular basis.

Side note to Mr. Mackey - I didn't mean that perfect grammar is a prerequisite to post here, just that if you are going to call someone an idiot, perhaps you should check your own writing first. pot-kettle-black-and so forth

Allan is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 10:08 PM
  #34
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,483
vCash: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemsky83
I'm with you on this one. Why is it that poster get away with calling players names? Yet when a media person is called an idiot fans complain that he shouldn't be called a name.

Some players on the Oilers have been called every name in the book and nothing is said. But when TJ is called an idiot, posters complain.

If Terry Jones can't be called names, then neither should players, management or coaches of the Oilers/Roadrunners and the organizations be called names either.
I certainly don't think there should be ( if there is ) a double standard when it comes to posters and media people.
I think the reason I took issue with this, is that IMO jones wasn't irresponsible with anything he said. His comment on Exibition NHL hockey vs. AHL hockey was quite a bit off the mark IMO, and there were a few other things I didn't agree with, but thats fine. I think you need to consider the content of a post before claiming that he/she is an idiot. If someone posts something that has absolutley no merit, and was intended to "inflame", then maybe the moniker fits. I don't think the Jones article falls into that catagory.

guymez is online now  
Old
07-26-2004, 11:30 AM
  #35
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
In general I don't really care for Terry Jones' writing. For all the accusations about fans living in the past and hanging on the glory years, I think this guy is the poster child of that club. He has a history of these types of articles that cover both sides of the coin and then when the story finally plays out he sits at his keyboard and says "I told you so".

All that said, some of his points are valid. I think all of them are assumed without his writing them, and perhaps it was day where he could have broke his own mold and simply propped up the idea if for no other reason then the glim picture hockey fans are facing at this moment, but nonetheless you can't fault a writer for sticking true to his negative form and once again ramming the obvious into the limelight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
He really blasts the idea of long term success for the Roadrunners in Edmonton. Like most of us he thinks it will have success while a lockout is on.
I think everyone with an ounce of common sense can come to this question on their own. For all the reasons already discussed.

How about this for the flip side though. IF, big if, there is a chance for the Roadrunners to succeed here beyond one season, is this not the best situation to cultivate a long term niche in Edmonton?

Irregardless of if this was plan A, B or C. Irregardless of if the Oilers would never have looked in this direction should they not be faced with a lockout. The AHL team was in trouble, on a deadline and getting forced out of T.O. by the leafs errr I mean Ricoh.

So the Roadrunners are moving anyways, Edmonton is faced with no hockey next season and the Oilers needed a home for their players. Where is the problem?

Now if you want to try for long term success, even if it's viewed as a longshot, then this year is the absolute best year to take that shot. For awhile, perhaps the whole season, there is no direct competition in the city for the Roadrunners. To me the biggest hurdle for a new team in a new city is getting recognition over and above the established, getting ingrained in the minds of the market and making a connection with the city.

Seems to me that this is the best chance at the Roadrunners doing that. If they manage to achieve it while the Oilers are not playing then it should sustain itself once they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
2. This is minor league hockey and there is no way they average 10,000 a game. He used pre-season hockey as a comparsion. 4,000 season tickets don't show up for that and it is better hockey.

-I don't think it will average 10,000 after the lockout either, but did Laforge say it has to average 10,000 to keep the team here? No, he said he hoped it would average 10,000. I also think AHL is better than pre-season hockey. Pre-season hockey doesn't count in the standings. I really don't think that comparision is valid.
Further to what Spazz44 wrote.

I read that an AHL team can be run on $1,000,000.00 a year. Now factor in more exensive travel from Edmonton and possibly higher opperating costs at Rexall Place it still wouldn't double that. Now for arguments sake let's double it anyways and you need 2500 ppl per game in the stands at an average of $20 a ticket. (geez the Aviators were drawing that much)

Bottom line, you don't need 10,000 ppl per game. On the flip side just think what it would accomplish IF they managed to achieve that? 3.5 mil extra at the end of the year could do some nice things for the Oilers, no?

