Fertitta : " Hockey struggles south of the Mason-Dixon Line, and it's a fact"

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Clearly they are thinking about relocating of a team. Only team there is that is dire enough problem is the coyotes. If no relocation then why would he said i don't know instead of giving the standard company line of " we are happy where the teams are at and see relocation of a team any time soon. "

why do you want Arizona relocated, tommy, how would you feel if Bonderman et all elected to go elsewhere other than Seattle, forget the deal and walked away from Seattle Center completely, is that what you want, because you're advocating that narrative when it comes time to relocate Seattle out of pro hockey....

 

[gstommylee]

why dlo you want Arizona relocated, tommy, how would you feel if Bonderman et all elected to go elsewhere other than Seattle, forget the deal and walked away from Seattle Center completely, is that what you want, because you're advocating that narrative when it comes time to relocate Seattle out of pro hockey....

Cause the team has a huge financial mess that isn't resolved any time soon and if Houston wants a team they are gonna get a team via relocation.

This has nothing to do with Seattle. Stop bring up Seattle. It has to do with Houston and the possibility of the coyotes maybe relocating to Houston.

Jermey jacobs said i don't know to a question about relocation. I was going on the thought as to why woudl jacobs say i don't know. Again My thought is they are looking at relocation and again the only team that has pretty dire situation is the coyotes.

I kindly ask you to stop bring up Seattle when Seattle is 100% irrelevant to Jacobs comment.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

This has nothing to do with Seattle. Stop bring up Seattle. It has to do with Houston and the possibility of the coyotes maybe relocating to Houston.

you're the one bringing up Seattle, dude.... even when you were informed none of this has to do with either market, you want to continue that narrative, ppl will call you out on Seattle

 

[gstommylee]

you're the one bringing up Seattle, dude.... even when you were informed none of this has to do with either market, you want to continue that narrative, ppl will call you out on Seattle

I never brought up Seattle as to regards relocation. I was talking about houston and coyotes not Seattle.

Again I ask you kindly to stop putting words into my mouth.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

I never brought up Seattle as to regards relocation. I was talking about houston and coyotes not Seattle.

yet you are advocating the contraction of Arizona, which will not happen.....

 

[gstommylee]

yet you are advocating the contraction of Arizona, which will not happen.....

Cause so far the NHL has so far refuse to do anything about actually improving the situation with that franchise. The team can't not stay put long term in that arena with things remain as they are. Its not sustainable to continue to be losing money and be on a year to year lease. Something has to be done and the NHL shouldn't even be looking at expanding beyond 32 teams when they got a much bigger issue that of the coyotes then maybe possible later on the flames.

Not even the NBA would be doing this. If this was done like the NBA there would still be at 30 teams until coyotes are dealt with and the flames issue dealt with.

 

[canuckfan75]

With the comments by Mr Jacobs today. there is no doubt in my mind that the Coyotes will be in Houston very soon. as early as 2019/2020

 

[Melrose Munch]

That's a different situation. They charged 500m for Vegas for 31. They didn't charge Seattle 450m for 32 they charged 650m for 32.

I'm saying where the issue is if they charge Houston let say 500m for #33 after charging Seattle 650m for #32 and Houston is a much bigger market than Seattle.

Its a different situation now. They need Houston more then seattle, as it is bigger. and a way larger TV market.

I looked at the interview video and no where does Jocab mention expansion. He asked a question about quebec and gave an answer while compared it to Houston in the process. he was asked about relocation which he said i don't know.

What about the prior tweet from today. He mentions houston as next to go through the process.

I would like to know where Jacobs get his numbers because I don’t believe Quebec City is the 105th media market( unless you include Mexico?). It’s usually in the 65-70 range, and Houston 6th or 7th.

Houston is 5th now as of late 2017.

 

[gstommylee]

Its a different situation now. They need Houston more then seattle, as it is bigger. and a way larger TV market.
What about the prior tweet from today. He mentions houston as next to go through the process.


Houston is 5th now as of late 2017.

I assume he got that from the interview. If so i have no idea how he could come the conclusions of expansion. And right now NHL is not looking into expanding into houston. They are looking into Seattle and only Seattle.

No way in the heck NHL will accept a lower expansion fee after they gotten 650m from Seattle.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Cause so far the NHL has so far refuse to do anything about actually improving the situation with that franchise. The team can't not stay put long term in that arena with things remain as they are. Its not sustainable to continue to be losing money and be on a year to year lease. Something has to be done and the NHL shouldn't even be looking at expanding beyond 32 teams when they got a much bigger issue that of the coyotes then maybe possible later on the flames.

