Helene Elliott: The high-flying Ducks just aren't on our radar

Jazz

Registered User
Article by the Hall of Fame writer on Anaheim's (so far) failure to capture the attention of Southern Californina despite their record and play.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/hocke...full.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-nhl-ducks

.......The Ducks, however, are bucking that trend. In their first 19 home games, they averaged 15,377 fans, up 13.5% over a year ago. That includes three announced sellouts in the 17,174-seat Honda Center, and advance sales indicate the next 10 games might sell out, starting tonight against Calgary.

Yet the Ducks, who not only made that Cup run in 2003 but also reached the Western Conference finals last spring, haven't recaptured the frenzy of their early years, when they filled the arena — then known as the Arrowhead Pond — to 99.4% of capacity their first five seasons.

Brian Burke, the Ducks' general manager, knows the history and understands what's needed in a Southern California market full of superstars and celebrities - To win and entertain. - "We're very pleased with the fan response. We'd like the building full, but one good playoff run and one good 35-game segment is not going to erase years of mediocrity," he said. "A lot of people who left, left for a reason. They had a couple of star players in Paul Kariya and Teemu Selanne but they never built around those players. It was consistent mediocrity. No one is going to pay to watch that long-term.".......
 

vbet*

Guest
"The Ducks acknowledged losing $15 million last season. Ryan said they anticipate losses of $12 million this season, but that the five-year plan put in place by the Samuelis when they bought the team from the Walt Disney Co. is unfolding ahead of schedule."

Wow, they are happy with those numbers? Were they in charge of the federal budget before buying the Ducks?
 

NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS

Registered User
Feb 28, 2006
13,542
5,771
"The Ducks acknowledged losing $15 million last season. Ryan said they anticipate losses of $12 million this season, but that the five-year plan put in place by the Samuelis when they bought the team from the Walt Disney Co. is unfolding ahead of schedule."

Wow, they are happy with those numbers? Were they in charge of the federal budget before buying the Ducks?

Maybe the Ducks were losing 25 millions per year under Disney.
 

Pepper

Registered User
Aug 30, 2004
14,693
269
"The Ducks acknowledged losing $15 million last season. Ryan said they anticipate losses of $12 million this season, but that the five-year plan put in place by the Samuelis when they bought the team from the Walt Disney Co. is unfolding ahead of schedule."

Wow, they are happy with those numbers? Were they in charge of the federal budget before buying the Ducks?

Burke said ~1 month ago that Ducks might actually make profit this year
 

puckhead103*

Guest
Gotta love markets in absurd locations!
the biggest reason why anaheim got a team is they were able to pay the $50 million expansion fee in 1993.......

gotta love the nhl's greed.....
 

krudmonk

Registered User
Jan 12, 2006
5,509
0
Sannozay
The Kings still get more attention, so don't go off about hockey in "absurd" locations. Focus your argument on the NHL trying to jam another team into a place where existing hockey fans had already developed loyalty to the team which got there first. The Isles and Devils will always play distant second- and third-fiddle for the same reason.
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
Gotta love markets in absurd locations!
Bet you had no problem with your team taking the expansion money though. Expansion money propped up the failing economic system for most of the 90s.

the biggest reason why anaheim got a team is they were able to pay the $50 million expansion fee in 1993.......

gotta love the nhl's greed.....
Actually, I remember from Gil Stein's book that the League honchos were VERY enamored of being associated with Disney, though having the money didn't hurt.

krudmonk's reasoning makes the most sense to me as to why there might be problems in Anaheim. As long as the owners are willing to stick it out, don't see why it's a problem for the rest of you.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
186,931
39,038
Actually, I remember from Gil Stein's book that the League honchos were VERY enamored of being associated with Disney, though having the money didn't hurt.

I'm not saying this is a reflection on the Ducks, but the NHL did the same thing when they went for the money when they went for the ABC/ESPN (both owned by Disney) exclusive deal and the league went down the tubes almost at that moment.
 

