Kings' suite holders get no refund

[me2]

We don't know if there were replacement events, what they were or when they were. But in all probability suites to those 41 events probably weren't as valuable as suites to 41 Kings games and most of those suites were purchased with the Kings in mind.

Then they shouldn't pay again if they are not happy.

So, some % of whatever amount would normally be attributed as Kings revenues should be refunded if for no other reason than good PR. Why are the Kings taking in ticket revenue when they haven't played a game? No reason not to give a little back.

Except that events are often worth more than the Kings games. See U2 below (not say U2 is/isn't a replacement event).

Or, your idea really isn't that bad. Suites to the 41 replacement events are probably cheaper than suites for the 41 Kings game, so doing that would be the same as just a straight up refund. Good idea.

Average kings ticket price is $46.63
The U2 ticket prices go from $90-1700

http://theticketagency.com/ResultsTicket.aspx?evtid=203163
http://www.ticketsnow.com/tickets.cfm/p=255591
A suite to U2 is $9,095.00 (12 seat suite).


How much do you think a Kings game suite costs?

http://www.mbef.org/MBWA/StapleCenter.htm
You could get a Kings suite for $3000 form the above site when the NHL was playing.


http://www.xjxixm.com/staplesluxury.htm


lists Staples luxury boxes at $200K-300K

What does that make a U2 concert worth? 3-10x as much as a Kings game?

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Then they shouldn't pay again if they are not happy.

Well that's genius. So owners are already losing a ton of revenue with the lockout, so now they should piss off their highest paying customers and maybe they won't by suites next year? Good plan.

If you ask me, especially right now, the idea for NHL owners is to make fans happy in anyway they can, so that they do come back.

Except that events are often worth more than the Kings games. See U2 below (not say U2 is/isn't a replacement event).

Average kings ticket price is $46.63
The U2 ticket prices go from $90-1700

http://theticketagency.com/ResultsTicket.aspx?evtid=203163
http://www.ticketsnow.com/tickets.cfm/p=255591
A suite to U2 is $9,095.00 (12 seat suite).

How much do you think a Kings game suite costs?

http://www.mbef.org/MBWA/StapleCenter.htm
You could get a Kings suite for $3000 form the above site when the NHL was playing.

http://www.xjxixm.com/staplesluxury.htm

lists Staples luxury boxes at $200K-300K

What does that make a U2 concert worth? 3-10x as much as a Kings game?

I never said a U2 concert wasn't worth more. But are 41 U2 concerts the replacement for the 41 Kings games? I doubt it. Besides, why do the Kings get ticket revenue from U2 concerts? Obviously they are legally obligated to a portion of the suite revenue, but what exactly is the harm of NHL teams redunding some money if for no other reason than to say 'we know the lockout sucks, but look we are trying to do something for the fans'. The NHL seems to be willing to do anything to get the fans back and to look good to sponsors and ticket holders, wouldn't refunding some money and getting good PR do that? It's a much better idea than some of the other things they've come up with.

 

[hockeytown9321]

I need to ask - who is complaining here?

Please read the article again. Then apply the standard, non delusional definition of the word complain to the quotes in the article by suiteholders.

 

[kdb209]

Well that's genius. So owners are already losing a ton of revenue with the lockout, so now they should piss off their highest paying customers and maybe they won't by suites next year? Good plan.

If you ask me, especially right now, the idea for NHL owners is to make fans happy in anyway they can, so that they do come back.


I never said a U2 concert wasn't worth more. But are 41 U2 concerts the replacement for the 41 Kings games? I doubt it. Besides, why do the Kings get ticket revenue from U2 concerts? Obviously they are legally obligated to a portion of the suite revenue, but what exactly is the harm of NHL teams redunding some money if for no other reason than to say 'we know the lockout sucks, but look we are trying to do something for the fans'. The NHL seems to be willing to do anything to get the fans back and to look good to sponsors and ticket holders, wouldn't refunding some money and getting good PR do that? It's a much better idea than some of the other things they've come up with.