Not even the NBA would be doing this. If this was done like the NBA there would still be at 30 teams until coyotes are dealt with and the flames issue dealt with.

how do you know it's not going to be Calgary, tommy.....

 

[gstommylee]

how do you know it's not going to be Calgary, tommy.....

Because Calgary isn't that dire situation compare to the coyotes. They need a new arena yes but they don't need one so badly bettman has to go public and say built them a new arena or else. NHL already made that approve this or else threat to the coyotes. Calgary is fine where they are at for the time being but that doesn't mean things could change in the years to come.

Here's the quesiton does Calgary need one tomorrow in the near future? No, Does coyotes need one in the near future yes.

Look at how long the NHL has allowed the coyotes to be a mess. It would be insane to move the flames when they weren't given the same amount of time to get things figured out than the coyotes.

I am not even sure how the coyotes are going to pay for that new arena they need. They don't have a billionaire in the ownership group.

I have stated what the Barroway needs to do in order to remain in that market. A new arena and a $$$ investor, the question remains will both of those happen. If both things happen then the league sees no reason to relocate coyotes to Houston. If not than Houston is waiting.

 

[TheLegend]

I never brought up Seattle as to regards relocation. I was talking about houston and coyotes not Seattle.

Again I ask you kindly to stop putting words into my mouth.

Yes you did.... you mentioned on several occasions back when Seattle first became a subject about the Coyotes relocating there.

Since then it’s been whatever new city comes up in a BoH discussion.

 

[gstommylee]

Yes you did.... you mentioned on several occasions back when Seattle first became a subject about the Coyotes relocating there.

Since then it’s been whatever new city comes up in a BoH discussion.

Seattle is no longer a relocation Canaanite since OVG showed up and we have a billionaire investor that turned in an application bid. Before OVG showed with a NHL group, the only way a team could even come is via relocation to play in key arena while the new one is built. Seattle is no longer a relocation canadiate.

 

[Melrose Munch]

Yes you did.... you mentioned on several occasions back when Seattle first became a subject about the Coyotes relocating there.

Since then it’s been whatever new city comes up in a BoH discussion.

Tommys not being fair. It will look like seattle overpaid if houston gets a cheaper expansion.

I assume he got that from the interview. If so i have no idea how he could come the conclusions of expansion. And right now NHL is not looking into expanding into houston. They are looking into Seattle and only Seattle.

No way in the heck NHL will accept a lower expansion fee after they gotten 650m from Seattle.

that was from the scrum after. And well see. If they want expansion, they may have to compromise.

how do you know it's not going to be Calgary, tommy.....

Because Calgary isn't that dire situation compare to the coyotes. They need a new arena yes but they don't need one so badly bettman has to go public and say built them a new arena or else. NHL already made that approve this or else threat to the coyotes. Calgary is fine where they are at for the time being but that doesn't mean things could change in the years to come.

Here's the quesiton does Calgary need one tomorrow in the near future? No, Does coyotes need one in the near future yes.

Look at how long the NHL has allowed the coyotes to be a mess. It would be insane to move the flames when they weren't given the same amount of time to get things figured out than the coyotes.

I am not even sure how the coyotes are going to pay for that new arena they need. They don't have a billionaire in the ownership group.

I have stated what the Barroway needs to do in order to remain in that market. A new arena and a $$$ investor, the question remains will both of those happen. If both things happen then the league sees no reason to relocate coyotes to Houston. If not than Houston is waiting.

Calgary needs a new arena now. I agree with hutch.

 

[gstommylee]

Tommys not being fair. It will look like seattle overpaid if houston gets a cheaper expansion.
that was from the scrum after. And well see. If they want expansion, they may have to compromise.


Calgary needs a new arena now. I agree with hutch.

The league set the price of expansion to Seattle for 650m. They agreed to that price when they turned in that application. its the NHL that would be screwed Seattle out 150m if they accept Houston for way less than 650m. Don't blame Seattle for that.

I never said Calgary doesn't need one. I don't think the situation in Calgary is as bad as people think. They are actually doing pretty great attendance wise at 18,905 average.

NHL would be stupid to move the flames while intentionally ignore the problems with the coyotes.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

The league set the price of expansion to Seattle for 650m. They agreed to that price when they turned in that application. its the NHL that would be screwed Seattle out 150m if they accept Houston for way less than 650m. Don't blame Seattle for that.

I never said Calgary doesn't need one. I don't think the situation in Calgary is as bad as people think. They are actually doing pretty great attendance wise at 18,905 average.

