No longterm future for American teams in so-called non hockey markets! (endorsements)

Status
Not open for further replies.

rwilson99

Registered User
Puckhead said:
As a matter of fact I do! The fact that TBay won the cup means what exactly? The fact that Jay Feaster the GM of the Bolts could barely give tickets away until the team started winning in January. To further prove my point that the state of Florida does not support hockey, is that in early November I found myself vacationing just outside of Tampa Bay, and every morning I eargerly checked the Tampa Bay Tribune for anything to do with the lockout or any news in general about hockey, do you know what I found? A tiny three line blurb about "no talks planned, and day 35 of the lockout". This, in the city that won that thing called the Stanley Cup! You see, I happen to understand, unlike most of you, that simply because a team wins the cup, does not mean that they support hockey. Also, the fact that you have a decent season ticket base means about the same. Tampa wins the cup...

(Blah Blah Blah)

So in future please stick to facts regarding what I said, and don't go off on your own tangent questioning my knowledge of the game of hockey. You are the one who knows not of what you speak.

Here's another reason certain non-traditional markets will have an advantage over some of our friends in traditional markets.

NO STATE INCOME TAX & A LOWER OVERALL COST OF LIVING.

Big markets such as Detroit (3.9%) and New York (7.7%) will have an distinct economic disadvantage when compared to backward hick hockey markets in Tampa Bay, Miami and Dallas where there is no state income tax.

Using the example at 4 Million. No state income tax would save him between 150-300K a year. Who knows how much endorsement money would be required to make up for the gap under the Canadian taxation programs.

All your FAs belong to Tampa. Get ready for a dynasty to rival the 80s Oilers. :clap:
 

NYIsles1*

Guest
Street Hawk said:
As for Leetch, in his prime in the 90's he won a cup with the Rangers, was MVP of that Cup team, won the Norris as best dman a number of times, and is American, couldn't get much better than that for US endorsement deals? So, did Leetch score big in endorsements? Leetch probably got hurt by missing the playoffs the past 6 years with the Rangers.
Hockey players almost never get endorsement deals in New York or they are simply not publicized. The Rangers had Sasson in the late seventies with Duguay, I think Messier and Gretzky filmed one commercial in 1996. Aside from that I can not recall anything memorable in thirty years and eight cups among three teams.

The idea that there are hockey endorsements based on being a New York market hockey player just does not reflect the history of what has happened. This is baseball's largest market with football, basketball and individulal stars taking the rest. Hockey is very limited in New York, now more than ever and win or lose this is not going to change. There is only one demographic of fans that attend hockey games which falls far below even the MLS demographic that can draw 50,000 to see David Beckham to Giants Stadium with no media hype on a Tuesday afternoon.

There is no reason for advertisers or sponsors to spend money marketing hockey here when they have the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Nets, Giants, Jets and out of market mega-stars like Woods or Labron or tennis players.

Look at the names that have played hockey in this market: Brodeur, Jagr, Holik, Stevens, Lindros, Yashin, Peca, Leetch, Niedermayer. All three buildings have thousands of empty seats for home games (despite the padded attendance figures posted on Espn) and very limited space in the local media win or lose and this was with unlimited payrolls. Where was all this marketing?

Why do you think Team USA stopped using Msg? The draw in Columbus and Minnesota would be double because those are major hockey markets where a much larger majority of the public is interested in the product.

Television ratings for hockey in New York have never been worse. The Rangers on Msg over eighty two games in 2003-04 with an 80m dollar team that even added Jagr could only equal the Islander television ratings in the late nineties when Milstein ran the club with a 15m dollar payroll. 60,000 homes.

Explain to me why Nashville or Carolina cannot come close to 60,000 homes if they had 82 televised games?

Dolan's mismanagement extends to how his television people showcase hockey. Only limited home exhibition coverage for the Rangers and no Islander-Devil exhibition televised games. He invented a channel called Metro that only reached a limited number on homes and put overflow games for all three teams on them, essentially shutting fans out. Special programming on Msg Networks is extremely rare for the Rangers and non-exsistant for the Isles and Devils.

The Isles returned to the playoffs three years in a row and their ratings are half of what they were when they were finishing last with the Dolan's doing all they can to keep them off their primary channels at playoff time because he does not want competition. The Devils ratings are below the Isles. Lamoriello as part of the terms for resigning with Msg demanded his team be visible on Dolan's networks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

triggrman

Where is Hipcheck85
Sponsor
May 8, 2002
31,627
7,348
Murfreesboro, TN
hfboards.com
rwilson99 said:
Here's another reason certain non-traditional markets will have an advantage over some of our friends in traditional markets.

NO STATE INCOME TAX & A LOWER OVERALL COST OF LIVING.

Big markets such as Detroit (3.9%) and New York (7.7%) will have an distinct economic disadvantage when compared to backward hick hockey markets in Tampa Bay, Miami and Dallas where there is no state income tax.

Using the example at 4 Million. No state income tax would save him between 150-300K a year. Who knows how much endorsement money would be required to make up for the gap under the Canadian taxation programs.

All your FAs belong to Tampa. Get ready for a dynasty to rival the 80s Oilers. :clap:

I was just about to post something similar about the Nashville market. We have one of the lowest costs of living for a major city in the US.

5k square foot homes here can be found in gated communities for less 800k.
 

FangFingers

Registered User
Apr 6, 2005
106
0
I dont see it.

Brett Farve seems quite happy in Green Bay (barely a city).

LeBron isnt hurting in Cleveland (small market).

San Antonio-tiny market has had no problem assembling and keeping a championship NBA team together.

Peyton Manning has no problems playing long term in Indianapolis (small market), nor Steve McNair in Nashville (everyone's favorite whipping city)

Players arent flocking to play for the NY teams in the NFL or NBA.

NHL endorsement dollars are tiny to begin with. You can also argue that an NHL star in a smaller market will could possibly make more than an NHL star in a big market simply because the NHL will always be behind the NBA, NFL, and MLB in the mega-cities that have franchises from all 4 sports - big fish small pond better off than big fish in massive pond.

The only really thing that I could see that would siphon players from smaller, newer, markets would be the fact that they want to play closer to thier families or homes in Canada or Northern U.S. Considering that Nashville is home to several former Preds who have loved the area so much that theyve decided to live here with thier families after thier days with the Preds are gone, I kind of like the chances of Nashville in the new NHL.
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
rwilson99 said:
Here's another reason certain non-traditional markets will have an advantage over some of our friends in traditional markets.

NO STATE INCOME TAX & A LOWER OVERALL COST OF LIVING.

Big markets such as Detroit (3.9%) and New York (7.7%) will have an distinct economic disadvantage when compared to backward hick hockey markets in Tampa Bay, Miami and Dallas where there is no state income tax.

Using the example at 4 Million. No state income tax would save him between 150-300K a year. Who knows how much endorsement money would be required to make up for the gap under the Canadian taxation programs.

All your FAs belong to Tampa. Get ready for a dynasty to rival the 80s Oilers. :clap:
You should try to have your big 4 back under contract before you talk about dynasties to rival the Oilers. You have St. Louis, Richards, LeCavalier and Khabibulan, and with a new hard cap system, it looks very unlikely that you can have all of them back with the money they will be looking for.
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
arrbez said:
Toronto has like 5x more people than Columbus and is the largest media and economic centre in Canada. Bringing an exciting home-grown superstar like Nash into Toronto would just be a license to print money. $3 million is an awful lot for a hockey player to make in endorsements, but I'm sure he could make significantly more in T.O. than in Columbus
Thank you! That was all I was looking for. A voice of reason. I can't necessarily substantiate how much more money in endorsemnents you can get in Toronto over Columbus, but common sense, which seems to be lacking on these boards says that it would be more in Toronto...was that so hard.

I make a statement like the southern US franchises being false hockey markets, and I am getting lambasted for insulting the President and using the flag for toilet paper. Take it easy people, it's just my opinion after all, and we are all entitled to it!!!
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
NYIsles1 said:
Hockey players almost never get endorsement deals in New York or they are simply not publicized. The Rangers had Sasson in the late seventies with Duguay, I think Messier and Gretzky filmed one commercial in 1996. Aside from that I can not recall anything memorable in thirty years and eight cups among three teams.

The idea that there are hockey endorsements based on being a New York market hockey player just does not reflect the history of what has happened. This is baseball's largest market with football, basketball and individulal stars taking the rest. Hockey is very limited in New York, now more than ever and win or lose this is not going to change. There is only one demographic of fans that attend hockey games which falls far below even the MLS demographic that can draw 50,000 to see David Beckham to Giants Stadium with no media hype on a Tuesday afternoon.

There is no reason for advertisers or sponsors to spend money marketing hockey here when they have the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Nets, Giants, Jets and out of market mega-stars like Woods or Labron or tennis players.

Look at the names that have played hockey in this market: Brodeur, Jagr, Holik, Stevens, Lindros, Yashin, Peca, Leetch, Niedermayer. All three buildings have thousands of empty seats for home games (despite the padded attendance figures posted on Espn) and very limited space in the local media win or lose and this was with unlimited payrolls. Where was all this marketing?

Why do you think Team USA stopped using Msg? The draw in Columbus and Minnesota would be double because those are major hockey markets where a much larger majority of the public is interested in the product.

Television ratings for hockey in New York have never been worse. The Rangers on Msg over eighty two games in 2003-04 with an 80m dollar team that even added Jagr could only equal the Islander television ratings in the late nineties when Milstein ran the club with a 15m dollar payroll. 60,000 homes.

Explain to me why Nashville or Carolina cannot come close to 60,000 homes if they had 82 televised games?

Dolan's mismanagement extends to how his television people showcase hockey. Only limited home exhibition coverage for the Rangers and no Islander-Devil exhibition televised games. He invented a channel called Metro that only reached a limited number on homes and put overflow games for all three teams on them, essentially shutting fans out. Special programming on Msg Networks is extremely rare for the Rangers and non-exsistant for the Isles and Devils.

The Isles returned to the playoffs three years in a row and their ratings are half of what they were when they were finishing last with the Dolan's doing all they can to keep them off their primary channels at playoff time because he does not want competition. The Devils ratings are below the Isles. Lamoriello as part of the terms for resigning with Msg demanded his team be visible on Dolan's networks.
In a very indirect way, you have actually reinforced what I have been saying all along. I never said that hockey players could make in endorsemnents the same kind of money as other pro atheletes. Furthermore, even with all that advertising money being spent on all those other sports a hockey player stands to make more in NY than Nashville, it really is that simple. It is a question of where the better opportunities are.
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
FangFingers said:
I dont see it.

Brett Farve seems quite happy in Green Bay (barely a city).

LeBron isnt hurting in Cleveland (small market).

San Antonio-tiny market has had no problem assembling and keeping a championship NBA team together.

Peyton Manning has no problems playing long term in Indianapolis (small market), nor Steve McNair in Nashville (everyone's favorite whipping city)

Players arent flocking to play for the NY teams in the NFL or NBA.

NHL endorsement dollars are tiny to begin with. You can also argue that an NHL star in a smaller market will could possibly make more than an NHL star in a big market simply because the NHL will always be behind the NBA, NFL, and MLB in the mega-cities that have franchises from all 4 sports - big fish small pond better off than big fish in massive pond.

The only really thing that I could see that would siphon players from smaller, newer, markets would be the fact that they want to play closer to thier families or homes in Canada or Northern U.S. Considering that Nashville is home to several former Preds who have loved the area so much that theyve decided to live here with thier families after thier days with the Preds are gone, I kind of like the chances of Nashville in the new NHL.
Let me re-iterate again! You cannot draw the same conclusions for hockey as the other big sports. Hockey is nowhere to be found in the minds and hearts of Americans, and those few that do, it is still well after football, baseball and Basketball and darts and water polo and you get the picture. The comparison to the other pro sports is not fair and furthermore simply not the case.
 