I also read that Cal Nichols threw out a figure of 13 mil a season for operating the Oilers even without hockey operations. Considering there is 10 mil in the CBA fund they're obviously still short if the lockout goes the whole year (assuming Nichols was being honest). 10,000 ppl to the Roadrunners makes up the difference, so really it is again, a good fit at this time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
3. Market saturation - The teams would be competing against each other for fans and he uses the Calgary situation is an example. Calgarys attendance has dropped since they had the Hitmen.
I think Calgary is a little different. The Flames stunk for 7 years. The attendance was dropping with or without the Hitmen.

In fact I thought that since the city started getting excited about the Flames again (last December) the Flames support has increased considerably without an adverse effect to the Hitmen.

The Oilers have become a hard ticket in this town and that is part of what fuels that support. There is no reason that people won't still see it as a hard ticket and it is likely more of a case of if the Roadrunners can find their niche.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
5. Double-Headers won't work, he says that people think the NHL is already too long, why would they go to two games?
I don't really get this argument. The Roadrunners are supposed to be targeting a different market segment from the Oilers so doesn't that suggest that the people going to the earlier game would NOT be the people going to the late game? If there are some people that do go to both then it would simply be a bonus.

I would think that there are some good marketing opportunities with such things as their Hotel packages where they can take in the Roadrunners at the same time they come into town for the Oilers but in the end I would expect that they would operate it as two seperate entities that happen to occur on the same day.

There may also be a savings in operations at Rexall as far as consessions and environmental systems where they don't have to ramp up operations for two seperate occasions but can ramp up only once and simply keep operating for two seperate games. Start up costs are always disproportionatly more expensive than simple operating costs.

The only concern for me would be ice conditions for the later game - which I assume would be the Oilers.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 01:56 PM
  #36
Marconius
Registered User
 
Marconius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvis Lives
They are not "blithering idiots" just because you disagree. Period.
Ahhhh, but just because you do happen to agree, does not mean they aren't blithering idiots either

Marconius is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 02:15 PM
  #37
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neogeo69
I can see the possibility of 8,000 - 10,000 fans for the lockout season.

Is it so impossible to believe that the Roadrunners might survive longterm going head to head against the Oil? I think that realistically the attendance might drop to 4000 after the lockout. But then compared with the Toronto version, that's pretty much the same deal. (i.e. avg attendance 4600 or so.) Ticket prices were $15/$25/$35.

http://observer.thecentre.centennial...ners020604.htm

The question is, what is the Rexall Place deal with the Oilers? How much does it cost to run a SECOND team in Rexall or is everything already paid for (I guess with the exception of cost of concession supplies and pay for non-salary workers).

Is it reasonable to expect 4,000 fans after the lockout for the RR? And if so, would that be cost effective enough for the Oilers master plan? What if, after the lockout season, the Roadrunners lowers the ticket price to $15, or even $10? Maybe $20 is just the price for the lockout year.
LaForge was interviewed on The Team this morning.

Some interesting points:

Most teams budget to lose between C$2 to 3 million per season with their AHL team.

The Oilers came close to breaking even in Hamilton in their last year there (granted, fewer salaries and shared costs with MTL)

The Oilers marketting research has projected crowds of 10,000 while there is a lockout, and 5000 once the NHL is playing again. They expect the crowd size to vary widely depending on the opponent ... farm teams of Candian clubs are expected to be much better draws, esp Habs and Leafs.

Sounds like the Oilers are planning to break even with the Runners, or at least have minimal losses.

Edit to add: Also, their business models have all used an average ticket price of $20, and they are committed to that number, but they have not yet determined how much the various seats will cost.

BTW: Every caller into The Team morning show today seemed really pumped about the Roadrunners (I caught about an hour of it) ... as opposed to the lukewarm reaction from E-towners a few months ago, when the news broke that the Oilers were pursuing a WHL team.


