Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
How are the Flames expenditures going to drop substantially by moving to Seattle? Seriously I'd love to hear the argument there. They are going to make less revenue, that's obviously not up for debate. But unless they are cutting payroll (which of course means a less competitive team, which of course means lower ticket sales, which of course means...), where are these substantial expenditure savings coming from?
|
Are you not aware they are sharing a building with another tenant? That means cost sharing for operational expenses related to the arena. That is just proven all over the league where teams have dual tenants.
To flip the coin, I want to see this proof they are going to make less revenue. What guarantee is there they are going to make less revenues? Because you say so? Because Calgary is some golden goose or something? You can't guarantee that, because you don't know. I would love to see the numbers of what team revenues were around the league, but those appear to be closely guarded secrets.
As I've already pointed out, they are making money in American dollars, so get an immediate 25% bump in value of the dollar. So if the Flames were making $100M in revenues in Calgary, they are going to be making the exact same dollars at $75M in Seattle. I would think that for a Seattle team to see a massive drop in revenues they would have to be a failure at the box office. It is highly doubtful a first year team would be a failure at the box office, and a team as good as the Flames, should draw very well as they would be in the playoff mix. Seems you're just hoping they fail to say the Flames owners made a mistake, when common sense says its very unlikely they would suffer immediately.