[News] Jets renewal rate 96%

[EYE_Overstand]

The jets fans at the last home game here were way worse than any Canuck game in the past 5 years.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Well these renewals are for 3, 4 and 5 years (similar set up to the original commitments) so they'll probably be doing okay. Not my favorite kind of setup but it seems to be working for them and the fans seem to be on board with it.

But this talk about new arenas really needs to stop, and it's been brought up here before and it always seems to enrage me.

You say they have the weakest corporate support, so building a new arena for more corporate boxes and club seats doesn't make much sense if they're already at a risk of it running thin. Their building is only 10 years old, so there would be no public money on the table seeing as how it's likely they're still financing the construction of MTS. So what you're saying is that a team that can keep demand high with fewer seats should build a new arena at a minimum cost of ~$300M for what? So you can spend all that money for 3,000 of the lowest priced seats in the house? Seems like an expensive project to take on for not much additional revenue.

Plus, the size of the MTS Centre has made it far more versatile as a non-hockey venue (it can act as a mid-size and large concert venue, something few arenas can adequately do), to the point where it has been #3 in non-sporting event attendance in the country (behind only the ACC and Bell Centre). The size of MTS is an advantage to TNSE, not a disadvantage.

When your cap in revenue is middle tier of NHL teams current revenue, with no room to grow, it's not sustainable, or at the least financially ideal since you have little room for error in financing the team. Increasing capacity allows them to expand their revenue potential which they could be taking advantage of right now since fan support is near it's peak. They're leaving millions on the table. No matter who owns the team, they're not gonna be content with just enough if there's another option to bring in more dough; allowing for more breathing room when times are tougher, or when they need to spend a lot of money (such as in free agency to bring players in).

[Sylvanfan]

As the CDN dollar starts to plummet, franchises like the Jets will face a real challenge. Their on ice play is mediocre at best, and unless they reshape that roster they are way off of being any type of serious contender. Are people going to continue forking out hundreds of dollars a night to see a teamthat they know has the upside to maybe get the last wild card spot?

They have a committed owner with deep pockets. But every Canadian based team just wasted the best chance they will have in the next 15 years to take advantage of the economic advantage they had. We will find out how much owners in smaller Canadian cities like spending their own money running these teams.

[Red John]

Only 50% renewed for three years?

Nothing has changed since the old Jets.

Zero corporate support (what corp wouldn't plan on keeping seats long term especially at a discount)?

So what you have is a lot of fans who are choosing to "wait and see" what happens committing year by year.

With the Jets doomed to mediocrity in years to come you'll start to see some empties.

Considering two years ago, 100% of sth's were committed to 3 years that's a sharp drop.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Red John

Only 50% renewed for three years?

Nothing has changed since the old Jets.

Zero corporate support (what corp wouldn't plan on keeping seats long term especially at a discount)?

So what you have is a lot of fans who are choosing to "wait and see" what happens committing year by year.

With the Jets doomed to mediocrity in years to come you'll start to see some empties.

Considering two years ago, 100% of sth's were committed to 3 years that's a sharp drop.

The minimum you could renew for is three years. 50% chose to extend it greater than three years (up to five).

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Joborule

When your cap in revenue is middle tier of NHL teams current revenue, with no room to grow, it's not sustainable, or at the least financially ideal since you have little room for error in financing the team. Increasing capacity allows them to expand their revenue potential which they could be taking advantage of right now since fan support is near it's peak. They're leaving millions on the table. No matter who owns the team, they're not gonna be content with just enough if there's another option to bring in more dough; allowing for more breathing room when times are tougher, or when they need to spend a lot of money (such as in free agency to bring players in).

MTS is designed so that the tougher times aren't as hard. 15,000 seats in lean times are easier to fill than 18,000 which means they can charge more while paying less to operate it. It also maximizes the revenue from non-hockey events, which means that even if the Jets aren't making as much money, TNSE can still make up the difference elsewhere.

