Minnesota might complain about the coloursTopper wrote:Now there's a sweater.Aaronp18 wrote:SKYO wrote: Hell yeah, Seattle Totems - Luongo vs Vancouver Canucks - Miller, rivalry born again!
1917 Stanley Cup Champs
Would be apropos if they entered the NHL in 2017.
Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Moderator: Referees
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Now that Rogers is probably the biggest stakeholder in the NHL with the Canadian TV rights and owning the leaves, I wonder how they would feel about a second team in Toronto? On the one hand, more Canadian teams probably means more games for Rogers to broadcast and fill up the programming schedules on their channels.
On the other hand, a second team would have at least some impact on ticket prices at ACC, which is an enormous revenue generator for MLSE. Plus, Bell would do its best to acquire regional broadcast rights to the new team.
At any rate, expansion in Ontario won't happen without Rogers making a shit-ton of money off of it, which supports Bettman saying $1.4 billion wouldn't be near enough expansion fees. Its hard to imagine Rogers making it economically feasible for a team to ever enter Ontario. Balsillie's figure of $225-265 million wouldn't even come close.
On the other hand, a second team would have at least some impact on ticket prices at ACC, which is an enormous revenue generator for MLSE. Plus, Bell would do its best to acquire regional broadcast rights to the new team.
At any rate, expansion in Ontario won't happen without Rogers making a shit-ton of money off of it, which supports Bettman saying $1.4 billion wouldn't be near enough expansion fees. Its hard to imagine Rogers making it economically feasible for a team to ever enter Ontario. Balsillie's figure of $225-265 million wouldn't even come close.
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 19129
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
ESQ wrote:Now that Rogers is probably the biggest stakeholder in the NHL with the Canadian TV rights and owning the leaves, I wonder how they would feel about a second team in Toronto? On the one hand, more Canadian teams probably means more games for Rogers to broadcast and fill up the programming schedules on their channels.
On the other hand, a second team would have at least some impact on ticket prices at ACC, which is an enormous revenue generator for MLSE. Plus, Bell would do its best to acquire regional broadcast rights to the new team.
At any rate, expansion in Ontario won't happen without Rogers making a shit-ton of money off of it, which supports Bettman saying $1.4 billion wouldn't be near enough expansion fees. Its hard to imagine Rogers making it economically feasible for a team to ever enter Ontario. Balsillie's figure of $225-265 million wouldn't even come close.
And maybe Rogers gets paid back for their TV deal by being offered a shit load in expansion fees to the Leaves for allowing another team in Ontario. Everyone wins, except the fan that is.
The only HW the Canucks need
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
His comment was in reference to four expansion teams for that number.ESQ wrote:At any rate, expansion in Ontario won't happen without Rogers making a shit-ton of money off of it, which supports Bettman saying $1.4 billion wouldn't be near enough expansion fees.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
The figures I've been reading indicate that $1.2 billion would be the fee for a new Toronto based organization all by itself.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Kowch wrote:The figures I've been reading indicate that $1.2 billion would be the fee for a new Toronto based organization all by itself.
That's just unreal - I don't know much about valuation of companies, but if the Maple leaves are pulling in $80 million a year profit, how could a new franchise be worth over a billion?ClamRussel wrote:His comment was in reference to four expansion teams for that number.ESQ wrote:At any rate, expansion in Ontario won't happen without Rogers making a shit-ton of money off of it, which supports Bettman saying $1.4 billion wouldn't be near enough expansion fees.
I also read that MLSE believes it has an argument for a regional veto power, which the NHL disputes. The only precedent that I could find for a special territorial expansion fee was Anaheim giving half its expansion fee to the Kings. I don't think there was a territorial fee for Senators, Canucks, Nordiques, Islanders or Devils.
If MLSE succeeds in getting an additional territorial fee, what will the Canadiens ask for then? I don't think the Aquilinis have the kind of clout to demand a territorial fee for Seattle.
At any event, at the numbers being tossed I'd be very nervous that the new franchises are doomed to failure due to enormous debt servicing right off the bat.
- BurningBeard
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1329
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Well, the leaves are worth $1.2 billion, so I can see where the argument is coming from. I doubt they ask for that much though.ESQ wrote:That's just unreal - I don't know much about valuation of companies, but if the Maple leaves are pulling in $80 million a year profit, how could a new franchise be worth over a billion?
I also read that MLSE believes it has an argument for a regional veto power, which the NHL disputes. The only precedent that I could find for a special territorial expansion fee was Anaheim giving half its expansion fee to the Kings. I don't think there was a territorial fee for Senators, Canucks, Nordiques, Islanders or Devils.
If MLSE succeeds in getting an additional territorial fee, what will the Canadiens ask for then? I don't think the Aquilinis have the kind of clout to demand a territorial fee for Seattle.
