Houston Rockets owner eyeing NHL franchise?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Young_Guns

There seems to be an obvious conference imbalance with a vacancy out West. If Seattle or Houston got there act together and notified the NHL that they were willing to pay, Bettman would have a franchise there via expansion in a heartbeat.

That said, the Coyotes remain a question mark, and I am not sure what happened with the sale of the Hurricanes. There's always Quebec City, but they are likely to be awarded a relocation if you ask me.

I'm pretty sure the "it has to make sense" that the potential Houston owner is referring to is to not pay $500 million for the team. I know the Seattle guys already said that was a ridiculous number.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by jayswin

What? I haven't looked up the stats recently but they were almost always sold out at Reunion Arena and then sold out the first few seasons at their new arena.

After that they had a few seasons at around 16k+ average and now they're back up again. They've never been near the bottom of the league as far as I know. Could be wrong.

They sure were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ndance_figures

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They sure were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ndance_figures

That shows them at 16th with over 18k per game and selling 97.7% of their arena. Is that your idea of "near the bottom of the league" and struggling?

The Flames through Stars (10th to 16th) all averaged in the 18k range, so ranking them kind of takes away from the fact that they're all neck and neck with very healthy attendance.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by jayswin

That shows them at 16th with over 18k per game and selling 97.7% of their arena. Is that your idea of "near the bottom of the league" and struggling?

The Flames through Stars (10th to 16th) all averaged in the 18k range, so ranking them kind of takes away from the fact that they're all neck and neck with very healthy attendance.

2013 they were bad.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Houston Flames - inaugural season 2022?

They need a more disaster appropriate name.

The Houston Floods.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Very bad idea. Considering the Dallas Stars have had many years where their attendance is near the bottom of the league why on earth would a Houston team do better?

Are you sure? The Stars are as stable a franchise as any.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by jayswin

That shows them at 16th with over 18k per game and selling 97.7% of their arena. Is that your idea of "near the bottom of the league" and struggling?

The Flames through Stars (10th to 16th) all averaged in the 18k range, so ranking them kind of takes away from the fact that they're all neck and neck with very healthy attendance.

Now you are cherry picking good years? There was talk not long ago of them selling off the team because they were not happy with the attendance. The fact is like many sunbelt teams when the team is a contender they draw, when they are not they are at 74% attendance. So you think you can split the Dallas Stars fairweather fan base between two NHL teams down there? Come on man, it is not rocket science that is a bad idea.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Are you sure? The Stars are as stable a franchise as any.

They were just sold in 2011 and Gaglardi was taking about possibly selling two years later because the franchise bleeds money. How is that as stable as any franchise? Seriously, do people just pull stuff out of thin air to make an argument?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza.../#1c032c464098

[Calgary4LIfe]

Well, the NHL is firmly in the "Big 4" group of sports now in North America, but there is a tonne of room for it to grow yet. Houston is the biggest market without an NHL team, so it definitely does make sense. Not only would the revenue of an expansion franchise be helpful (500 million), but even a relocation fee would be as well (200? 300? I am not sure). On top of this, the long-term TV contract deal would most certainly be higher (which is why the NHL has yet to move away from the Phoenix market - even though that team is NOT doing well, the value of having a national TV deal inclusive of Arizona increases the revenue for the NHL IIRC). Houston would be another big add onto a long-term national broadcast deal.

MLS is also pushing in the US. Definitely gaining in popularity there. The NHL revenues are what.. half of the NBA? The NBA is the 3rd on the list from the Big 4 leagues.

I would say that if there is an opportunity to move into the Houston market, the NHL would be incredibly foolish NOT to do so. It would also help to increase exposure in the Texas area, and perhaps even develop a natural rivalry with Dallas.

I really think that the NHL will eventually hit 34 or 36 franchises, simply by entering some of the bigger markets that they do not yet have exposure in (and including the possibility of a 2nd Ontario team, as well as Quebec).

MLB has 30 teams? NFL 32? NBA 30? (might be slightly off here, but it's close). Not so crazy to think about when you factor in the Canadian teams. Take out Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Montreal, and suddenly you are left with only 25 franchises that are competing in markets with the other Big 4 sports. Not all of those markets will be suitable (for instance, I really doubt Milwaukee will ever be looked at), but there does exist some rather large markets that are untapped by the NHL still. I am sure they would love to find a way back into the Atlanta market as well, but they need an owner who is actually willing to make it work. Would be funny to have them there for a third time though.

It is definitely risky, but I do believe that the NHL is intent on increasing their revenues in the US market, and the only way to do that is to expand into these big untapped markets and further grow the game.

Mixed results without question, but I think the expansion that we saw in the last 20 years have proved to be beneficial, including California, Nashville, and for a time, even in Florida (up and down in those markets, but I really think the NHL will do whatever they can to stay in those markets for the long run).

The only reason they left Atlanta the 2nd time was that there was no time to find a new owner in Atlanta and get a building up. Winnipeg got pretty lucky there. In the 2006-07 season, Atlanta (16,240) had a higher attendance than St. Louis (12,520), Chicago (12,727), NYI (12,886), Washington (13,929), NJ (14,176), Boston (14,764), Phoenix (14,988), Nashville (15,259), Florida (15,370). Doesn't scream like a failing organization to me, though when they did lose their best players and started sucking again, interest did dwindle down to 13,469 in their last season - still higher than the Islanders and Phoenix, and only ~200 from Columbus. Still higher than the low point in many successful organizations like Chicago though (12,727 in the 06-07 season), or the Pens (11,877 in the 03-04 season).

To me, it shows that a team - even in established markets - just need to be competitive to keep drawing interest. Washington, Boston, St. Louis and Chicago at the bottom of the heap in the 06-07 season? Carolina was also good up until 2012-13. Once the team started sucking, so did the fan support. However, they had a higher average that year than the Rangers, arguably the 2nd best market in the world, right?

