A team in a NICE arena in the epicenter of the fanbase vs. a team in a nice but VERY flawed arena in the outskirts of the fanbase and well into the competing team's fanbase epicenter.
This is simple. An arena operator owns both venues and makes money from both venues and has a tenant in one venue and another tenant who could lift sales in the other (and for all intents and purposes, the LARGER venue with more seating available if they make modifications not possible/realistic in the premier venue).
I ask.....can a superbly managed arena operator (aside from Yormark, that tw*t) make more money operating both arenas with two teams occupying both arenas and filling more dates with two essentially differing markets or would they be better served not using one venue in the suburbs and relegating their investment to sparse event scheduling?
There's no logic in that. A relatively small investment to modernize an arena is made and one that can capitalize on a growing fanbase IN THAT LOCATION. Yet am I to believe they should ignore the two counties and fish for Ranger converts and those new to the game?
This hinges on the NVMC being made larger and the concourse being vastly improved - which they are doing, from bathrooms to eateries to decor......just not yet with the number of seats and maybe never with luxury boxes.
For those stating Nassau and Suffolk are shrinking in wealth......this happened many times before with regions.
Brooklyn was one. Queens as well. Both are booming now. When the economy recovers......two arenas controlling two markets would be a significant opportunity. Would it be significant enough to command the full amount of the annual "stipend" from the arena operators to make their investment pay off? I don't see it far off.....if they can help make two buildings generate more revenue by moving, opening up hundreds of thousands of seats each season at Barclays for bigger draws (being able to sell 18k at an event vs. 41 nights of 14,500 MAX).
I'm confident we end up somewhere better but not ready to say which one yet. We're definitely moving, IMHO.
(Personally, I like Belmont/Queens ideas because the team ownership would not be under Ratner and Co., but NVMC and Brooklyn both work because they don't have to invest in a building and the potential failure to make profit)