Last edited by igor*: 07-26-2004 at 02:22 PM.
igor* is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 02:21 PM
  #38
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
They expect the crowd size to vary widely depending on the opponent ... farm teams of Candian clubs are expected to be much better draws, esp Habs and Leafs.
I was thinking about that too. They will probably have built in rivalries with Manitoba, Toronto, Hamilton and Lowell... I think that's one big advantage over a WHL team.

However, on the flip side, with no other teams West of Saskatchewan, it will be hard to get a regional rivalry going. With the WHL team, you can easily get a hate going for the Hitmen & Rebels. Well, it will be interesting nonetheless.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 03:08 PM
  #39
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
Some interesting points:

Most teams budget to lose between C$2 to 3 million per season with their AHL team.
Wow was that thing I read ever out to lunch.

Don't I look like an ass.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 06:34 PM
  #40
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Wow was that thing I read ever out to lunch.

Don't I look like an ass.
I dunno.

I think you're probably looking at somewhere in the range of C$1.5M for salaries and per diems (players and coaches). About 26 guys.

Maybe 60 nights on the road, at C$100 a head ... so C$150k-ish for accomodation.

They'll probably fly into BOS or similar and bus it around the NE states, and play back-to-back games in St. John's, Winnipeg, Utah, San Antonio, Milwaukee and Chicago. So there won't be an inordinate number of flights ... and I'm sure they plan ahead and get good rates. So say 20 to 25 one-way flights maybe? at C$250-ish a head on average (wild guess, maybe a bit high) ... plus bus rental ... so C$180k-ish for travel as a guess. Plus the travel subsidy that they pay to the league ... whatever that is, perhaps C$ 100k?

Then costs for marketting and admin, facilities, etc. ... which is probably the biggest chunk of the pie. In this case the oilers should be able to use existing staff while the holdout is on. Probably saves them from laying people off too. But once the NHL is playing again ... say another 30 people or so are needed? Some of them with exclusive Roadrunner responsibilites ... others working jointly for the two teams. What's the payroll cost there ... at least C$2M?

Obviously there is an absolute swack of things that I'm missing here, expenses and revenues ... but it hits the highlights. And clearly there is a lot of money to be saved if the oilers can maximize the synergy in their operations of the Oilers and Roadrunners.

This VERY rough math works out to close to $4 million in expenses. In terms of just ticket sales (the main source of revenue) ... at a c$20 average, they'll need somewhere in the range of 5000 fans per game to break even. Which sounds about right.

igor* is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 08:22 PM
  #41
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Good math guys and gals

Then really I think it can work.

I think they can average 5000 people per game even if the Oilers are playing. I don't think they are going to make a huge profit or any profit but if the goal is too break even then they can do it.

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 12:19 AM
  #42
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
Well now this seems more sensible

I don't think Jones was guilty of anymore more than jumping the gun. I think he was dead on in his belief that this team wouldn't draw 10K a night as long as the NHL was going ahead.

I think 5K is a reachable average and if the Oilers are cool with breaking even as the BCS and minimal losses as the WCS then everything should be fine.

Given what the fans do for the big club I don't think it's realistic to expect to make money off their AHL club and like Igor said most franchcises accept it as a loss anyway.

Matts is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 01:38 AM
  #43
Boondock Saint
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,659
vCash: 500
So my question is, does this call off Laforge's pursuit of a WHL team???

Could Edmonton possibly support all three???

And what would you rather see in Edmonton, WHL or AHL???


Personally I would much rather go to a WHL game than an AHL game, but maybe that's just me.....

Boondock Saint is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 03:28 AM
  #44
Bicycle Repairman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,695
vCash: 500
I think Jones is Bang On. Especially in his last sentence. It's a double-edged sword and not one the Oilers organization was anticipating. The fear here is that either way, if the Roadrunners crash and burn at the gate, it costs the organization financially. If it's too successful, then it provides impetus to say "Goodbye Oilers, Hello Houston!"

The Roadrunners hardly burned up the AHL last season. They are mediocre in the grand scheme of AHL things and it will take winning to garner Box Office Boffo. Especially for a market newcomer. Edmonton expects a NHL-level show, and the AHL is a significant drop-off seeing how, thought intermixed with promising youth, there's an awful lot of over-expired stiffs in that league.

Junior Leagues such as the WHL are a whole different demographic than minor pro. The Hitmen are marginally successful because thier core audience doesn't overlap with the Flames ticket-buying constituency entirely.

The Oilers have set themselves up to compete against themselves. I realize the whole thorny situation fell into their lap, but at the end of the day, the decision to move the Roadrunners will be the organisation's fatal blow.

Bicycle Repairman is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 03:34 AM
  #45
Jamie
Registered User
 
Jamie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
I think Jones is Bang On. Especially in his last sentence. It's a double-edged sword and not one the Oilers organization was anticipating. The fear here is that either way, if the Roadrunners crash and burn at the gate, it costs the organization financially. If it's too successful, then it provides impetus to say "Goodbye Oilers, Hello Houston!"

The Roadrunners hardly burned up the AHL last season. They are mediocre in the grand scheme of AHL things and it will take winning to garner Box Office Boffo. Especially for a market newcomer. Edmonton expects a NHL-level show, and the AHL is a significant drop-off seeing how, thought intermixed with promising youth, there's an awful lot of over-expired stiffs in that league.

Junior Leagues such as the WHL are a whole different demographic than minor pro. The Hitmen are marginally successful because thier core audience doesn't overlap with the Flames ticket-buying constituency entirely.

The Oilers have set themselves up to compete against themselves. I realize the whole thorny situation fell into their lap, but at the end of the day, the decision to move the Roadrunners will be the organisation's fatal blow.
I think the Oilers are looking at this more of a one year plan more than anything else. They should be able to get pretty good attendance if there is a lockout NHL season, and then they'll try and get their WHL team by making a little bit of a swap. In a lockout NHL season, I can see an AHL team in Edmonton being very succesful, but I do agree, if there's not, they're essentially competing against themselves for ticket sales. A WHL team would be better, and I think that that is still in there plans, and this is a short term fix, because they really didn't have many other options.

Jamie is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 03:39 AM
  #46
LoudmouthHemskyFan#2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
I think Jones is Bang On. Especially in his last sentence. It's a double-edged sword and not one the Oilers organization was anticipating. The fear here is that either way, if the Roadrunners crash and burn at the gate, it costs the organization financially. If it's too successful, then it provides impetus to say "Goodbye Oilers, Hello Houston!"

The Roadrunners hardly burned up the AHL last season. They are mediocre in the grand scheme of AHL things and it will take winning to garner Box Office Boffo. Especially for a market newcomer. Edmonton expects a NHL-level show, and the AHL is a significant drop-off seeing how, thought intermixed with promising youth, there's an awful lot of over-expired stiffs in that league.

Junior Leagues such as the WHL are a whole different demographic than minor pro. The Hitmen are marginally successful because thier core audience doesn't overlap with the Flames ticket-buying constituency entirely.

The Oilers have set themselves up to compete against themselves. I realize the whole thorny situation fell into their lap, but at the end of the day, the decision to move the Roadrunners will be the organisation's fatal blow.

Another quality post from good ol' bicycle repairman...Not quite as good as the mixed Oilers/Flames top 20 prospects one however...

LoudmouthHemskyFan#2 is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 03:43 AM
  #47
Bicycle Repairman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie
I think the Oilers are looking at this more of a one year plan more than anything else. They should be able to get pretty good attendance if there is a lockout NHL season, and then they'll try and get their WHL team by making a little bit of a swap. In a lockout NHL season, I can see an AHL team in Edmonton being very succesful, but I do agree, if there's not, they're essentially competing against themselves for ticket sales. A WHL team would be better, and I think that that is still in there plans, and this is a short term fix, because they really didn't have many other options.
Well, you can forget about the franchise/league switcheroo with Saskatoon. There's so many things wrong with that scenario.