Markets are fickle, but TV contracts are not. To get out of being such a gate-driven league, the NHL needs to expand into these larger markets so that they can get a larger share of TV revenues. I think that is their plan, and the Atlanta owner threw a huge wrench into that plan. Houston may prove to be a very successful way back into it.

If that owner is willing, the NHL will expand into that market ASAP, I would bet. Might be some lean years to start, but the long-term view is probably very palatable for the NHL to take some losses in that market for a while.

[Strange Brew]

If you don't believe hockey should be in hot weather locations the NHL is not going to grow past about 25 teams. You can take out Florida, Tampa, Carolina, Arizona, Dallas, Vegas and the California teams.

Question is whether Houston market would support hockey. The Aeros were reasonably well supported in the AHL but that is minor league. Houston is a very different market than Dallas, and no doubt it would cannibalize some "corporate" attendance from Rockets. But Houston is a big city with many corporate head offices.

[savemedrzaius]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They sure were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ndance_figures

Damn. 2016-2017 season was tough for the Leafs. According to Wikipedia they had 41 home games and the not one person went to a game.

[Poe969]

Tad Brown. Tad? Really? For that reason alone I don't want them to have a team.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They were just sold in 2011 and Gaglardi was taking about possibly selling two years later because the franchise bleeds money. How is that as stable as any franchise? Seriously, do people just pull stuff out of thin air to make an argument?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza.../#1c032c464098

Really no reason to be snotty even if you disagree. Hicks was bleeding money and in financial trouble himself, IIRC. The team was mismanaged and fans were ignoring them. Galglardi righted the ship, the team has decent attendance and enjoys good corporate support. Similar to when they first moved to Dallas. So I consider them stable although admittedly they hit a rough patch. From what I recall, that happens to some hockey franchises.

Back to Houston. That situation has everything the NHL wants, a major market and a deep pockets owner in Fertitta who controls a state of the art arena. If he is serious, I could see a team coming to Houston in the near future. And he's too smart to pay $500 million.

[puckedoff]

Uh oh guys we better pony up for that arena

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

If you don't believe hockey should be in hot weather locations the NHL is not going to grow past about 25 teams. You can take out Florida, Tampa, Carolina, Arizona, Dallas, Vegas and the California teams.

Question is whether Houston market would support hockey. The Aeros were reasonably well supported in the AHL but that is minor league. Houston is a very different market than Dallas, and no doubt it would cannibalize some "corporate" attendance from Rockets. But Houston is a big city with many corporate head offices.

Advantage too is you force the suite owners to buy for both the Rockets and the Floods so you have built in revenue for those. Then, if your club seats are desired make it the same deal. All of the sudden you've got all your suites sold at 8,000 built in expensive season tickets.

Not to mention your overhead becomes significantly lower. Maintenance costs are cut in half, you maybe have 1 or 2 dedicated flood/rockets employees (besides basketball folks) and the rest just toggle.

[Lanny_McDonald]

I said this in another thread about expansion fees. To get an expansion fee you need an owner that is willing to foot the bill. If there is not an owner in the market interested in coughing up the $250-300M expansion, and the league wants to get into that market, relocation is the only other option.

From the last round of expansion talks there were only two teams willing to think about submission of the $10M application fee - Las Vegas and Quebec City. Las Vegas had very deep pockets and was desperate to get a team before the other leagues could push their way into the market. Quebec couldn't come up with the $500M. As a result, Quebec has been suggested the landing place a relocation.

Now, with a $250-300M expansion fee Quebec may again become a serious expansion locale, as might a couple of other cities, including Houston. If the league is smart, they float that and see if they can get parties interested at a lesser cost, but with the knowledge they are going to be selecting from a dramatically smaller talent pool from the existing franchises. If Quebec or Houston steps up, they should then put an expansion team there. I think the reality is that no one is going to pay that much money for a secondary tenant in a building. They will be more inclined to look at relocation and coughing up the $50-60M fee for moving a team.

Frankly, the best option here is to go expansion with Quebec City for 2020, then look at possible relocations, do them at the same time, or in 2021 or 2022. Relocation has some interesting options, including Houston, Seattle, Portland, Kansas City and Oklahoma City. Not primary markets, but locations where owners can use the NHL as a secondary revenue stream and not have to be concerned about being the primary draw. The relocation fee is a lot easier pill to swallow for a owner who is looking at the hockey team as a secondary draw. The established team, and the immediate ability to be competitive is well worth going that route.

[flamesfan1297]

How would the NHL be able to justify having an expansion fee less than 500$ million now though? I'd think Vegas wouldn't be too happy if another expansion team payed 200 million less than they had too

[dissentowner]

Here is the problem, we heard the exact same thing about Arizona and Carolina. Sure, the NHL wants TV deals in those areas for revenue but how does that help an owner who is bleeding millions every year? The same thing was said about Atlanta the second time around and how did that work out? The reality is a decent portion of the Stars fanbase probably comes from Houston and they have a hard time selling out now. So once the shiny new toy factor is over with a Houston team instead of having one team in Dallas that at best draws mid pack attendance you will have two teams drawing bottom 5 attendance. It won't work.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

If you don't believe hockey should be in hot weather locations the NHL is not going to grow past about 25 teams. You can take out Florida, Tampa, Carolina, Arizona, Dallas, Vegas and the California teams.

Sooner this happens the better IMHO. Watching the Ducks Flames last night in the context of the wildfires burning there in October while i was huddled around the stove reminded me how odd it is that there is an ice arena in Anaheim California.

[Backlunds_socks]

Flames aren’t leaving