But sure, let's say that 10 years after building MTS they've paid it off and decide they don't want to secure any more capital and want to take on the costs because of 3,000 more seats for a mere $300M. Those 3,000 seats are going to be the cheapest but hey, times are good, let's assume they'll go for $50 each. Let's also assume that each of those fans will spend $30 at each game because again, times are good. That's only like 3 beers and a hot dog anyway. So in a mere 30 seasons of peak fan support, the team can look to have those 3,000 seats justify the cost of building a new arena, which will be about the time they'll have to start looking at building the replacement. This also ignores the operational costs of those extra seats as well as the interest on the construction costs. Not to mention a bigger arena brings with it a bigger footprint and a higher value so a few more property tax dollars as well. MTS is already an arena designed on revenue maximization for it's size, so this isn't even a Saddledome or Rexall situation. If MTS was still under construction or in it's early phases and an NHL team was coming back and they could say 'hey, it will cost a bit more to add about 1500-2000 seats but it could be better in the long run' it would be one thing. But the arena is built and only ten years old and making money that doesn't need to go to financing the construction anymore, which means more profit.

Plus TNSE would need to find and buy the land which could be tough in Winnipeg since the SHED is pretty much based around an arena so the city (and province) wouldn't be too helpful in any bid that isn't in a prime downtown location to keep that dream alive. Since few cities can justify multiple large-venues, you also need to take into account what to do with MTS when you move out. The cost of re-purposing it would not be cheap either, this would be a lot of money TNSE is committing to after spending so much on the team already, which will leave them with absolutely no breathing room and certainly very little disposable cash for free agents.



Any suggestion for them to build an arena within the next twenty years is a stupid one, plain and simple.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

MTS is designed so that the tougher times aren't as hard. 15,000 seats in lean times are easier to fill than 18,000 which means they can charge more while paying less to operate it. It also maximizes the revenue from non-hockey events, which means that even if the Jets aren't making as much money, TNSE can still make up the difference elsewhere.

But sure, let's say that 10 years after building MTS they've paid it off and decide they don't want to secure any more capital and want to take on the costs because of 3,000 more seats for a mere $300M. Those 3,000 seats are going to be the cheapest but hey, times are good, let's assume they'll go for $50 each. Let's also assume that each of those fans will spend $30 at each game because again, times are good. That's only like 3 beers and a hot dog anyway. So in a mere 30 seasons of peak fan support, the team can look to have those 3,000 seats justify the cost of building a new arena, which will be about the time they'll have to start looking at building the replacement. This also ignores the operational costs of those extra seats as well as the interest on the construction costs. Not to mention a bigger arena brings with it a bigger footprint and a higher value so a few more property tax dollars as well. MTS is already an arena designed on revenue maximization for it's size, so this isn't even a Saddledome or Rexall situation. If MTS was still under construction or in it's early phases and an NHL team was coming back and they could say 'hey, it will cost a bit more to add about 1500-2000 seats but it could be better in the long run' it would be one thing. But the arena is built and only ten years old and making money that doesn't need to go to financing the construction anymore, which means more profit.

Plus TNSE would need to find and buy the land which could be tough in Winnipeg since the SHED is pretty much based around an arena so the city (and province) wouldn't be too helpful in any bid that isn't in a prime downtown location to keep that dream alive. Since few cities can justify multiple large-venues, you also need to take into account what to do with MTS when you move out. The cost of re-purposing it would not be cheap either, this would be a lot of money TNSE is committing to after spending so much on the team already, which will leave them with absolutely no breathing room and certainly very little disposable cash for free agents.



Any suggestion for them to build an arena within the next twenty years is a stupid one, plain and simple.

If you're analysts for why they shouldn't get a new arena because it'll be too costly and they wouldn't get enough revenue from it to cover the expenditure of building a new arena, and spend up to the cap in the future, then that shows why Winnipeg is unsustainable in the first place. They may get money from the other events that occur in the venue, but they're still potentially losing on more money from their most frequent tenant. I'm giving Winnipeg the benefit of the doubt that if they could build a new venue with more seating and luxury suits (which is the big one here), it would give the franchise a lot more security thanks to the added flexibility.

The luxury suits is where the team would make the greatest gains in a new arena. The nosebleeds would allow the Jets to give cheaper tickets to fans that don't want to pay the high value ones night in, night out. That's more revenue their making now then they were before. And then if the buzz dies down and the market doesn't want to pay one of the most expensive tickets in the league anymore, they have the extra capacity, plus the new luxury suits, that can allow them to adjust their pricing so they can still get the same revenue now, or at least close to it.

