BOG Meetings: Bettman optimistic 23/24 salary cap could go up to $86 million

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It sounds like hope that the pro sports leagues would acquire the Bally Sports nets has faded, and they are likely heading to a fairly imminent bankruptcy.

https://nypost.com/2022/12/18/mlb-nb...works-sources/

That would leave 12 teams without TV deals or at least severely diminished deals. Probably 500-750 million in combined revenue will evaporate when that happens, and there aren't any obvious solutions to recover that revenue that was built on an unsustainable carriage fee model.

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

That sounds way too high for a single year. The article references $60M/yr for the Padres...who I'm sure aren't an amazing viewership draw, but they are the only game in town for a 3M+ metro area. With twice as many games.

Maybe 4 of those NHL contracts are somewhat lucrative: LAK/DET/STL/MIN

The other 8 are probably pretty cheap: ANA/DAL/ARI/FLA/TBL/CAR/CBJ/NAS

And if those contracts do all evaporate, they will be replaced with something, even if it's a lot cheaper. I suspect these regional deals also include in-rink advertising and an exclusive gambling partnership. So even if the TV rights sell cheaper, they can still sell those rink boards and partner with Draft Kings/etc

I wonder if Amazon would consider getting into the RSN mix to pickup this upcoming vacancy? Now that they've got NFL broadcasts, I'd imagine their long term goal is to do multiple sports.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A moral and ethical obligation, LOL

It's a business, and they are trying to maximize their revenues - like every business

True, and I don’t necessarily even fault them for doing their best to make money but it just seems like the focus could be shared on the value side of the equation a little more too. I dunno, I probably can’t describe what I mean well on a message board.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

True, and I don’t necessarily even fault them for doing their best to make money but it just seems like the focus could be shared on the value side of the equation a little more too. I dunno, I probably can’t describe what I mean well on a message board.

Can you provide an example of what you mean by the bolded?

(sincere question)

[Poster]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A moral and ethical obligation, LOL

It's a business, and they are trying to maximize their revenues - like every business

When the stole the season from the fans and took 100’s of millions from the players, they took on the moral and ethical obligation to fulfil their promise of growing revenue for their partners!

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by Jiggy

NHL games are a lot more fun to watch now than the 90's and 2000's. It's about playing with pace and having the puck in the offensive zone instead of sitting back and playing defense. There are a ton of great games every week where in the 90's and 2000's the games would be over if a team had a 2-1 or 3-1 lead.

In 2006 when the league came back from the lockout, the salary cap was half...you will have a hard time convincing me that the entertainment value today - even when correcting for quality of team and inflation...

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I wonder if Amazon would consider getting into the RSN mix to pickup this upcoming vacancy? Now that they've got NFL broadcasts, I'd imagine their long term goal is to do multiple sports.

I wonder that as well. The even bigger question may become game production...I don't have Centre Ice, but AFAIK they simply rebroadcast local feeds? Is it even possible to go back to the days of a local non-sports affiliate (like 2&7) broadcasting the games?

Or will the NHL/specific teams have to take on the broadcast themselves and figure out other modes of distribution (Pay-per-view or otherwise)? TBH I don't even understand how things are now working in the US between ESPN+/Centre-Ice/etc

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Can you provide an example of what you mean by the bolded?

(sincere question)

I think the main issue for me is the game management side which seems evident but will of course be impossible to ever get anyone to admit or pin down. Seems like refs are definitely encouraged to keep things close if possible, and to me that detracts from the sport itself and sort of cheapens it.

Growing up I was a huge fan of jerseys and I know this is a non-issue for most fans but just for me personally it sort of cheapens these brands and iconic sweaters to have ads on them. I understand that other major pro sports do it but I just don’t get why this was absolutely necessary. I used to actually collect jerseys as a kid and now kids growing up will be buying jerseys as billboards eventually, which, okay, whatever. It isn’t a big deal just kinda lame.