NHL would be stupid to move the flames while intentionally ignore the problems with the coyotes.

may not be an option in Calgary, tommy

 

[Melrose Munch]

The league set the price of expansion to Seattle for 650m. They agreed to that price when they turned in that application. its the NHL that would be screwed Seattle out 150m if they accept Houston for way less than 650m. Don't blame Seattle for that.

I never said Calgary doesn't need one. I don't think the situation in Calgary is as bad as people think. They are actually doing pretty great attendance wise at 18,905 average.

NHL would be stupid to move the flames while intentionally ignore the problems with the coyotes.

So the NHL can charge want it wants though. If its 500m for Houston, I guess we have an issue. Calgary's owners disagee with you.

 

[613Leafer]

The teams that seem to struggle the most financially/attendance:

Florida: 3 playoff appearances in the last 20 seasons, zero series wins
Arizona: 6 straight seasons out of the playoffs, only three playoff appearances in the last 15 seasons, and only two series wins in franchise history.
Columbus: 4 playoff series in 17 seasons, zero series wins.
Carolina: 9 straight seasons with no playoffs, 5 playoff appearances in 20 seasons (granted they did win a SC)
Atlanta (when they existed): Missed playoffs for 10 out of 11 seasons, no playoff series wins

You compare that to the southern teams that seem to do pretty well financially:

TB: 9 playoff appearances in the last 15 seasons, including three Conference Finals, at minimum two Finals appearances (might make it this year), and one SC win.
Nashville: 11 playoff appearances in last 14 seasons, one SC Finals appearance
St. Louis: ~50 year old franchise (time to build a fanbase), 7 playoff appearances in last 10 seasons
Dallas: this team has struggled the last ~10 years (only 2 playoff appearances), but they were in the playoffs for 12 of the previous 14 seasons, including a SC win.

So is it bad markets? Or just markets that have never really had a chance to grow a brand, because they've generally had crappy teams for the vast majority of their history? Most of them have missed the playoffs for 75%+ of their history, and several have zero playoff series wins in their history. It's not like they'd be great hockey markets with good teams, but it's reasonable to say they'd be better off financially if they'd had better teams.

 

[TheLegend]

Seattle is no longer a relocation Canaanite since OVG showed up and we have a billionaire investor that turned in an application bid. Before OVG showed with a NHL group, the only way a team could even come is via relocation to play in key arena while the new one is built. Seattle is no longer a relocation canadiate.

Tommy you’re a walking contradiction.

You were adamant nobody (individual or group) could (or would) ever build an an arena AND pay an expansion fee. Then OVG comes along with a big investor in tow and suddenly it’s like it was never like that.

This is revisionism at its peak. But that’s okay.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Hockey struggles in Washington and St. Louis?

Nashville and Tampa too, apparently.

Sounds like the guy wanted to make a captain obvious statement to sound credible... Except it's a lot less true than it was 10 years ago.

 

[KevFu]

Also, San Jose.

 

[MNNumbers]

I'm not sure how anyone can say things like:


"Barroway needs a new arena and a huge new investor. It they don't appear, then Houston is waiting." This idea that Houston is waiting seems to be dispelled by the video clip at the beginning of this thread. Fertitta would be glad for a team, at a discount. However, who among us really believes that the NHL is going to give discounts.? The price is going to be at least 500M for Fertitta, no matter how a team comes. And, right now, it seems he isn't willing to pay that.

So, please, don't assume Houston is ready. It's all a negotiation. And, that's what makes watching this interesting....

 

[gstommylee]

500m makes better sense than 650m 350m for team 150m for relocation.

 

[Baccus]

Less always makes more sense to the buyer, but is irrelevant to what actually happens.

I love how some posters harp that the NHL franchise costs need to be lowered when they keep going up. It's not a volume business.

 

[PCSPounder]

Explain the Kings, Lakers and Clippers then. None of them have the same entity owning them (even though AEG does have a share of the Lakers it’s still controlled by the Buss family) yet they managed to exist at the same facility for years without being financially crippled.

Steve Ballmer is looking to move his Clippers out to a new barn in a couple of years but that still doesn’t preclude you cannot have different ownerships coexisting within the same facility.

In Los Angeles, you can make up for paying rent with a killer local TV payoff. That’s not nearly as true in, say, Portland.

::::

As to the question of Calgary and Arizona, allow me this oddball argument. Is the Saddledome concourse a bit small? Probably. Can that be fixed without a new building? YES. In my opinion, the Flames are advocating for a new arena so that the casual suite attendees don’t have to stand when the Flames score. O, the horror!

And that’s probably why the Flames will move first. Blerg.