It would be costly now to build a new arena, but it could help them tons down the road. If Jets are going to be in Winnipeg for the long term, they're going to have to build a new arena at some point anyway since the MTS will reach outdated standards at some point. Why not build a state-of-the-art facility that will last three decades now while the support is at it's highest, rather than possibly having to do this 5-10 years from now?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Joborule

If you're analysts for why they shouldn't get a new arena because it'll be too costly and they wouldn't get enough revenue from it to cover the expenditure of building a new arena and spend up to the cap in the future, then that shows why Winnipeg is unsustainable in the first place.

It's not that the revenue wouldn't eventually pay for it, it's an issue of making enough to justify spending that amount of money while you currently have a modern, profitable building with upwards of 30 years left in it's life.

They may get money from the other events that occur in the venue, but they're still potentially losing on more money from their most frequent tenant. I'm giving Winnipeg the benefit of the doubt that if they could build a new venue with more seating and luxury suits (which is the big one here), it would give the franchise a lot more security thanks to the added flexibility.

The luxury suits is where the team would make the greatest gains in a new arena.

If it was enough to replace a 10 year old arena, the Flames would have done the same thing instead of undergoing the big reno to add suites and take out seats, because the Saddledome was more out of date as a 'revenue maximizing venue' in 96 than MTS Centre is now or will be in 10 years.

Plus, you're now arguing that the Jets need to expand their luxury suites while also criticizing the team's sustainability because their corporate support is the lowest. Hard to argue it both ways.

The nosebleeds would allow the Jets to give cheaper tickets to fans that don't want to pay the high value ones night in, night out.That's more revenue their making now then they were before.And then if the buzz dies down and the market doesn't want to pay one of the most expensive tickets in the league anymore, they have the extra capacity, plus the new luxury suits, that can allow them to adjust their pricing so they can still get the same revenue now, or at least close to it.

First, why should they care about fans who don't want to pay the going rate for tickets? They're a business, not a charity. Those seats will cost the most to build, you don't base your decision on a new arena for them.
Second, if the buzz dies down, the larger capacity is not an advantage because it means the value of tickets drops faster. If they're at the point where they're in a new and expensive arena and are only getting the same or similar revenue, they're in a worse off financial position.

There's a reason the Flames stopped selling PL seats in the dark times, only having 17,000 available tickets is better when the arena isn't filling up than 19,000.

It would be costly now to build a new arena, but it could help them tons down the road.

No it won't. They're turning a decent profit right now. Building a new arena would mean that extra profit would have to go to financing the cost of the arena, something that isn't cheap (the Oilers and Flames have been pushing for public money and they've got some pretty deep pocketed owners in the fastest growing cities in the country). For comparison, Jobing.Com arena's financing is $12.5M a year, which means that for the Jets to be better off with a new arena than with MTS, the arena would need to double the team's profit. Those are some pretty lofty goals just to get to slightly better than where they are now. That's without the team spending more to be competitive.

If Jets are going to be in Winnipeg for the long term, they're going to have to build a new arena at some point anyway since the MTS will reach outdated standards at some point.

Well this can also be said of every single team in the league regarding their arena, regardless of how old it might be, so this point is meaningless.

Why not build a state-of-the-art facility that will last three decades now while the support is at it's highest, rather than possibly having to do this 5-10 years from now?

Because they don't need to do it 5-10 years from now either. Hell, they probably don't have to start really thinking about it for at least 20. MTS is a modern, albeit small, arena that is making the team money, has a good deal with the city, maximizes the possibilities for non-hockey events and is an appropriate size for the market as a whole. There's a reason you build arenas with the hope to last ~40 years, it takes a long time to start seeing the real returns and at the end of it's life it is essentially worth nothing so building a new arena is basically just starting over which is why TNSE isn't going to abandon an arena that has quickly reached it's prime profit years in order to go back to the start line two decades before they need to.