Owners grind every city they are in playing on the emotions of fans to extract tax revenue for their private businesses. This is sort of a sleazy way to extort the emotional aspect of the sport, and to me again would only lead to massively increased prices on tickets and food and beer / overall experience, which reduces the value for fans. The other issue with this is because this is a carrot offered by the league to provide things like all-star games, draft, special events, Calgary won’t ever host these again unless they follow through on the taxpayer extortion playing out, like all the other cities.

A 10 year deal with Rogers, the worst company on earth, has been endured by fans only because it’s mandatory to watch NHL hockey. While I’m sure they provided the best bid in the tendering process, I am not impressed like Rogers shareholders would be with their ability to cut costs all over the place. Broadcast quality is an issue here and reduced value to fans.

I am sure I can come up with more but the biggest problem for me is compromising the integrity of the sport because you have a business and want to make a bunch of money. Like, no, if the game is destined to be 8-0 let things play out the way they normally would. We don’t need the invisible hand of the Toronto war room creating a scenario where McDavid and the Oilers get artificially propped up when they should be getting blown out 6-0 and their ####ty D exposed for what it is.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I think the main issue for me is the game management side which seems evident but will of course be impossible to ever get anyone to admit or pin down. Seems like refs are definitely encouraged to keep things close if possible, and to me that detracts from the sport itself and sort of cheapens it.

Growing up I was a huge fan of jerseys and I know this is a non-issue for most fans but just for me personally it sort of cheapens these brands and iconic sweaters to have ads on them. I understand that other major pro sports do it but I just don’t get why this was absolutely necessary. I used to actually collect jerseys as a kid and now kids growing up will be buying jerseys as billboards eventually, which, okay, whatever. It isn’t a big deal just kinda lame.

Owners grind every city they are in playing on the emotions of fans to extract tax revenue for their private businesses. This is sort of a sleazy way to extort the emotional aspect of the sport, and to me again would only lead to massively increased prices on tickets and food and beer / overall experience, which reduces the value for fans. The other issue with this is because this is a carrot offered by the league to provide things like all-star games, draft, special events, Calgary won’t ever host these again unless they follow through on the taxpayer extortion playing out, like all the other cities.

A 10 year deal with Rogers, the worst company on earth, has been endured by fans only because it’s mandatory to watch NHL hockey. While I’m sure they provided the best bid in the tendering process, I am not impressed like Rogers shareholders would be with their ability to cut costs all over the place. Broadcast quality is an issue here and reduced value to fans.

I am sure I can come up with more but the biggest problem for me is compromising the integrity of the sport because you have a business and want to make a bunch of money. Like, no, if the game is destined to be 8-0 let things play out the way they normally would. We don’t need the invisible hand of the Toronto war room creating a scenario where McDavid and the Oilers get artificially propped up when they should be getting blown out 6-0 and their ####ty D exposed for what it is.

Game management has nothing to do with new revenue sources

I am not a fan of ads on jerseys either

Not going to get into the arena debate here

Rogers being garbage isn't on the NHL. They sell their TV rites to whoever pays the most. Do you think they are responsible for determining which broadcasters are worthy?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Game management has nothing to do with new revenue sources

I am not a fan of ads on jerseys either

Not going to get into the arena debate here

Rogers being garbage isn't on the NHL. They sell their TV rites to whoever pays the most. Do you think they are responsible for determining which broadcasters are worthy?

I think it does because if games are more “exciting” because they are “closer” it leads to more eyeballs ergo more revenue. What do you think though or why do you disagree?

An ally. Good.

That’s fair.

No this is a good point but will be interesting to see what happens when the contract is up. If I was the NHL I would be concerned about quality minimums though.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This may not be popular but a rising salary cap and increasing revenues are bad from a fan perspective.

