Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Scary Eloranta]

^^^ Bang on. Without all the new luxury boxes new arenas like Edm, Det etc have - the Flames lose out on a pretty big revenue stream.

I still hate Bettman though.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

you're kind of proving bettman's point. if the flames have more fans going to the games than Edmonton for example, why are they then not making more money than edmonton?
money being left on the table with the old arena.

That sounds like something the team's owners should address.

[Bigfeet24]

‘The leagues oldest arena’ not exactly on the fence lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nickerjones]

Originally Posted by New Era

There's Houston. Metro population 6.313M. GDP of $526B. Home of the NBA's Rockets. Natural rival for Dallas.


There's Oklahoma City. Metro population 1.373M. GDP of $72.B. Home of the NBA Thunder. Natural rival for Dallas. No real hockey tradition.

Important to note that both of these markets have had pro hockey teams and they failed. Yes they were AHL teams but pro hockey none the less. Hell Oklahoma City had trouble getting their attendance over 2,000 when tickets were $10. I'm not sure how viable either of these markets would be.

[yourbestfriend]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

Important to note that both of these markets have had pro hockey teams and they failed. Yes they were AHL teams but pro hockey none the less. Hell Oklahoma City had trouble getting their attendance over 2,000 when tickets were $10. I'm not sure how viable either of these markets would be.

Houston has everything going for it to be the next city to get an NHL team after Seattle.
- an owner who is willing and actively wants an NHL team
- 2nd most Fortune500 headquarters located in the US
- 4th largest population in the US
- an already established hockey fan base in Texas
- a relatively new arena

Also, a 2nd tier professional sports league like the AHL is not a draw for anybody. An NHL team coming to your city is a completely different animal (ie. Vegas, Seattle). Now that the ownership team in Houston is changed, it is a real possibility to see a team like the Coyotes relocating there.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

you're kind of proving bettman's point. if the flames have more fans going to the games than Edmonton for example, why are they then not making more money than edmonton?
money being left on the table with the old arena.

The Oilers last year bought in 20 million more dollars and had a 24 million dollar operating income versus the Flames 8.

They went from 117 million in revenue in 2016 to 151 in 2017

Calgary went from 130 million in 2015 to 121 in 2016 to 129 last year.

So Edmonton showed a pretty significant increase in revenue and operating income when they moved to the new building.

Calgary's operating income in the last three years has dropped from 21 million to 5 million.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

Also, a 2nd tier professional sports league like the AHL is not a draw for anybody. An NHL team coming to your city is a completely different animal (ie. Vegas, Seattle). Now that the ownership team in Houston is changed, it is a real possibility to see a team like the Coyotes relocating there.

Why on earth would you relocate a team when you can probably get upwards of $700M in expansion fees by granted them a new franchise???

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

you're kind of proving bettman's point. if the flames have more fans going to the games than Edmonton for example, why are they then not making more money than edmonton?
money being left on the table with the old arena.

It's not being left on the table. It's being left in the wallets of the tax payers and fans.

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

Why on earth would you relocate a team when you can probably get upwards of $700M in expansion fees by granted them a new franchise???

Because we're already at 32 teams with Seattle's expansion bid all but completed. Why wait 20 years for another expansion process that may or may not happen?

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir

Because we're already at 32 teams with Seattle's expansion bid all but completed. Why wait 20 years for another expansion process that may or may not happen?

The league has shown that they are perfectly fine not having an even number of teams.

What makes you think Houston's going to take 20 years? They already have an area and a deep-pocketed owner who has been pretty clear that he has an interest in an NHL franchise.

I think the NHL's tv deal with NBC runs out in 2020-21. Houston will be a huge leverage piece in their next deal and likely helps get them a team within 5 years.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

The league has shown that they are perfectly fine not having an even number of teams.

What makes you think Houston's going to take 20 years? They already have an area and a deep-pocketed owner who has been pretty clear that he has an interest in an NHL franchise.

I think the NHL's tv deal with NBC runs out in 2020-21. Houston will be a huge leverage piece in their next deal and likely helps get them a team within 5 years.

US National TV deals are irrelevant today as a source of revenue, and will be even more irrelevant in 20-21. They did well to get a 200 million a year deal, adding Houston does nothing for ratings or carriage fees. The Canadian deal is twice that and based on 7 Canadian teams and would probably be more of an impact.

Local TV deals are where the real money is for the moment, but that money is going to dry up by the time Houston gets a franchise.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

US National TV deals are irrelevant today as a source of revenue, and will be even more irrelevant in 20-21. They did well to get a 200 million a year deal, adding Houston does nothing for ratings or carriage fees. The Canadian deal is twice that and based on 7 Canadian teams and would probably be more of an impact.

Local TV deals are where the real money is for the moment, but that money is going to dry up by the time Houston gets a franchise.

The NHL got bent over when they signed the NBC deal, but had to take it.

They won't do the same next time.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

The NHL got bent over when they signed the NBC deal, but had to take it.

They won't do the same next time.

Based on what? NBC is not making any money on that deal in advertising revenue based on the ratings the NHL gets. The only reason they paid as much as they could was for leverage to get NBC sportsnet carried on cable and satellite and cash in on the carriage fees. That model is dead.

[442scotty]

If it keeps snowing like it is the saddle dome roof will collapse and that will force some action between the city and the flames

[redforever]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Presumably, you weren't here in the 80s. That bust was worse. Much worse.

While that might be the case, at least there was a positive climate for attracting business when things turned around. That is not the case now.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

The NHL got bent over when they signed the NBC deal, but had to take it.

They won't do the same next time.

Why not? Its not like they have the leverage to make sure it never happens again. They're a minor league game, NBC can take them or leave them.

It appears at the moment that the culprit for the terrible production value of current NHL broadcasts is the fact that they were in overpaid in this deal in which you're saying they got screwed.

The broadcaster thought they'd be more profitable than they are and is now having to cut costs to make ends meet.

[CMPunk]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

Important to note that both of these markets have had pro hockey teams and they failed. Yes they were AHL teams but pro hockey none the less. Hell Oklahoma City had trouble getting their attendance over 2,000 when tickets were $10. I'm not sure how viable either of these markets would be.

I didn't think hockey in Houston failed, the Wild pulled the team out of there because they couldn't get a lease agreement.

[Amethyst]

If this city is going downhill fast and all the rich people are leaving, it would be pretty foolish to spend our final dollars on a fancy arena. Who would buy those super expensive tickets anyway?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CMPunk

I didn't think hockey in Houston failed, the Wild pulled the team out of there because they couldn't get a lease agreement.

This is correct. Les Alexander didn’t want a minor league hockey team using up valuable dates in his nice arena.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

The NHL got bent over when they signed the NBC deal, but had to take it.

They won't do the same next time.

Conditions are probably worse looking ahead than they were when the deal was signed. Buyers remorse all over the place with other league deals as cable cutting continues, NHL has the lowest demand and unlucky timing for the next one.