Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Coyotes saga is on once again

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    You have an interesting way of defending your position...even when you're wrong, you try to convince people through the number count in your posts. With this one...you're not convincing me. Just do a search for attendance stats in the NHL. You'll see how you are wrong in thinking the Jets are in the same position as any of the teams you listed (Hurricanes, Yotes or Panthers).

    I won't even go into the $$$ coming in from the tickets sold...just focusing in on the # of a$$es in the seats at these arenas over the past 5 years:
    16-17 15-16 14-15 13-14 12-13 AVG
    Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Att.Avg % Avg
    Jets 15,821 108.6% 15,294 101.9% 15,037 100.2% 15,004 100.0% 15,004 100.0% 15,232 102.1%
    Hurricanes 11,949 64.0% 12,203 65.3% 12,594 67.4% 15,483 82.9% 17,558 94.0% 13,957 74.7%
    Yotes 13,069 76.3% 13,433 78.4% 13,345 77.9% 13,775 80.4% 13,923 81.3% 13,509 78.9%
    Panthers 14,522 85.2% 15,384 90.3% 11,265 66.1% 14,177 83.2% 16,991 99.7% 14,468 84.9%
    I know your issue is with % capacity. But when comparing the Jets to these 3 Southern US hockey hotbeds, % capacity tells an important story when you realize that the actual average attendance figures are higher in Winnipeg every year over the past 5 years...while also being a completely full house every season.. IF the arenas were switched, you're right...the US teams on this list might not "look" as bad, from the number of empty seats seen on daily hockey highlights...BUT, Winnipeg would be getting even more a$$es in the seats of a bigger rink if they had one.

    Do note...i am not saying we shouldn't have teams in non-traditional markets. But at some point, the plug really needs to be pulled when its obvious the market can't support an NHL team. I'm not saying move all of these teams to Canada (i agree...not a lot of options north of the border)...but i don't think the patience shown in AZ, Carolina and FL would have been shown in Canadian markets. The plug would have been pulled long ago.

    BTW...don't bring up MLB and the NBA when talking about teams surviving difficult times...there are a total of TWO Canadian teams in these two leagues...and i can speak to the failure that occurred with the Expos and claim a major double standard when it came to the way the Expos were treated compared to US MLB teams.
    Last edited by lynchmob450; 03-09-2017, 06:36 PM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by lynchmob450 View Post
      You have an interesting way of defending your position...even when you're wrong,
      With all due respect to parties and styles involved, and REV, I do respect your dedication and knowledge. I found this line to be the most hilarious line I have read on this board in years.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by swami24 View Post

        With all due respect to parties and styles involved, and REV, I do respect your dedication and knowledge. I found this line to be the most hilarious line I have read on this board in years.
        Well...on this one he is wrong (specifically when comparing the Jets to the 3 US cities). On most other issues, he is batting like Rod Carew.

        Comment


        • #14
          Carew missed more than 60% of the time

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by lynchmob450 View Post
            You have an interesting way of defending your position...even when you're wrong, you try to convince people through the number count in your posts. With this one...you're not convincing me. Just do a search for attendance stats in the NHL. You'll see how you are wrong in thinking the Jets are in the same position as any of the teams you listed (Hurricanes, Yotes or Panthers).

            I won't even go into the $$$ coming in from the tickets sold...just focusing in on the # of a$$es in the seats at these arenas over the past 5 years:
            Great....and having already read the post, I realize you then take my exact argument..make it your own and then somehow tell me I am wrong for it...which is funny because...

            "You have an interesting way of defending your position...even when you're wrong" had such great promise as an opening line..and then you go and flub it...


            16-17 15-16 14-15 13-14 12-13 AVG
            Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Attendance % Att.Avg % Avg
            Jets 15,821 108.6% 15,294 101.9% 15,037 100.2% 15,004 100.0% 15,004 100.0% 15,232 102.1%
            Hurricanes 11,949 64.0% 12,203 65.3% 12,594 67.4% 15,483 82.9% 17,558 94.0% 13,957 74.7%
            Yotes 13,069 76.3% 13,433 78.4% 13,345 77.9% 13,775 80.4% 13,923 81.3% 13,509 78.9%
            Panthers 14,522 85.2% 15,384 90.3% 11,265 66.1% 14,177 83.2% 16,991 99.7% 14,468 84.9%
            Lovely numbers.

            I know your issue is with % capacity. But when comparing the Jets to these 3 Southern US hockey hotbeds, % capacity tells an important story when you realize that the actual average attendance figures are higher in Winnipeg every year over the past 5 years...while also being a completely full house every season.. IF the arenas were switched, you're right...the US teams on this list might not "look" as bad, from the number of empty seats seen on daily hockey highlights...BUT, Winnipeg would be getting even more a$$es in the seats of a bigger rink if they had one.
            Uhmm...yeah, you just proved two of my points. Not yours.

            1. Southern teams playing in shoeboxes become "success" stories and are easier to market and sell, the idea of scarcity...or supply/demand creates buzz...

            2a. Winnipeg, for whatever reason, was allowed to host an NHL team in an arena that seats barely 15k...that's a joke for a 'traditional' market. right?

            2b. Las Vegas will seat 17500. Which puts the Jets highest attendance number, 15821, at 90.4% of Vegas' capacity. Vegas.

            Add to it that many of these non-traditional teams are likely in better financial positions playing in smaller venues with lower overhead..

            So let's take your numbers to the next obvious step, one you opted not to show for some reason...

            With a seating capacity of 15,004
            Florida looks like: 97.0%, 102.5%, 75.1%, 94.5%, 113.2%, 96.4%
            Carolina looks like: 80.0%, 81.3%, 84.0%, 103.2%, 117.0%, 93.0%

            Worth noting, the Jets; top end 15821 is 84.5% capacity in Raleigh and 82.2% capacity in Sunrise. That's a problem.

            Florida looks pretty ****ing awesome...if we're being honest...and get this, Florida's attendance hinges on the team being relevant, like quite a number of other franchises traditional and non, even O6.

            Carolina? Want to talk about a club put through the wringer? Look at Carolina..look at their history and everything they went through...folks forget exactly how badly the Whalers were treated in Connecticut..they were the Islanders before the Islanders....and then when they relocated the expectations and demands became ridiculous. What's Capacity for Carolina? 18,680.

            As far as Phoenix goes...yup it's a failed experiment..but moving them isn't as simple as a "Canada" for a couple of reason that no one ever wants to talk about. Limited number of markets that can actually support the club, unless we let them play in a 12k arena in a secondary metropolis..which then begs the question..why is that not ok in the US? You need a Western city to take them...or you need to bribe a current Eastern city to go West...

            But for fun lets look at PHX if they played in an arena that sat 15004...

            87.1%, 89.5%, 88.9%, 91.8%, 92.8%, 90.0%

            What's important to remember is that PHX isn't a failure because it lacked fans..it's a failure on the NHL level, on the ownership level, on the local government level...a lot of the same reasons that led to CAP and the threat that damn near every Canadian team not named the Maple Leafs could be on the move..hell it the same issues led to the Montreal Canadiens being sold to an *American*...

            Do note...i am not saying we shouldn't have teams in non-traditional markets. But at some point, the plug really needs to be pulled when its obvious the market can't support an NHL team. I'm not saying move all of these teams to Canada (i agree...not a lot of options north of the border)...but i don't think the patience shown in AZ, Carolina and FL would have been shown in Canadian markets. The plug would have been pulled long ago.
            I don't think that statement about Canadian clubs can be supported with proof, again at a time when it would have been easier to pull the plug, the league didn't instead it sought a variety of measures to bolster the NHL in Canada...including both versions of the salary cap - which folks tend to forget about..what a lot of folks tend to forget about, when it comes to the NHL in Canada is that it is a cutthroat world...teams simply don't want to help each other out...they see themselves competing for the same roughly 55m people.

            BTW...don't bring up MLB and the NBA when talking about teams surviving difficult times...there are a total of TWO Canadian teams in these two leagues...and i can speak to the failure that occurred with the Expos and claim a major double standard when it came to the way the Expos were treated compared to US MLB teams.
            Oh no, I absolutely want to bring them up...because it spotlights the hypocrisy....we want a a hardline when the outcome suits our need....

            What I find tends to be most true is a lot of people don't have any exposure to market based business. If a Big Mac in NYC sells for $5 and in Richmond it sells for $3, is Richmond a bad market for McDonalds? If a Hockey ticket sells for $100 in Toronto, and $60 in San Jose, is San Jose a bad market? The answer to both is No, because different areas and markets have to have individual definitions of success and growth...

            The NHL has existed for 100 years, and only 6 teams have been in the league for the entirety. The NHL's first round of expansion didn't come until 50 years in...and some of those clubs are barely solid (looking at you Pittsburgh and your Messiah complex)....Chicago was a basement dwelling embarrassment far worse than anything that's come as a result of "modern" expansion...it took a death to make them a competitive top end club..and they've been laying roots for a century...

            In the end folks need to be patient, it's something that many in Canada would have liked from the MLB and NBA but are vexed by coming out of the NHL....
            Last edited by Rev_Bully; 03-10-2017, 08:45 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Using ESPN's Home Attendance Numbers for 2015-16

              There are 4 teams in the NHL with a home draw equal to or greater than the 19,250 seat capacity of the BB&T Center in Sunrise Florida
              Chicago, Montreal, Detroit and Minnesota


              There are 9 teams with a home draw equal to or greater than the 18,680 seating capacity in Raleigh
              Chicago, Montreal, Detroit, Minnesota, Philadelphia, Toronto, Calgary, Tampa and Boston


              Those are important numbers when talking about %capacity and market. Everyone will tell me how X team or Y team could..and yet they don;t have the arena to do so..if it was such a sure thing..the funding would be there to provide these untapped cash cows with the means to do so...

