Coyotes for sale again? Possible buyer in Houston - Page 4 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

jaydub74 · 12-02-2021, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan!

Nobody cares about Quebec City..

Fin

I may be in the minority but I would far prefer to stay in Canada and play in QC vs Houston. No contest, I don’t see the draw to living in the states at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reaper · 12-02-2021, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames1217

How many people in Houston care about hockey?

It's not about how many people care about hockey (hockey participation is high in Texas though); it's about how much corporate money is available. Fans in the stands is only one part of the viability equation.

Jordan! · 12-02-2021, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaydub74

I may be in the minority but I would far prefer to stay in Canada and play in QC vs Houston. No contest, I don’t see the draw to living in the states at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's about population, and economy. Not about love of hockey per capita. More Canadians need to understand this

Flames1217 · 12-02-2021, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan!

It's about population, and economy. Not about love of hockey per capita. More Canadians need to understand this

You need fans though.

No matter how big the city is, if no one's cares about hockey in the area then no one cares.

I understand building the game in places where fans are less likely to be present (such as Houston) but if it was only about economy and population there would be a big switch in the teams who are the most profitable.

timun · 12-02-2021, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Expats alone don't come close to making a franchise viable IMO.

Precisely my point. "Number of Canadian expats" is an awful metric to make any business decisions with respect to plunking down a hockey team in a city. All the reasons people in this thread are saying Houston is a good potential hockey market are the exact same reasons that the Jets moved to Phoenix in 1996. It's silly.

Part of Jack Kent Cooke's justification for going after the LA expansion team in the mid-'60s was because Southern California had hundreds of thousands of Canadian expats. Asked years later about the Kings' tepid attendance, he was quoted saying: "They told me there were 300,000 Canadians who’d moved to Southern California. How was I to know that they were the 300,000 Canadians who didn’t like hockey?".

Dan Reeves, who owned the NFL's Rams, the WHL's (pro league, not the current major junior league) Blades, and exclusive lease rights to operate a hockey team out of the LA Memorial Sports Arena (where the Blades and Cooke's Lakers played), was actually the favourite to win the rights to the LA NHL franchise. Cooke—a Canadian himself—cockamamied his way into the franchise rights with that "lots of Canadian expats here!" business plan, but the real reason he won was that he decided to build The Forum in Inglewood and financed it himself. He took all the dickery over the rights to play at the Memorial Sports Arena right out of the equation, and moved the Lakers to The Forum too to spite the Coliseum Commission. The Forum would go on to be the dominant arena venue in the LA metropolitan area, while the Memorial Sports Arena hosted the also-rans of pro sports (Clippers, WHA Sharks, ABA Stars, etc.).

JackIsBack · 12-02-2021, 02:20 PM

For some reason Bettman has always wanted the team to remain in Phoenix (or Arizona)... I have no idea why as it's always been a failure revenue wise. I think maybe because so many Canadians spend the winters there and the thought is that Phoenix would or could attract a wide mix of fans like Las Vegas does now - but I think a move to Houston (or similar city in that quadrant) would be best. Sorry Quebec, no way the league even looks at moving the team to the Eastern Conference.

Speaking of Las Vegas - I think that since there is a team there now that does attract a wide range of fans, this will eliminates Bettman's objections to moving the team away from Arizona.

My bet - Coyotes are Houston bound.

timun · 12-02-2021, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackIsBack

For some reason Bettman has always wanted the team to remain in Phoenix (or Arizona)... I have no idea why

Quote:

Originally Posted by timun

Quote:

Originally Posted by getbak

With the Coyotes situation, you had a city in Glendale that had played the game and did what they were asked to do, so pulling out and leaving would not have been a good look. Also, at the time, the Coyotes lease with Glendale was said to be one of the strongest arena leases a city had ever signed and came with pretty significant penalties if the team moved (those have subsequently been negotiated away).

The league didn't like the way Ballsilie had tried to do an end-run around their ownership rules, so they also dug their heels in for that reason. If he had been able to get away with it, it could have thrown the league into chaos for years.

If Ballsilie had played by the rules a little better -- like Chipman did -- who knows what might have happened? The Toronto and Buffalo territorial rights issue was also a problem for Ballsilie, so it would always have been a battle.

