Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
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.
|
Well since neither of us can offer proof, I'll make my argument instead. Even if you wanna be generous and say there's 150,000 diehard hockey fans in Seattle, there are still at least that many in Calgary. But in Calgary you compete against no one. The Stamps aren't a real competitor. The Seahawks, the NBA team, the Mariners, the Sounders, UDub...there's just a bit more competition for the sports dollar there. Bigger market yes, but not necessarily more diehards (likely not), and more competitors. If the team isn't a consistent winner, how do you see them not being just another middling market for an NHL owner?
Plus there's also corporate support that is more difficult to get with the competition compared to Calgary, and the local TV deal which will be for less. The USD difference is nice for now, but given Trump intends on, well, being Trump, that difference is shrinking and will continue to do so. He wants more exports, gotta get that dollar down. The operational savings over time probably cover the relocation fee, an unavoidable expenditure that comes with moving to Seattle.
I do not see a scenario where the Flames move under current ownership, selling is much more likely. So suffering has nothing to do with it. Looking at the Seattle market shows that it's not something that can be consider a real threat for a move when compared to Calgary. As I've always maintained, Toronto 2 is the real threat but is also a lot more complicated.