NHL teams don’t need more money. NHL players don’t need more lucrative contracts. Fans don’t need higher prices to access pro hockey or enjoy an event in person, or support their team, etc. We don’t need ads all over the ####ing place constantly and we don’t need gambling ads shoved down ur throat ad nausem. And lastly and most importantly, we don’t need absolutely everything that the NHL does be solely and exclusively for money and hopefully they can actually divert just 1% of their attention and time and care to actually making the game good. Better reffing, not managing outcomes for maximum entertainment and more money.

So when I see this all I think is damn, that sucks.

Supply and demand determines the price of everything, why should hockey be any different?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Supply and demand determines the price of everything, why should hockey be any different?

Because you shouldn't rake your fans over the coals and bleed them dry for every single penny just because you can. It's a terrible way to build a business if you price out all the families. I'm trying to understand your angle here. Are you a wealthy shareholder with a big stake in the nhl? If not why on Earth would you want to participate in your own fleecing and defend this hore####?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

Because you shouldn't rake your fans over the coals and bleed them dry for every single penny just because you can. It's a terrible way to build a business if you price out all the families. I'm trying to understand your angle here. Are you a wealthy shareholder with a big stake in the nhl? If not why on Earth would you want to participate in your own fleecing and defend this hore####?

Pick a lane - are they maximizing revenues or are they pricing out all the families?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Pick a lane - are they maximizing revenues or are they pricing out all the families?

This is a complex one and actually a larger issue but personally I think society writ large needs to shift away from businesses having their sole purpose as making money. There is much more to life than making money. Businesses can be good for their communities and do much more than just spin a profit. Especially businesses that are monopolies or enshrined oligopolies like the NHL or Rogers. They need to be much more than just about making money. In fact I would argue they have an ethical and moral obligation to be highly engaged society contributors- much more than they are now even. For example, preying on young people to get hooked on sports gambling is quite disgusting. Having the balls to say, ya know what, that’s not somewhere we should take our business.

Should we hire these possible rapists (WJHC players) because they’re good at hockey? Ya know what, maybe they don’t deserve the job just because they’re better hockey players. You know, stuff like that.

[Northendzone]

So with the cap potentially going up by about 10% per year we can expect the price of tickets to go up by 12% to 15% per year.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

Because you shouldn't rake your fans over the coals and bleed them dry for every single penny just because you can. It's a terrible way to build a business if you price out all the families. I'm trying to understand your angle here. Are you a wealthy shareholder with a big stake in the nhl? If not why on Earth would you want to participate in your own fleecing and defend this hore####?

Ugh. I'd actually pay more of a premium, and do with many things in my life not to have families / kids around. One of the silliest tropes that always gets trotted out.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

So with the cap potentially going up by about 10% per year we can expect the price of tickets to go up by 12% to 15% per year.

You have it wrong.

The cap goes up when revenues go up.

The revenues go up for a number of reasons including an increase in ticket prices.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

Because you shouldn't rake your fans over the coals and bleed them dry for every single penny just because you can. It's a terrible way to build a business if you price out all the families. I'm trying to understand your angle here. Are you a wealthy shareholder with a big stake in the nhl? If not why on Earth would you want to participate in your own fleecing and defend this hore####?

I can only assume that if you were selling your house, you’d be willing to sell it for way below its FMV to some needy family?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I can only assume that if you were selling your house, you’d be willing to sell it for way below its FMV to some needy family?

You caught him. There’s no such thing as affordable housing to ensure needy families have shelter. Excellent point.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You caught him. There’s no such thing as affordable housing to ensure needy families have shelter. Excellent point.

There is nowhere near enough of it. Waiting lists are years long, and the supply cannot be easily increased because homeowners (who want the value of their property to go up) do not want affordable housing built in their neighbourhoods.

The point stands on its merits.

[Britflamesfan]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

True, and I don’t necessarily even fault them for doing their best to make money but it just seems like the focus could be shared on the value side of the equation a little more too. I dunno, I probably can’t describe what I mean well on a message board.

At some point it will become to expensive for fans to attend live games. The price of a ticket cannot just keep going up. I suspect it is getting close to maximum even now