[Resolute 14]

Have to say, it is a rather remarkable transformation. Pre-Jets Winnipeg hockey fans were insufferably arrogant, while post-Jets Winnipeg hockey fans have become incredibly insecure.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Have to say, it is a rather remarkable transformation. Pre-Jets Winnipeg hockey fans were insufferably arrogant, while post-Jets Winnipeg hockey fans have become incredibly insecure.

Which is perfectly exemplified in the very first post of this thread.

Instead of simply noting something positive, Jets fans have to come out and say "See!! Proof that you're wrong! This'll silence em for sure!!"

Could've just posted something nice and positive, instead it has to be in spite of someone else.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Meh.. I for one am always happy to hear that any organization is doing well. Strong teams mean a strong league.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by strombad

Which is perfectly exemplified in the very first post of this thread.

Instead of simply noting something positive, Jets fans have to come out and say "See!! Proof that you're wrong! This'll silence em for sure!!"

Could've just posted something nice and positive, instead it has to be in spite of someone else.

It's the sort of inferiority complex that made Canuck fans what they are today.

[Hackey]

Good to hear. I myself worried a bit that the fans might get apathetic but it's good to see the continued support.

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by EYE_Overstand

The jets fans at the last home game here were way worse than any Canuck game in the past 5 years.

There was a thread from the March 9, 2012 game that was devoted to how well behaved and fun the Winnipeg fans were, compared to other Canadian teams. I doubt the behavior of Jets fans could have changed that drastically after one game. I've followed this forum for 10 years, and I failed to see anything about how horrible the Jets fans were at the Saddledome.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

It's not that the revenue wouldn't eventually pay for it, it's an issue of making enough to justify spending that amount of money while you currently have a modern, profitable building with upwards of 30 years left in it's life.

Because they don't need to do it 5-10 years from now either. Hell, they probably don't have to start really thinking about it for at least 20. MTS is a modern, albeit small, arena that is making the team money, has a good deal with the city, maximizes the possibilities for non-hockey events and is an appropriate size for the market as a whole. There's a reason you build arenas with the hope to last ~40 years, it takes a long time to start seeing the real returns and at the end of it's life it is essentially worth nothing so building a new arena is basically just starting over which is why TNSE isn't going to abandon an arena that has quickly reached it's prime profit years in order to go back to the start line two decades before they need to.

My argument is on the basis of me disagreeing with you in how long that arena would remain profitable once they've been around for 10 years. The standards for NHL arenas are always changing. MTS may still be up to par now aside from capacity, but will that be the case in 2020? If not, will it put a limit on their revenue stream? Question cannot be answered now, but I'd imagine being in the position isn't favourable, otherwise why do teams renovate/build new venues?

Islanders are moving to Brooklyn, where they're going to be playing a small capacity venue as well; which I think is stupid, since the seating arrange is fairly awkward as well. At least Winnipeg has an actual hockey arena. I don't imagine the Islanders staying in their new venue any longer than a decade either, and a temporary move till they get a home more suited for hockey, where they could get more revenue from it.

If it was enough to replace a 10 year old arena, the Flames would have done the same thing instead of undergoing the big reno to add suites and take out seats, because the Saddledome was more out of date as a 'revenue maximizing venue' in 96 than MTS Centre is now or will be in 10 years.

Plus, you're now arguing that the Jets need to expand their luxury suites while also criticizing the team's sustainability because their corporate support is the lowest. Hard to argue it both ways.

The dome went out of date quickly, but as you mention, was able to update it (somewhat) to more modern standards. MTS doesn't have the advantage of taking more seats away for more luxury suites. I suppose they could, but then there would be even less regular seats, which is already in limited quantity.

Because they have the lowest corporate support, they're really up against the wall in relation to any other NHL team. But luxury suites are money makers, and I would hope there would be enough money in the city that having some more suites to sell wouldn't be an issue.

First, why should they care about fans who don't want to pay the going rate for tickets? They're a business, not a charity. Those seats will cost the most to build, you don't base your decision on a new arena for them.
Second, if the buzz dies down, the larger capacity is not an advantage because it means the value of tickets drops faster. If they're at the point where they're in a new and expensive arena and are only getting the same or similar revenue, they're in a worse off financial position.

There's a reason the Flames stopped selling PL seats in the dark times, only having 17,000 available tickets is better when the arena isn't filling up than 19,000.

