Quote:
Originally Posted by browna
When they left the last time, there were grumblings tickets were too expensive. Well, they've gone up around the league 35-40% in that time. Don't know if the mean wage has gone up the same there.
Winnipeg's arena has 30% less seats than Calgary's, so in a simple economics, to make them as profitable as the Flames, the average ticket price has to be 30% more than here. Ok, so the new team doesn't spend to the cap, but spends 20% less then the Flames, tickets still have to be 10% higher (don't for get Manitoba sales tax on top) to bring in the same revenue/profit as the Flames do.
And thats assuming your expenses are the same, and that you can sell the rink board ads and the TV rights, and the luxury boxes, at the same going rate that Calgary sells theirs for. Luxury boxes would be the big one, at $150K+ per year, per box, or so. Ontop of that, the Flames aren't exactly printing money these days either.
If all those revenue and expense criteria aren't met, the deep pocketed owner is going to be bankrolling fairly large losses losses...that starts to wear on a guy, especially if there's a prime S. Ontario market still available in a couple years, with a brand new arena waiting.
|
Can't disagree with your comment about S.Ontario but I do need to disagree with what you say about Winnipeg. According to Forbes in 2010 Phoenix was the worst team in the league for franchise value and was operating a loss of $20MM.
Even with your estimations that Winnipeg can't match Calgary's ability to bring in the dough they'll sure as hell be better than Phoenix and I doubt you would disagree with me there, would you? So if one's faced with the decision to eat another $20MM in losses, or, less in losses (potentially profit too) by moving the team to a destination that is guaranteed to be hockey hungry and sell a crapload of tickets, I'm not sure what the problem is.
Also, to Resolute who can't seem to have a discussion without resorting to petty name calling and over-the-top condescension, 29 owners don't have to agree with Bettman actions and his own ridiculous self-interest and egomaniacal decisions- the NHL owns the Coyotes, so they get to call the shots with the franchise. No? I don't think the owner of St.Louis is calling the owner of Anaheim and telling him what he can and can't do with the franchise he owns, despite the revenue sharing scheme they've constructed. So yeah, Bettman probably does have some kind of bizarre agenda and as Vulcan has pointed out, there have been several examples of this throughout his tenure as commissioner.
The Coyotes are not General Motors. No bailout, thanks. Oh yeah and also, Winnipeg will support their team because the people know what it's like to have lost theirs. I think there is a significant intangible and difficult to prove factor about Winnipeg which, obviously, should be considered in the business decision but does require a leap of faith somewhat.