At any event, at the numbers being tossed I'd be very nervous that the new franchises are doomed to failure due to enormous debt servicing right off the bat.
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
I'll just leave this here...
AN NHL TEAM IN TORONTO COULD BE YOURS FOR - $1.2 BILLION?
I'm sure that MLSE wouldn't mind. They'd get the lions share of that expansion money in addition to their parent company owning the broadcasting rights in Canada.
AN NHL TEAM IN TORONTO COULD BE YOURS FOR - $1.2 BILLION?
I'm sure that MLSE wouldn't mind. They'd get the lions share of that expansion money in addition to their parent company owning the broadcasting rights in Canada.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Good article on why Vegas shouldn't get a team:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pat ... -nhl-arena
One thing Vegas is good for is throwing money at an idea to see if it works, and then abandoning it. If the NHL does end up there, who will be left holding the bag when the owners pack up and try something else?
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pat ... -nhl-arena
One thing Vegas is good for is throwing money at an idea to see if it works, and then abandoning it. If the NHL does end up there, who will be left holding the bag when the owners pack up and try something else?
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
IF Bettman had to pay out his pockets no fucking way he'd keep a team in AZ.
Vegas is a joke, Bettman thinking all those dollars generated by Vegas\ would be NHL money?? lol he needs to be let go, time for a new regime.
Vegas is a joke, Bettman thinking all those dollars generated by Vegas\ would be NHL money?? lol he needs to be let go, time for a new regime.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Lol at people who still think Bettman is the Emperor of the NHL or something. Dude wprks for the BoG and does their bidding.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Only asking because I don't know....
What's the difference between the Lightning and the Panthers?
If people in Florida don't like hockey then why are the TBL averaging over 17,000 fans per game for the past 5+ years? Even back when they were a bad team (post SC and pre Stamkos) they were missing the playoffs year after year but still drawing the crowds....
What's the difference between the Lightning and the Panthers?
If people in Florida don't like hockey then why are the TBL averaging over 17,000 fans per game for the past 5+ years? Even back when they were a bad team (post SC and pre Stamkos) they were missing the playoffs year after year but still drawing the crowds....
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
I've been to a game in TB, and it was a blast. Good crowd, live organ, and a concert after the game. A regular season game was an event. Don't know about FL, but maybeTB is just run better?
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
Well the Panthers are reportedly a loss leader for a series of ownership groups that appear to be profiting from an arena management deal with Brevard County (an arena that's like 20 miles from Miami I might add) which requires the Panthers to be an anchor tenant. The on ice product there has been generally terrible and if I'm not mistaken Miami has a reputation as a poor sports market in general.
The Lightning play in a downtown arena and have a committed owner who has made investments in both the on ice product and the off ice experience, they are nearly always a competitive team with a championship banner and a star player (in fact they've had one or more marquee players for what, fifteen years now?, continuously).
It's little wonder that one of these franchises would have an established fan base and the other would still struggle with attendance 20+ years into their existence. Aside from the state they play in, they have little in common.
The Lightning play in a downtown arena and have a committed owner who has made investments in both the on ice product and the off ice experience, they are nearly always a competitive team with a championship banner and a star player (in fact they've had one or more marquee players for what, fifteen years now?, continuously).
It's little wonder that one of these franchises would have an established fan base and the other would still struggle with attendance 20+ years into their existence. Aside from the state they play in, they have little in common.
Re: Diluting the Talent Pool...Again
I think Dave has hit the nail on the head here.dbr wrote:Well the Panthers are reportedly a loss leader for a series of ownership groups that appear to be profiting from an arena management deal with Brevard County (an arena that's like 20 miles from Miami I might add) which requires the Panthers to be an anchor tenant. The on ice product there has been generally terrible and if I'm not mistaken Miami has a reputation as a poor sports market in general.
The Lightning play in a downtown arena and have a committed owner who has made investments in both the on ice product and the off ice experience, they are nearly always a competitive team with a championship banner and a star player (in fact they've had one or more marquee players for what, fifteen years now?, continuously).
It's little wonder that one of these franchises would have an established fan base and the other would still struggle with attendance 20+ years into their existence. Aside from the state they play in, they have little in common.
Like Phoenix Arizona, Miami's arena is in the middle of the suburbs. The on-ice product has generally been terrible. They have struggled to be even mediocre. They generally do not make the playoffs (five playoff appearances in 20 years - when more than half the teams make the playoffs - is bloody awful). Their only star player has been a goalie. And like dbr said, Miami is generally a pretty shitty sports town.
Add on top of this the reality that hockey just isn't a big sport in Florida, and it should be no surprise that there are so many empty seats at the BB&T Center.