Because it's more people in the building when the team is doing good, meaning more tickets, concessions, and merchandised sold. If the team isn't doing hot and aren't selling as much tickets anymore, then they won't have as much use if people don't care to purchases nosebleed seats no matter how cheap they are, but it also wouldn't be a problem. If Jets are a competitive team, and make it to the playoffs, those seats are bringing in plenty of money.

No it won't. They're turning a decent profit right now. Building a new arena would mean that extra profit would have to go to financing the cost of the arena, something that isn't cheap (the Oilers and Flames have been pushing for public money and they've got some pretty deep pocketed owners in the fastest growing cities in the country). For comparison, Jobing.Com arena's financing is $12.5M a year, which means that for the Jets to be better off with a new arena than with MTS, the arena would need to double the team's profit. Those are some pretty lofty goals just to get to slightly better than where they are now. That's without the team spending more to be competitive.

Middle tier league wise is the best they can do with tickets jacked up to the max. It's okay now, but with the weaker Canadian dollar, it'll likely be tougher for Jets to break top 20 in a few years if the dollar doesn't bump back up and residents can't afford such high ticket prices anymore.

I get what you mean that this is a expensive project, and short term cost may be too much to make it worth it, but if there was a time the provincial government would be in favour of supporting the finance in a new arena, now may be the best since people don't want the Jets to leave once again because a new arena deal couldn't be struck up.

But then again, with a weaker dollar, would the province be able to afford putting in a lot for it? Not quite sure about that, and not sure if the owner would want to do the same.

Overall I feel the Jets would be better off with an +17.5K with 2/1.5 rows of luxury suits, rather than a 15K venue with one row of luxury suites. You may be right in saying it's not needed, at least the moment, but I believe that if they were to do it asap, it would save them costs later down the road, and reap the rewards sooner.

[RougeUnderoos]

I don't quite get the hate towards Winnipeg. Maybe I don't pay enough attention to the "bad posters" to feel that the team should be packed up and sent back to some American city that doesn't care, but personally I'm happy another team is in Canada. If their ticket sales are going well, good.

Sports is about rivalries, and I'll never feel any sense of rivalry with some team in Kansas City or Seattle. The Coyotes have been in Phoenix for almost twenty years now and it's hard to get up hate for them when nobody in Phoenix cares about them.

Another thing I don't get is the recent air of self-satisfaction around here about how other teams are no good. I'm happy with how the Flames are playing, all things considered, but this is the fifth year in a row they aren't going to make the playoffs... I mean really, who are we?

[Jets4Life]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't quite get the hate towards Winnipeg. Maybe I don't pay enough attention to the "bad posters" to feel that the team should be packed up and sent back to some American city that doesn't care, but personally I'm happy another team is in Canada. If their ticket sales are going well, good.

Sports is about rivalries, and I'll never feel any sense of rivalry with some team in Kansas City or Seattle. The Coyotes have been in Phoenix for almost twenty years now and it's hard to get up hate for them when nobody in Phoenix cares about them.

Well said.

I am the biggest supporter of the return of the Nordiques. I would love to see "The battle of Quebec" again. These rivalries were as intense as the BOA. It seems like Quebec could be granted a franchise by 2015-16.

[BigNumbers]

Is this Winnipeg Puck?

[Julio]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Plus, the size of the MTS Centre has made it far more versatile as a non-hockey venue (it can act as a mid-size and large concert venue, something few arenas can adequately do), to the point where it has been #3 in non-sporting event attendance in the country (behind only the ACC and Bell Centre). The size of MTS is an advantage to TNSE, not a disadvantage.

It has in the past been #3 in Canada, but part of that is a combination of there not being a good venue in Winnipeg for arena sized shows to go to before the MTS Centre opened, and there not being any non theatre sized competing venue in the area. MTS Centre gets concerts that in Calgary would go to the Corral, in Vancouver to the Pacific Coliseum, and in Toronto to a venue like Ricoh, where the Marlies play.
The last numbers I saw (2012) had MTS at 6th in Canada, behind every NHL venue except the Dome, and they haven't been in the top 5 since 2008, despite having little or no competition, and more open dates than almost any other NHL arena