You keep talking about owners and the NHL as if this was some league wide policy - no it was a decision by one team with unique market dynamics. As the article shows, other teams (Boston and Anaheim) chose to refund part of the luxury suite payments because of the cancelled NHL games.

The Kings and AEG have treated Kings Season Ticket Holders fairly, arguably their "highest paying customers". The Suite Holders, be honest - do you really think any of them bought them because of the Kings - No. They bought them for the Lakers - end of story, thats where the demand is. AEG probably lost more money because the Lakers missed the playoffs than they did because of the entire lockout.

I don't think there is any risk of alienating any of the Suite Holders. There have been a total turnover of 10 suites (out of 160) in the entire history of the Staples center - all because the companies closing, going bankrupt, or Shaq being traded. No company has voluntarily given up a Staples Center box yet.

Keep in mind where the Kings rank in LA - Lakers, concerts, Clippers, more concerts, ... Kings.

If this were the Lakers who lost a season, well then you could bet your ass the suite holders would have gotten something back.

 

[me2]

Well that's genius. So owners are already losing a ton of revenue with the lockout, so now they should piss off their highest paying customers and maybe they won't by suites next year? Good plan.

They can't be too pissed off if they aren't giving up their boxes.

I never said a U2 concert wasn't worth more. But are 41 U2 concerts the replacement for the 41 Kings games? I doubt it. Besides, why do the Kings get ticket revenue from U2 concerts?

Why does it matter where the money goes? If it goes to the Kings or to the Staples centre or where ever, its still paid and gone.

Obviously they are legally obligated to a portion of the suite revenue, but what exactly is the harm of NHL teams redunding some money if for no other reason than to say 'we know the lockout sucks, but look we are trying to do something for the fans'. The NHL seems to be willing to do anything to get the fans back and to look good to sponsors and ticket holders, wouldn't refunding some money and getting good PR do that? It's a much better idea than some of the other things they've come up with.

Sure refund some money but then the suite owners asking for a refund should lose their rights to suites for any replacement events. Then AEG can resell their boxes.

What's a box worth? $190-300K, lets say $240K avg. 200 events, Kings are about 1/4, $60K refund.

U2 suites bringing in $9K. Wouldn't take long to make up the $60K refund.

Seems fair.

 

[nyr7andcounting]

=Why does it matter where the money goes? If it goes to the Kings or to the Staples centre or where ever, its still paid and gone.

Because the Kings aren't playing? Why should they be bringing in revenue when they aren't playing? If they are it's only because of "blanket" payments such as suites. What harm does it do them to refund some of the money which they didn't even really earn? I don't understand how you can't realize that the positive PR that comes with refunding suite money far outweighs the small amount of revenue the Kings would lose.

Sure refund some money but then the suite owners asking for a refund should lose their rights to suites for any replacement events. Then AEG can resell their boxes.

What's a box worth? $190-300K, lets say $240K avg. 200 events, Kings are about 1/4, $60K refund.

U2 suites bringing in $9K. Wouldn't take long to make up the $60K refund.

Seems fair.

I already said, the suite holders should be given the choice of accepting 41 replacement events or getting back the portion of their payment that eventually goes to the Kings.

And by your math, Anshutz can actually MAKE money on top of it. Get some good PR for giving a refund and if your plan would actually work, which I assume you think it would since you said it's fair, than Anshutz makes money on all of this. So again, where's the negative to doing it?

 

[me2]

And by your math, Anshutz can actually MAKE money on top of it.

He's just such a nice guy he's giving it away.

 

[dawgbone]

Does it say in their contract that there is guaranteed to be a certain number of Los Angeles Kings games?

If all it says is a minimum of 150 events, I don't see what the complaints are about, or what the problem is with you people here.

It has nothing to do with keeping customers happy, or "doing what's right". Should they be giving back money because the Lakers don't have their 12 home playoff dates as well? Is that assumed to be in the 150 events?

You get your suite for all events at staples centre, which is a guaranteed minimum of 150. Does that mean if there are more than 150 events, you should have to pay more?

It's the same thing.