Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

New CBA or Lockout? "All things CBA"

Recommended Posts

Besides attendance there is profitability too. Not sure what the balance sheet has looked like the past couple of years; but I remember back when the Canes went to the Conference finals somebody saying they usually only make a profit if they get to the 2nd round of the Playoffs.

Of course, NJ seems to have financial problems too. Wonder if any of the bottom 4 or 5 teams in attendance make a profit. I really hope there's no real talk of contraction at the CBA. I'd rather see moving teams to better markets in the same geographic region, ie: Phoenix to Seattle, etc.

Profit isn't everything. The teams are generally all going up in value, so although they may operate at a loss, they can eventually be sold for profit... Unless they goof up and hose the league, which if you ask me, they are in danger of doing if they keep playing labor-issue games.

I think contraction talk came from the Phoenix situation. There's still rumblings of the league holding contraction over the players' heads, with it centered on Phoenix. Since the league owns Phoenix, they could make more money contracting, then re-expanding later (via entry fees) than the profit they'd make selling. Bettman says he doesn't want to do that, but you never know. With Quebec ready in a few years now that they have solid arena plans, it would be awfully convenient to drop to 29 for a year or two while they build, then soak the rabid Quebecers for the entry fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the corporate accounts/sponsorships in addition to the ticket sales that drive a market's value. The Cane's have long term commitments with the arena, tv contracts and some corporate sponsors so if they hold up their end of the deal and put a competitive product on the ice, the ticket sales will steadily increase as this market has proved over and over again. There is plenty of money to spend in this market but people are very smart about how they invest their entertainment dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think the Canes have a couple of other advantages.

One: they are the only top level professional sports franchise this side of Charlotte, and will be for the foreseeable future.

Two: hockey is a great sport that is not at all covered by any product of our near professional sports University teams. This area is obsessed with college sports especially basketball and football, but this is an entirely different thing being played here at the highest level in the world. It is a great product. I would rather go to an NHL game than any other professional sport. This game is so fast, especially in person, and there is so much honest action that the teams change while playing.

Football and basketball, I'd just as soon go college, especially around here.

I agree with Super Dave's point that is related to that, the best way to fill the arena is to just get some people out to a game, especially a good one. Then, you want to lock them in? Get them to a playoff game.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that contraction would be a factor if the league decided to go to a more thorough revenue sharing model. I would think that the "haves" would love to drop a couple of the "have nots" if and when it comes to sharing their money. I certainly don't think it would come to 5 or 6 teams (I did read that as a suggestion somewhere), but I can certainly see a scenario where a couple of teams get contracted. I think that those attendance figures I talked about would factor in and my point was that the Canes have been much closer to the cut line than I would like to see. Hopefully the additions in this off season would help with that.

One question that I have about the attendance numbers that are published is are they actual fans in attendance or are they ticket sales? No show fans don't spend any money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know where this talk of NHL "contraction" came from. Does anybody really think the NHL is going to give up 6 television markets by eliminating teams? Does anybody think with Seattle, Quebec, 2 sites in Ontario, Kansas City, Las Vegas and even Hartford all being mentioned as sites for relocation or expansion this league is going to become smaller?

We will see teams move in the next few years but we won't see less teams. Nobody should confuse Carolina or Nashville NHL markets with Atlanta. The Canes are in Raleigh for a long time.

IMO, the only viable market ready for an NHL franchise is Quebec. They are building a new arena, and they have a fanbase waiting for it. Kansas City has the arena but I am not convinced they have much of a fanbase waiting for that chance. Seattle, meh...they'd need an arena and while they have supported junior hockey ok that's not nearly the same price point as you'd see for an NHL game. Hamilton?!?! I don't think Toronto will let that happen.

I don't think we'll see contraction. But I think relocation is a very real and distinct possibility. The success of Winnipeg is certainly something the players wouldn't mind seeing repeated with markets that may be struggling in the U.S. The players will want this because it will give them a better chance to receive the escrow portion of their paychecks if that part of the CBA is maintained.

Markets in trouble? Phoenix, Columbus, NY Islanders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that contraction would be a factor if the league decided to go to a more thorough revenue sharing model. I would think that the "haves" would love to drop a couple of the "have nots" if and when it comes to sharing their money. I certainly don't think it would come to 5 or 6 teams (I did read that as a suggestion somewhere), but I can certainly see a scenario where a couple of teams get contracted. I think that those attendance figures I talked about would factor in and my point was that the Canes have been much closer to the cut line than I would like to see. Hopefully the additions in this off season would help with that.

One question that I have about the attendance numbers that are published is are they actual fans in attendance or are they ticket sales? No show fans don't spend any money.

I am 100% certain its about tickets sold as opposed to people coming through the turnstiles. You're right, those fans that are not actually there don't spend any money. Yet'd I'd point out those concessions are not NHL revenues, they go to the respective team owners. NHL merchandise though, most of that $$ goes to the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the only viable market ready for an NHL franchise is Quebec. They are building a new arena, and they have a fanbase waiting for it. Kansas City has the arena but I am not convinced they have much of a fanbase waiting for that chance. Seattle, meh...they'd need an arena and while they have supported junior hockey ok that's not nearly the same price point as you'd see for an NHL game. Hamilton?!?! I don't think Toronto will let that happen.

Yep. Quebec is foaming at the mouth. I don't see any foaming in K.C.

Buffalo is another impediment to Hamilton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 100% certain its about tickets sold as opposed to people coming through the turnstiles. You're right, those fans that are not actually there don't spend any money. Yet'd I'd point out those concessions are not NHL revenues, they go to the respective team owners. NHL merchandise though, most of that $ goes to the league.

