NHL Anti-Thread: Bad Business Decision Aggregator

[IceCap]

4 hours ago, mcj882000 said:

I could see a second Toronto team working if they were to market themselves as, say, "the team Torontonians can actually afford to watch!" But regrettably I just don't see that happening in today's "make ALL of the money" economic climate.

The whole thing is contingent on the Leafs agreeing to it, since any Toronto 2 team would fall within their market. And MLSE isn't going to let someone else squat in their market for less than a billion up front in territorial fees. On top of the expansion fee.

 

So at that point Toronto 2 would have to charge Leafs-esque prices just to have a prayer of getting back in the black. 

 

Also we don't need the hockey Clippers

[Sport]

Phoenix is a case of two things being true at the same time - it's a bad market for hockey and they made it much harder on themselves by building the arena where they did. I don't see anybody claiming arena location is the only reason the Coyotes are unsuccessful, just that it's one of many problems that have created this mess.  

 

Let me preface this first by saying that building a new arena in Tempe will not suddenly turn Phoenix into a thriving hockey market and I think for the health of the league they should move the franchise to QC.  But just from a purely basic math standpoint, if the arena is closer to more people then more people will go to the games. I don't understand why that very basic concept gets so much pushback.

 

There are a lot of asks for a person to attend a professional sporting event, yes, but there's vast differences between the headaches needed to endure for my family from Northwest Columbus to attend a Blue Jackets game versus what my family in southeast Phoenix goes through in order to attend a Coyotes game. Those additional inconveniences add up to people choosing not going to games and it's got nothing to do with dedication or any of that horses***. I don't agree that the majority of stadiums/arenas are difficult to get to and neither would literal maps. 

[TBGKon]

On 12/10/2021 at 6:01 PM, rams80 said:

HFboards got really high on Chase Field earlier this week.

 

Yes, the baseball stadium.

 

Send help.

That might be the dumbest thing I've heard.  Logistically, you could probably work around the Dbacks and any possible playoff run by the Coyotes not playing at home until November, but what if the Coyotes make the playoffs?  You cant make the Dbacks play on the road for a potential 2 months or so.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

I admit that I haven't read every post in this thread, nor have I closely kept up on the news on this issue.  So please forgive me if this is a stupid question.  But why is Halifax not being considered?  The CFL once had notions of putting a team there.

Also, even though I think it's criminal that only two of the six cities listed are Canadian (and one of those is unrealistic), I wonder about the lack of mention a particular U.S. city: Cleveland. 

 

While the populations of Halifax and Cleveland are a lot smaller than those of the six cities on the NHL's list, surely there is a more receptive audience for hockey in either of those cities than in the four U.S. cities listed.  Is it just down to the assumption that there are no people in Halifax or Cleveland who are rich enough to pay what the NHL will expect in expansion fees?  I believe that the people who own Safeway are from Atlantic Canada; and there just have to be some billionaires in Cleveland.

[Luigi74]

21 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

I admit that I haven't read every post in this thread, nor have I closely kept up on the news on this issue.  So please forgive me if this is a stupid question.  But why is Halifax not being considered?  The CFL once had notions of putting a team there.

Also, even though I think it's criminal that only two of the six cities listed are Canadian (and one of those is unrealistic), I wonder about the lack of mention a particular U.S. city: Cleveland. 

 

While the populations of Halifax and Cleveland are a lot smaller than those of the six cities on the NHL's list, surely there is a more receptive audience for hockey in either of those cities than in the four U.S. cities listed.  Is it just down to the assumption that there are no people in Halifax or Cleveland who are rich enough to pay what the NHL will expect in expansion fees?  I believe that the people who own Safeway are from Atlantic Canada; and there just have to be some billionaires in Cleveland.

Cleveland is in the same boat as Pittsburgh when NBA expansion comes up, there really isn't enough corporate money in the region to spread around among four major league teams for sponsorships, suites and so on, same when it comes to disposable income for the fans attending the games and their general interest. 

[Sport]

There's a lot of hockey fans in Cleveland and no doubt in my mind it would be better than Phoenix, but Cleveland has a few things working against them for the NHL:

1. They're already overextended for their 3 major professional teams as it is and they would be one of the smallest cities, if not the smallest, to have a team in all of the Old 4 leagues.

2. If a hockey fan in Cleveland wants to see an NHL game they're a couple hours from Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Detroit and they have a team in the AHL. It's in a weird spot on the map that isn't a priority for the league to fill. "BUT NY HAS 3 TEAMS" Yeah, New York is different and the way they wound up with 3 teams was a series of funny circumstances that the league would've never intentionally pursued nor would they try to replicate anywhere else. Also the Devils and Islanders have both had long periods where they weren't what I would call "healthy" franchises. 

3. The way Cleveland would get an NHL team is through Dan Gilbert because he owns the arena and I don't see anyone else buying a team and moving them there to take up second banana status in Quicken Loans Arena nor do I see that guy building a second arena in Cleveland. Would Gilbert care enough to upgrade his Cleveland AHL team to an NHL team? I don't know, but he's the guy to ask. 

 

In summary, Cleveland isn't in the conversation. 

[kiwi_canadian]

A second NHL team in Toronto? Haven't they already been there? Lets not forget the Toronto Legacy!!!