What might play out is both Calgary and Edmonton bowing out of the National Hockey League and then the Battle of Alberta becomes the Edmonton Roadrunners pitting themselves against a Calgary AHL entity (let's remember the Flames already own the rights to a dormant AHL franchise).

Best we collectively can hope for is a prolonged NHL Lockout of perhaps two seasons, otherwise, it's lights out for both teams.

Bicycle Repairman is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 04:32 AM
  #48
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
The fear here is that either way, if the Roadrunners crash and burn at the gate, it costs the organization financially. If it's too successful, then it provides impetus to say "Goodbye Oilers, Hello Houston!"
It costs every organization financially. I believe there are few teams if any that make a profit on their AHL affiliate. Breaking even or making a profit is a complete and utter bonus in this endeavor.

I don't quite understand that last point, though. If an AHL team is successful, that will spell the end for the Oilers? Why? Because the fans have found an alternate form of hockey to attend? What complete and utter tripe. Should we have also assumed that the Flames would have left when the Hitmen were brought in? Edmonton will always be an NHL city first and foremost. If the Oilers decide to pack up and leave for Houston, it will be for reasons other than the threat of an AHL franchise in the same city.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
The Roadrunners hardly burned up the AHL last season. They are mediocre in the grand scheme of AHL things and it will take winning to garner Box Office Boffo. Especially for a market newcomer. Edmonton expects a NHL-level show, and the AHL is a significant drop-off seeing how, thought intermixed with promising youth, there's an awful lot of over-expired stiffs in that league.
Mediocre perhaps. But what exactly were you expecting? Edmonton had just had a split affiliation with Montreal the previous year with the Hamilton Bulldogs and didn't have the stability of having an AHL lineup already setup the year prior. They were expected to struggle being an expansion club and yet they still made the playoffs. Perhaps your expectations were a little high? Or perhaps you were ignorant of the situation the team was in?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
Junior Leagues such as the WHL are a whole different demographic than minor pro. The Hitmen are marginally successful because thier core audience doesn't overlap with the Flames ticket-buying constituency entirely.

The Oilers have set themselves up to compete against themselves. I realize the whole thorny situation fell into their lap, but at the end of the day, the decision to move the Roadrunners will be the organisation's fatal blow.
What demographic can you exactly categorize it as? I'd say it's a little tougher to pinpoint than you imagine with no NHL next season. The Oilers this upcoming season haven't put themselves to compete against anyone. The lockout will surely see to that.

Given the fact that the Oilers operate at mostly 98% capacity for most of the NHL season, I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Oilers have precious little to worry about in regards to the parent club and dwindling attendance.

Again, I reiterate. Edmonton is an NHL city. An AHL club does not threaten the viability of the franchise. Whether the AHL club, in general, will prove fruitful is another story. So all the bluster about this being potentially the end of Oilers is a tad bit exaggerative.


Last edited by momentai: 07-27-2004 at 04:50 AM.
momentai is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 04:52 AM
  #49
Bicycle Repairman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,695
vCash: 500
The Oilers were averaging about 12,000 per game with a season ticket base of about 8000 back in the mid-90's. Pray do tell what a run-of-the-mill AHL franchise will do if they are the only game in town.

Bicycle Repairman is offline  
Old
07-27-2004, 05:07 AM
  #50
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
The Oilers were averaging about 12,000 per game with a season ticket base of about 8000 back in the mid-90's. Pray do tell what a run-of-the-mill AHL franchise will do if they are the only game in town.
Give me a break.. even you realize that there were a bunch of factors in the mid-90's that killed the Oilers attendance outside of their poor record. Ever heard of a man named Mr. Pocklington? I would also argue that the Roadrunners will likely become a lot stronger team in the upcoming seasons with an influx of talent in the form of Greene, Niinimaki, Brodziak, JDD, Pouliot, Mikhnov and a bunch of others. This whole Roadrunners spelling the end of the Oilers crap is pretty weak..

Cerebral 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 11:35 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.