Concessions actually go to the arena and the team. Merchandise is a split with the bulk of the $ going to the league. You both have it right, ticket count is based on sold tickets only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the only viable market ready for an NHL franchise is Quebec. They are building a new arena, and they have a fanbase waiting for it. Kansas City has the arena but I am not convinced they have much of a fanbase waiting for that chance. Seattle, meh...they'd need an arena and while they have supported junior hockey ok that's not nearly the same price point as you'd see for an NHL game. Hamilton?!?! I don't think Toronto will let that happen.

I don't think we'll see contraction. But I think relocation is a very real and distinct possibility. The success of Winnipeg is certainly something the players wouldn't mind seeing repeated with markets that may be struggling in the U.S. The players will want this because it will give them a better chance to receive the escrow portion of their paychecks if that part of the CBA is maintained.

Markets in trouble? Phoenix, Columbus, NY Islanders

I agree with most of what you say. You may be under selling Seattle a little. The thinking is that the close proximity to British Columbia would help fill the stands. Without a ready to move in arena Seattle would still be a few years off. Quebec looks like a natural after their new arena is complete and I guess they could use the old arena in the interim.

The league could add two teams through expansion in the foreseeable future.But not now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what you say. You may be under selling Seattle a little. The thinking is that the close proximity to British Columbia would help fill the stands. Without a ready to move in arena Seattle would still be a few years off. Quebec looks like a natural after their new arena is complete and I guess they could use the old arena in the interim.

The league could add two teams through expansion in the foreseeable future.But not now.

I would say the British Columbia thing would only come into play for the games they play against Vancouver, beyond that...why would you go to Seattle to watch a game if they're not playing the Canucks. If they're really depending on British Columbians to make up the difference to make Seattle viable then I think they need to have their head examined. I wouldn't want to deal with the border crossing there. Its not like the old days anymore where you just wave at the guy in the booth and drive across. You would have one helluva log jam.

I think the idea sounds good on the surface but when you get down to it, its not a real feasible business model IMO.

Either way, most of the money teams have come from ticket sales and concessions. Merchandise, just a pittance. I know Forbes has a percentage of revenues per team which tracks just how much the proportion of a team's total revenues is from tickets. I know for the Wild its 47%, but for other clubs its almost 55% while others its as low as 40% so you have some significant variation there. Certain markets are far more dependent upon it.

Here's the Forbes article...click on any team and get their revenue specifics (or at least's Forbes' estimates of that)

Forbes Team Valuation link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to agree about Seattle. Vancouver is too close.

I used to live there. Despite being close to Canada this is not a hockey town at all. Unlike Raleigh with lots of relocated Yankee's the Pacific NW is a different demographic. Sure it's miserable in the Winter, but not a cold frozen winter wonderland kind of miserable, it's a wet drizzling chilled to the bone never see the sun kind of miserable.

Don't see them beating us for a franchise, that's for sure.

If our revenue comes mainly from ticket sales and concessions, this is going to be a good year.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first pre-season game is just about seven weeks away. what kind of window is there to get the agreement signed before pre-season games are affected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are keep meeting until early September. They said they have 600 pages in the new CBA for the NHLPA. They are agreeing on a lot of things and are getting closer to a decision. I don't think that their will be a lock out specially with all these long term contract signings this off season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are keep meeting until early September. They said they have 600 pages in the new CBA for the NHLPA. They are agreeing on a lot of things and are getting closer to a decision. I don't think that their will be a lock out specially with all these long term contract signings this off season.

The NHL players would be stupid to change too much of the current CBA. They've made out like bandits, even despite the 24% rollback. I think a lockout is less likely, but it still could occur. The smaller markets are really feeling the pressure of even going up to the salary floor these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it will last long either if there will be one. That's why I think that there will not be one. To close to the season to start. I don't think that the players should change to much anyways either because they already get a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman says that if both the League owners and NHLPA don't come together by September 15th they will be locked out. I really hope this doesn't happen.

Edited by JDMayo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been ignoring this topic with the hopes that it would go away... but I read an article that is full of negativity and doubt for the up coming season. I am getting really worried about the 2012-2013 season...

Well, on the bright side, if there is a lockout, just remember who wont the Cup after the last one... that's a good omen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nasty term lock-out has now been used. Right now I see it as a way to pressure the Players Association to hurry up and make a counter proposal. In another 2 weeks it becomes a tactic to pressure the players to accept a deal.

Bettman offered a response."We start from the premise that the fundamental proposal, our initial proposal, relates to the fact that we need to be paying out less in player costs," he said. "

Makes you wonder why owners are throwing around insane money this off-season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman should be tarred and feathered if he allows another lockout! Seriously, if this happens, the NHL should just fold because the public will NEVER flock to it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman should be tarred and feathered if he allows another lockout! Seriously, if this happens, the NHL should just fold because the public will NEVER flock to it anymore.

I've said that about so many sports so many times but fans always come back. Sometimes it takes a while but they come back.

There is still plenty of time to work something out. I am just surprised Bettman played the lockout threat so early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman should be tarred and feathered if he allows another lockout! Seriously, if this happens, the NHL should just fold because the public will NEVER flock to it anymore.

I don't think Bettman can force owners and/or players to accept one thing or another. If it does happen, it will be on both the players and the owners more then anyone imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does he have to lock them out for a whole year? I don't get that. That is how they lost the network with ESPN. I mean c'mon it really hurts. We have several weeks tell they sign a new deal. I really hope they can. I don't want them to lock out the players 5 days before my birthday I want to be watching hockey by then. Specially canes pre-season games on the website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want them to lock out the players 5 days before my birthday I want to be watching hockey by then.

Even worse, on my birthday :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...