Maken*

Guest
Bet you had no problem with your team taking the expansion money though. Expansion money propped up the failing economic system for most of the 90s.

The 90's expansion was one of the stupidest things to ever happen to the NHL. Complete cash grab by the owners and totally diluted the on-ice product. NHL teams in ridiculous markets, American dollars taking over my favourite sport, yeah I loved that.

I probably would've preferred if the "failing economic system" had failed. There will always be great hockey being played in Canada.
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
The 90's expansion was one of the stupidest things to ever happen to the NHL. Complete cash grab by the owners and totally diluted the on-ice product. NHL teams in ridiculous markets, American dollars taking over my favourite sport, yeah I loved that.
Of course it was a cash grab, because they really needed the cash. The talent level is diluted theory has been disproved here time and again, so no need to even try that one. I won't even ask your definition of "ridiculous markets".

I probably would've preferred if the "failing economic system" had failed.
You'd prefer no NHL? OK

Anyway, as for the topic, very nice % increase for the Ducks this year, and Burke's comments have a lot of merit.
 

EbencoyE

Registered User
Nov 26, 2006
1,958
5
Wow. A sports team is losing money. Stop the presses.

This is probably the best off the Ducks have ever been financially.

You don't buy sports teams with the purpose of making money. You buy sports teams for the love of the game. (Most) owners don't care if they're in the red.

I guess Buffalo was a stupid expansion too since they'll be lucky to break even this year with a long playoff run. And Ottawa, and Edmonton, and Calgary should never have gotten into the NHL either since they've had financial problems before. Canadian elitists are annoying.
 

JTH

Registered User
Nov 19, 2005
457
0
Canada
Do you really believe in what you typed, or did you neglect to think that through before hitting "submit reply"? Owners (of all businesses) are interested in a return on their investment, whether in short/long-term operating profit or through gains in capital value of their franchise.

You don't buy sports teams with the purpose of making money. You buy sports teams for the love of the game. (Most) owners don't care if they're in the red.
 

Blades of Glory

Troll Captain
Feb 12, 2006
18,401
6
California
Wow. A sports team is losing money. Stop the presses.

This is probably the best off the Ducks have ever been financially.

You don't buy sports teams with the purpose of making money. You buy sports teams for the love of the game. (Most) owners don't care if they're in the red.

I guess Buffalo was a stupid expansion too since they'll be lucky to break even this year with a long playoff run. And Ottawa, and Edmonton, and Calgary should never have gotten into the NHL either since they've had financial problems before. Canadian elitists are annoying.

Huh? You really believe that most professional sports owners are in it for the "love of the game?" These are entrepreneurs, they want to make money.

Hockey just does not work were it does not snow

I trust you haven't looked at the state of hockey in San Jose and Dallas then.
 

Cyclops II*

Guest
Huh? You really believe that most professional sports owners are in it for the "love of the game?" These are entrepreneurs, they want to make money.



I trust you haven't looked at the state of hockey in San Jose and Dallas then.

You could add Vancouver to that list (until this years snow storms).
 

Jazz

Registered User
the biggest reason why anaheim got a team is they were able to pay the $50 million expansion fee in 1993.......
gotta love the nhl's greed.....
Absolutely true.
Actually, in this case - no.

Disney only paid $50 Million expansion fee. Back then, they normally would have had to pay an additional $25 Million to LA for territorial infringement on the LA Kings property (ie, $75 Million total).

The NHL was wanting to get in on Disney's marketing machine, so this was actually a good move to bring them in to the fold. This is the "biggest" reason Anaheim got a team. They they (the NHL) later got stubborn and did not then want to listen to Disney's marketing ideas was one one of the reasons why Disney eventually pulled out (because we all know how good the NHL's marketing has been up until this year.... :shakehead ).

Anyways - for Anaheim, the NHL cut it's expansion fee in half for Disney, so instead of $50 Million for the NHL and $25 Million for the Kings, it was only $25 Million each.

The NHL could easily have picked another market and taken all $50 Million for the entire league. :teach:
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad