Take it from me guys. Las Vegas is getting a team. It was decided a long time ago. You follow the money, plain and simple. MGM, Vegas is all about money, and although the visitors may gamble, the casinos do not. They would never break ground if there was no team coming.
NHL & Vegas Part Deuces Wild: Betting it all on Black (Knights)
- Thread starter Major4Boarding
- Start date
- Status
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
Kind of an oversimplification. MGM is building the arena, and will be profitable with the arena whether there's a team or not. The arena isn't a gamble, the chance to get three quarters of a million more people in their entertainment/retail area every year by getting an NHL team is just the cherry on top of their arena business plan.
Yes that was discussed earlier.
How far do you have to scrape when the arena co-owner is MGM?
Yes, some perspective indeed.
TheLegend
Hardly Deactivated
I recall that when MGM/AEG began this arena project the official stance was they weren't looking to put a pro-sports franchise in it.
Same thing when Quebec City began the push to their arena. IIRC... It was for "cultural events".
In both cases.... putting an NHL franchise in either of those two projects was not at the top of the list.
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
Would you be happier if the arena was owned by AIG, Citigroup, or some other "respectable" company? Say what you want about casino/gaming companies, at least they're on the up and up about what it is that they do. Hell, only 50% of MGM's revenue even comes from taking everyone's kid's college funds and leaving them out of house and home.
The Maloofs made their money distributing Coors in New Mexico. Imagine how many domestic violence situations, cirrhosis cases, and drunk driving incidents they've contributed to, and they own 20% of the effort! Molson's in on the whole thing with them, the Habs must be a slimeball organization.
This whole tangent is pretty dumb.
IceAce
Strait Trippin'
Perspective indeed. Moral grandstanding here is laughable. In and of itself and then when you compare MGM to any of the current owners/affiliations of NHL franchises...Molson, Comcast, Computer Associates, Cablevision, AEG, etc. they really don't seem so egregious by comparison.
It's not moral grandstanding. I mean you have to draw the line somewhere or anything goes. You just don't happen to like where I personally draw the line, so the hyperbole and condescension follow. I don't like the gambling industry snd how it operates. You gonna shoot me now for DARING to voice it? Last I checked, we all get to say where we stand. Don't like it? Too bad.
Mind you this started with someone saying Vegas was sexy. To each his own, but if I don't see getting into bed with these guys as sexy, I'm going to tell you.
You're assuming too much. There is no way Las Vegas has to wait on Seattle.
- Nashville started play in 1998-1999 season
- Atlanta started play in the 1999-2000 season
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
I don't think you've got a firm grasp on exactly it is MGM does, how their business operates, or how they compare to other companies, but that's completely fine.
However, the real fact is that nobody's getting in bed with MGM but Hockey Vision anyways. The Vegas team is leasing the MGM-AEG Arena in a mutually beneficial business relationship for both parties. Would you have similar issues if the arena was owned by Clark County, some entertainment only spinoff of MGM, or Penn Gillette?
I guess what I'm really wondering is, do you really have an issue with MGM or is the issue with what you think Southern Nevada is as a whole? Either way is fine, it's just nice to discuss these things while there's nothing else to talk or speculate about.
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,217
Sure enough. Beyond the implied or inferred accusations of nepotism, I think people need to understand and try & wrap their heads around the fact that this isnt the "Bettman Show" here. Its not up to Gary Bettman to approve or disapprove, to facilitate manipulatively the concrete reality of a Las Vegas franchise. His half brother is years younger, has a track record in & of himself thats actually pretty impressive and without any help or float provided by his older Stepbrother.
Thats ok, no need to apologize, your right, the scale does Dwarf everywhere else and it does so because its extremely sophisticated. However, the very term "sophisticated" and "sleaze" are oxymorons. They dont jibe. Do not equate. Tel Aviv in Israel is known as the Brothel Capital of the World. Shocking? Why, yes, yes it is.... Every country in Europe, more than a few in South America including Mexico (often based on "Zones") as well as in Canada & the US, you will find that Prostitution is legal.
No, of course not, however, most people havent experienced it first hand. Lived & worked there as you do, as I have. Vegas is a victim of its own hubris & success. The Moral Majority & Feminists will never forgive you, me, or anyone else associated with the city.... So what? Live your life according to your own Moral Compass and thats it thats all. Vegas was one Hell of a dream that became a reality & grew up. Personally, I think theres something admirable about that but then again, Im an Outlaw, always have been.
Nonsense. I could tell ya'll horror stories about ComputerAssociates, AEG, Comcast or any number of them that would make even the worst MGM story look like a fairly fantastic fable. Not buying it. MGM is indeed "Grand" and that they even wanna join this club albeit indirectly I have no idea. I am however interested & concerned about the Lease, Terms with Foley. Be very interested in reading that. MGM does not mess around. No problem filling that arena with live entertainment if hockey doesnt maximize, and I do mean MAXIMIZE revenue per seat so theres that.Ive dealt with them. They do not screw around with lower profit margins & Foley had better have his **** together.
Last edited:
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
I've got a feeling the lease terms are going to be fair if not overly complimentary to the team. As I've said a number of times, this arena is going to make money regardless, and the real goal has got to be to get 750,000/year more people into the area surrounding the arena more than the arena itself, at least from MGM's perspective. I've got very little clue how AEG operates, so that's the wildcard and their involvement does add a little wrinkle to my line of thinking. MGM will spend millions building theaters, pay the shows to perform, and give away free tickets to shows just to get people into their properties. The shows aren't the product they're selling, the entire package is, and the more people they get in the more they'll profit. I don't see this being too much different except in scale.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,217
Ya, and we'll just see about that. AEG is basically just a Development & Management firm though they do of course have a Live Event Division (and holding co for the Kings etc, lousy quite frankly Arena Mgmnt Div) though its hardly innovative. And when your taking Vegas, youd better be innovative or your D.O.A. MGM on the other hand, they do employ some of the brighter minds & as your likely aware have preferred venues for specific acts, whatever or whomever they sign, very selective in fact, careful about what they do & who they sign. Not idiots & they measure everything. And I mean absolutely everything. If that teams customer base per seat isnt pulling what they could get from concerts & live events then Houston, weve' got a problem.
IceAce
Strait Trippin'
Lol nothing hyperbolic here friend. I merely said at this point the anti-Vegas crowd seemed like it was out of arguments, as those who argue "morality" tend to be since no one really seems to have the same definition of the word. It only seems to be used, ironically enough, condescendingly....
Didn't say you can't have that opinion, calm down. You can have it all you like but I'm just as entitled to say I think it's a bit ridiculous and explain why. Last I checked that was how discussion forums work?
One man's sexy is another man's sleazy i guess? As others have pointed out there are far more villainous folks already in that bed.
BattleBorn
50% to winning as many division titles as Toronto
However, they will stick to their contractual commitments for as long as they need to, even if it's a dud. (See: Cirque/Criss Angel at the Luxor.
) That thing's been a under performing dog since Day 1, and it's still there as per the contract that goes until 2018.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,217
.. you guess huh? Hell. As far as Im concerned bring it on. Go Las Vegas. Promises to be entertaining and thats all I ask for, all any of us should want.
IceAce
Strait Trippin'
This was the very point I was making. MGM is no worse than many current owners who have been here for decades.
The true test of any new owner in any market where the team doesn't simply have a license to print money (aka Canada)
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,217
Desert Ice 11
I'm here!
I'm excited that Las Vegas getting a hockey team is a real possibility. The number of teams in the market is great for the sport. LA, Anaheim, Arizona and soon Vegas.
The thought of a rivalry between Vegas and Arizona makes me want a team there even more. A weekend trip up there to catch a hockey game and enjoy the city sounds like a great time.
The thought of a rivalry between Vegas and Arizona makes me want a team there even more. A weekend trip up there to catch a hockey game and enjoy the city sounds like a great time.
Lol nothing hyperbolic here friend. I merely said at this point the anti-Vegas crowd seemed like it was out of arguments, as those who argue "morality" tend to be since no one really seems to have the same definition of the word. It only seems to be used, ironically enough, condescendingly....
Didn't say you can't have that opinion, calm down. You can have it all you like but I'm just as entitled to say I think it's a bit ridiculous and explain why. Last I checked that was how discussion forums work?
One man's sexy is another man's sleazy i guess? As others have pointed out there are far more villainous folks already in that bed.
Truth be told, I don't really dislike it on traditional moral grounds, as I don't subscribe to any religion.
I have to exercise some tact because what I really find objectionable is that what's being sold is hope for big payday, or a rush, when simple understanding of chance and probability would tell you all you needed to know, assuming you could understand these concepts. Basically, it's usually selling to those too dumb to understand, too incapable of self control, or some who just don't care that they're taking a chance where the most likely outcome is a loss, especially over a long enough period of time. (Noting that poker is different, and relies on playing your hand against others, not so much what you actually drew.)
The entire place is built up around that industry. Remove the casinos and gambling, and most of what's fueling the rest of the entertainment and economy disappears with it. It's just dumb, in my honest opinion. (Yes, I know I sound like a lot of fun.
)However, I do think there are very strong perceptions about Vegas, along the entire spectrum, and it's quite likely that major leagues have avoided placing teams there for some of those reasons, in addition to economic considerations (inclusive of market size and reliance on one main sector).
No, they're not actually. Some really sophisticated sleaze artists can be found in many places-- churches, businesses, governments.
Almost an admission that some sectors of society would find Vegas and its primary business objectionable. Objectification of women too? Why the hell not? Quite admirable.
Of course this makes sense from MGM's perspective, and you answered the question I posed to Ace.
The operational side to an NHL team rather easy to figure out, at least in a ballpark sense, as are the potential revenue sources.
*Player salaries ($50-70 MM presently)
*Admin/operations ($15-20 MM)
*Lease for arena - ??
*Misc - travel, NHL duties, etc.
Potential revenue sources:
*Ticket sales - $55/ticket avg, 41 home dates, 18K seats = $40 MM
*In-arena revenue (50% of above, rule of thumb per Levitt) = $20 MM
(assumes sellouts above)
*Local TV contract - smaller market, so $10 MM/yr?
*Share of NHL revenue sharing - $14 MM ?
To see how it can go wrong from the ideal above, see some of the other smaller or newer markets and their HRR.
Having revenue from the arena, inclusive on nonhockey events, is often something that can make the difference for viability.
I know these are back of the napkin type numbers, so anyone with different ideas or figures is welcome to add, subtract, correct, etc.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,217
Interestingly the Las Vegas Tourist Board conducted a survey asking people whether or not they came to gamble or came for the shows & entertainment, events & museums, art galleries & so on (which btw are amongst the best in the world)? Almost 70% claiming "no, no intention to gamble, that bad" yet over 90% of them did in fact gamble and on average, app $500. Dont know what the % was in terms of losers, winners. Its just all so much more sophisticated than it once was in the 50's, 60's & 70"s (late 70's when I first worked there, and one Hell of a Freak Show, you had everything... and nothing). The Gumba's, all gone. Regulations up the ying~yang. Unions to deal with. A very demanding Tourist Board. Very strict on a lot of levels as theyve seen it all. You cannot move on The Strip without being surveilled. But as a throwback, thats some serious Americana and something to be proud of. That you should respect. Have to. Thing is, The Strip, all that junk? Only represntative of maybe 10% of what Las Vegas is really all about. Were talking High Strangeness down there, Nevada, the 4 Corners. It really is a great place & city. World Class. And despite the rather transient population the old timers, those that thrive, amongst the best of the best Ive ever met.
Last edited:
- Status