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Rev_Bully View Post
                With a seating capacity of 15,004
                Florida looks like: 97.0%, 102.5%, 75.1%, 94.5%, 113.2%, 96.4%
                Carolina looks like: 80.0%, 81.3%, 84.0%, 103.2%, 117.0%, 93.0%

                Worth noting, the Jets; top end 15821 is 84.5% capacity in Raleigh and 82.2% capacity in Sunrise. That's a problem.
                Anthony...you keep spinning your tires. No where am i saying that the % capacity shown by the 3 US cities is what should be used to judge them. I am using the % capacity to tell the truth about what we are seeing in Winnipeg. While they play in a small arena, they are selling more than capacity...which i believe means they can sell more seats than they currently have. That's all that stat represents.

                And to just get back to the point, my argument is that YOU cannot compare Winnipeg to any of those cities because they do not sell the same amount of tickets as the Jets franchise. Its a very simple argument. Winnipeg sells more tickets every year over the last 5 compared to the Hurricanes, Coyotes and Panthers. Please admit this, at least.


                Originally posted by Rev_Bully View Post
                What I find tends to be most true is a lot of people don't have any exposure to market based business. If a Big Mac in NYC sells for $5 and in Richmond it sells for $3, is Richmond a bad market for McDonalds? If a Hockey ticket sells for $100 in Toronto, and $60 in San Jose, is San Jose a bad market? The answer to both is No, because different areas and markets have to have individual definitions of success and growth...
                Over the last 3 years, the average selling price for tickets are as follows (as per http://blog.tiqiq.com/2016/10/2013-1...t-prices-team/):

                Jets - $201.67 (i'm assuming this is CAD...so bringing this to a $0.65 USD, this would be $131.08)
                Hurricanes - $77.67
                Coyotes - $92.41
                Panthers - $92.41

                You're right...making money doesn't really matter where its done. But are you going to say that selling more tickets at a higher price is not better than selling less tickets at a lower price? I understand that ticket revenues are only part of the story (marketing to a larger population base is really important for the NHL...while 126% of Manitoba natives are NHL fans and 16% of Arizona folk are NHL fans...the possibility of growth is a little greater down south), i just don't see the Jets being in the same boat as the 3 US cities people keep talking about as failures.

                Comment


                • #18
                  I'm going to say that there's no excuse for Winnipeg to be playing in a 15k seat arena if everything you insist is true..

                  You've yet to justify why that's acceptable or why there's no money or interest in building a 19k seat arena in Manitoba for the Jets..

                  Meanwhile Carolina and Sunrise host huge arenas for hockey teams in nontraditional or niche markets..

                  But yeah I'm spinning my wheels...If there's all this money to be made..The basic question is "why isn't anyone making it?" Cause these teams are leaving lots of money on the table otherwise, right?


                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I didn't want the original Jets to move, but it was mostly for sentimental reasons. I hate seeing teams (that have a loyal following) move for mostly business reasons. This is pretty fresh, and painful, as I watch the NFL Chargers move away, not because of the lack of fan support, but because ownership and the City couldn't get on the same page for a badly needed new stadium.

                    Once the Jets did move to Phoenix, I wanted to see them be successful. And the funny thing is, they were, at least in the early years. They had a good team (Roenick, Tkachuk, Khabibulin and a young Shane Doan) that regularly made the playoffs. Attendance at their 16,210 seat, downtown arena was 94% in their first four years and they had 69 sellouts during that time.

                    Their major problem was that ownership and the League didn't do their due diligence about the financial effects of playing in a building that had 5,287 (almost one-third of capacity) obstructed view seats. Here's a fascinating piece from Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal about the situation and the clever things the Yotes' marketing staff did to sell the bad seats at America West Arena: http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...s-seating.aspx

                    Because there were many more bad seats than ownership and the League anticipated they had to be significantly discounted. The new team hemoraged money on their lease. A partnership with the Suns for a new downtown building (which should have been in the works before a move from Winnipeg) didn't materialize. A project for a Scottsdale arena (where 80% of the season ticket holders lived) got shot down. Financial crises forced a series of ownership changes. The move to Glendale pushed the Yotes farther away from their season ticket base and into the arms of a highly political and uncooperative landlord.

                    The Coyotes situation is a case study in how not to move a franchise, and how to poison a new, growing market that could have been successful with better foresight and planning.
                    Last edited by Foggy; 03-10-2017, 11:36 AM.
                    What would Fred do?

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Up here in Canada...you won't get a cent from governments to build an arena. It needs to be privately built...so getting Winnipeg to build a new arena will need current ownership to dig into their own pockets. Most of these billionaires that I know don't like spending their own money when they have an arena to use that is really costing them nada.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X