 

 

They were going to go with what was said earlier about selling tickets cheaper than the Leafs.

[Sodboy13]

Yeah, but they were going to make up for the low prices on volume with their 30,000-seat hockey arena.

[DEAD!]

That "toronto legacy" bit was more laughable than anything Jim Basillie tried to pull. 

[LMU]

2 hours ago, Sport said:

Phoenix is a case of two things being true at the same time - it's a bad market for hockey and they made it much harder on themselves by building the arena where they did. I don't see anybody claiming arena location is the only reason the Coyotes are unsuccessful, just that it's one of many problems that have created this mess.  

 

Let me preface this first by saying that building a new arena in Tempe will not suddenly turn Phoenix into a thriving hockey market and I think for the health of the league they should move the franchise to QC.  But just from a purely basic math standpoint, if the arena is closer to more people then more people will go to the games. I don't understand why that very basic concept gets so much pushback.

 

There are a lot of asks for a person to attend a professional sporting event, yes, but there's vast differences between the headaches needed to endure for my family from Northwest Columbus to attend a Blue Jackets game versus what my family in southeast Phoenix goes through in order to attend a Coyotes game. Those additional inconveniences add up to people choosing not going to games and it's got nothing to do with dedication or any of that horses***. I don't agree that the majority of stadiums/arenas are difficult to get to and neither would literal maps. 

I think the main problem with assuming that the basic math problem is what's causing the pushback is that this situation is a case where the calculation was so egregiously bad for something that you have only one shot at.  This is the sports equivalent of NASA confusing imperial and metric units for a satellite trajectory.  So, as much as it could help to build yet another arena in a different spot screwing up with the first one isn't something that you can claim a mulligan for. 

[The_Admiral]

8 hours ago, mcj882000 said:

I could see a second Toronto team working if they were to market themselves as, say, "the team Torontonians can actually afford to watch!" But regrettably I just don't see that happening in today's "make ALL of the money" economic climate.

You're describing "a Hamilton team"

 

  

3 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

But why is Halifax not being considered?

 

Because it's half the size of Winnipeg and the Maritimes are poor. Best-case scenario is as an adjunct to a team's territory, like Saskatchewan is for the Jets. They could be an audience for English Nordiques coverage. 

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it again- I really think that Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Hampton, VA would be a great one-team market for the NBA or NHL.

[spartacat_12]

17 hours ago, Friedrich Stuart Macbeth said:

... a 2nd Toronto team will struggle against the much-established Leafs

 

I can't see any teams topping the Leafs as far as popularity goes, but you're crazy if you don't think the market could support more than one team. People say "they'd be another Clippers" like it's a bad thing. The Clippers are the 6th most valuable NBA franchise.

 

Realistically, Southern Ontario could support 2 more teams. Put a team in one of the main GTA suburbs (Mississauga, Vaughan, Markham), price them a little below the Leafs, and you'd get plenty of 905ers who would gladly skip the commute downtown. Then you could throw another team in a city like Hamilton or Kitchener.

 

Obviously the Leafs would never let this happen, but the demand is definitely there. 

 

4 minutes ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it again- I really think that Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Hampton, VA would be a great one-team market for the NBA or NHL.

 

There were plans for the NHL to put a team there in the '90s (Hampton Roads Rhinos), but those got vetoed once the Whalers moved to Raleigh.

 

[BrySmalls]

21 minutes ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it again- I really think that Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Hampton, VA would be a great one-team market for the NBA or NHL.

It's not a good option for either league. Besides, Charlotte has the Hornets and Raleigh has the Hurricanes.

[Sodboy13]

And here comes the novel coronavirus!

[CS85]

50 minutes ago, Sodboy13 said:

And here comes the novel coronavirus!

 

"If we didn't test, we wouldn't have problems like this!"

 

 

edit:  lol, empty arenas in Canada again sounds like it's on its way back.

 

 

 

[neo_prankster]

26 minutes ago, CS85 said:

 

"If we didn't test, we wouldn't have problems like this!"

 

 

edit:  lol, empty arenas in Canada again sounds like it's on its way back.

 

 

 

How is the vaccination rate in Canada compared to the US?

[The_Admiral]

I think Canada trailed the United States for a while due to logistics problems despite more people wanting the vaccine, but now it's around 75%, on par with the New England states, from what I can tell.

[The_Admiral]

3 hours ago, spartacat_12 said:

I can't see any teams topping the Leafs as far as popularity goes, but you're crazy if you don't think the market could support more than one team. People say "they'd be another Clippers" like it's a bad thing. The Clippers are the 6th most valuable NBA franchise.

 

The Clippers are the 6th most valuable franchise precisely because the previous owner got caught on tape expressing his problems with The Blacks. In fact, every single North American pro sports team valuation over the last eight years is ridiculously inflated because the previous owner of the Los Angeles Clippers got caught on tape expressing his problems with The Blacks. Had Steve Ballmer not dropped by to throw the entire market out of whack by buying the Clippers under extraordinary circumstances -- circumstances which, well, if someone told me it was a stitch-up, I wouldn't wear myself out arguing against it -- anyone who wanted the Coyotes would be able to scoop them up for $200MM.

[Kooky01]

Surprised nobody has brought up Hartford or Milwaukee as a possible spot for the Yotes. Both cities are capable of holding an NHL team.