Generally, the league has always preferred to keep teams in their current cities and will make every effort to see that happen so long as there are owners willing to own the team in that city. For better or worse, for the last decade, there's always been someone who thinks they can make Phoenix a viable market.

This, a thousand times over. People whine and whine "How come the NHL tries so hard to keep the Coyotes in Arizona?!", and this is why. The City of Glendale played ball, they did everything the League/Coyotes asked of them: they spent a boatload of money building an arena for them, they gave them a sweetheart deal on the lease/operating agreement. If the Coyotes were allowed to just bail on that market it would screw the entire North American pro sports industry up. If the Coyotes abandoned Glendale years ago every municipality on the continent would balk at ever publicly financing an arena again.

That's why.

Strange Brew · 12-02-2021, 03:06 PM

Keeping franchises in their current cities is a huge factor in why expansion fees became so lucrative. Bettman is not an idiot.

Jordan! · 12-02-2021, 03:07 PM

This story is complete and utter Cowpucky

cdnsir · 12-02-2021, 03:24 PM

Waterloo, the tech capital of Canada, deserves their own NHL franchise. Anyone know how to tag RIM Jim?

DiracSpike · 12-02-2021, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan!

It's about population, and economy. Not about love of hockey per capita. More Canadians need to understand this

Exactly. Houston has the fifth largest metro area in the states, one of the largest growth rates in the US, HQ of 24 Fortune 500 companies, and is untapped market with a natural rivalry with Dallas and brings total geographic alignment to divisions now that the coyotes are in the central. QC has..............passionate fans? What's the dollar value on that? Everyone in QC already watches hockey. Even for a Canadian market it's a backwater, which is certainly saying something. A smaller version of Winnipeg where everyone speaks French, yeesh. The only people who should hope for that move to happen are us and Jets Oilers Sabres and Blue Jackets fans as that team would jump all of us to the front of the line on NTC contracts instead of yet another warm weather no state tax market.

Strange Brew · 12-02-2021, 04:31 PM

Everyone focuses on the city but let's remember the single biggest criteria for a sports franchise. A willing owner with the financial wherewithal to buy a team.

Cities don't actually buy these teams.

powderjunkie · 12-02-2021, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Keeping franchises in their current cities is a huge factor in why expansion fees became so lucrative. Bettman is not an idiot.

Yup, but we are now in a brief lull before the next bunch of franches will be extorting their cities for new arena deals (ANA, SJ, OTT...maybe VAN, TBL, CBJ, NAS etc. not too long after that).

There is an opportunity to get relocation fees and make the threat 'credible' again. It will really boil down to how much places like Tempe and Ottawa are willing to play ball...I don't think the league will be as resistant to movement now that they've reached 32.

Strange Brew · 12-02-2021, 06:30 PM

32 is probably a number that means more to fans and followers of the sport than it does to owners. Especially if the payoff is $800 million plus in expansion fees.

I do hear you on the relo threat credibility but really, has working out arena deals been much of a problem?

PeteMoss · 12-03-2021, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

TV deals also factor in. Houston is a large market so it would be a lateral move from Phoenix but a move to Quebec would add a market for Rogers while subtracting a large audience from ESPN and Turner. Quebec City will very likely never happen in our lifetimes as professional sports is just too high stakes now.

This is often a talking point but I just don't think it passes the sniff test. How many people in Arizona that are watching nationally televised games (likely a small number) are going to bail if the coyotes leave?

Just seems like too tiny a number to care about. Now if the coyotes were a team that had stars and actually ever had some non local appeal, I could understand the point.

powderjunkie · 12-03-2021, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

32 is probably a number that means more to fans and followers of the sport than it does to owners. Especially if the payoff is $800 million plus in expansion fees.

I do hear you on the relo threat credibility but really, has working out arena deals been much of a problem?

The one thing about expansion vs. relocation is that you're cutting another piece into the pie - ie. 1/33rd share vs. 1/32 share of things like tv deals, corp partnerships, etc.

Whereas a relocation fee is essentially 'free money' with no long-term caveats. The league can do the math and decide which is better at any given time (of course also considering other less-tangible factors/long-term plans, etc.)