X0ssbar

Guest
Puckhead said:
Let me re-iterate again! You cannot draw the same conclusions for hockey as the other big sports. Hockey is nowhere to be found in the minds and hearts of Americans, and those few that do, it is still well after football, baseball and Basketball and darts and water polo and you get the picture. The comparison to the other pro sports is not fair and furthermore simply not the case.

As stated numerous times in this thread, hockey players do not make even close to what pro athletes in said sports make on endorsements. So if you aren't drawing those same conclusions then what are we discussing here? In a salary capped NHL world it won't matter what market a star player plays in - he's going to get his dough and endorsement dollars are going to be negligable.

....UNLESS you are a "generational talent" like Gretzky, Lemieux or a guy like Crosby and those guys will get their endorsements no matter where they are playing.
 

triggrman

Where is Hipcheck85
Sponsor
May 8, 2002
31,627
7,348
Murfreesboro, TN
hfboards.com
Puckhead said:
Let me re-iterate again! You cannot draw the same conclusions for hockey as the other big sports. Hockey is nowhere to be found in the minds and hearts of Americans, and those few that do, it is still well after football, baseball and Basketball and darts and water polo and you get the picture. The comparison to the other pro sports is not fair and furthermore simply not the case.

Let me re-iterate again! The money they might miss in endorsements, they will easily get back with the lower cost of living. If you save 300k a year in state income taxes then another 500k in housing wouldn't that cover almost any endorsement deal?
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
Top Shelf said:
As stated numerous times in this thread, hockey players do not make even close to what pro athletes in said sports make on endorsements. So if you aren't drawing those same conclusions then what are we discussing here? In a salary capped NHL world it won't matter what market a star player plays in - he's going to get his dough and endorsement dollars are going to be negligable.

....UNLESS you are a "generational talent" like Gretzky, Lemieux or a guy like Crosby and those guys will get their endorsements no matter where they are playing.
I understand that, but when these players have just lost a year of their short careers over money (they couldn't accept 42 Million in February, but will now have no choice in playing under 37 Million) how can you say endorsement dollars are negligable? I never meant this as a blanket statement that applied to all players. I know that nobody is offering Sean Avery x amount of dollars to advertise whatever. This only applies to the star players those who are elite. You make sense in your argument, but all I have read on these boards since this lock out began is how greedy these players are, and now I am hearing that the money however little is negligable...why the sudden change in character?

The generational talent, will make his money regardless, but those who are just below that level will need to maximize their dollars when the opportunity presents itself. Let's not joke with these guys just play for the love of the game, and they want to win the Stanley Cup. That is all well and good, but it doesn't pay the bills. This is a money hungry society that we live in and now that the rich owners will become that much more rich off the backs of these atheletes, I think if a player gets the chance to make more, he will be gone in a flash.

Hockey being a lesser sport in the States means that very few if any players, will actually get national advertising deals. That being said though, they will get regional deals, and you can't tell me that a regional deal in NY or Philly would be the same as that of Nashville or Washington.

There was very little loyalty to their teams under the old CBA, but with FA going down to 28 and a hard cap system, I feel these guys are going to give a long look at every opportunity that comes their way. I am not suggesting that they will uproot their families at the drop of a hat, but pro atheletes are seen as a commodity, and they have a shelf life. They have to milk it for all its worth, before the expiry date.
 
Last edited:

NYIsles1*

Guest
Puckhead said:
In a very indirect way, you have actually reinforced what I have been saying all along. I never said that hockey players could make in endorsemnents the same kind of money as other pro atheletes. Furthermore, even with all that advertising money being spent on all those other sports a hockey player stands to make more in NY than Nashville, it really is that simple.
All due respect but your ignoring the issue. How do hockey players in New York stand to make any more here when there is no virtually endorsement or advertising money spent on hockey players here vs Nashville by any standard?

Zero minus zero still equals zero in Nashville or Manhattan and that's the problem your not acknowledging.

Thirty years of being a fan in this market and virtually no hockey endorsements or advertising for the players, Championship players, Hall of Famers, made no difference.

Explain why now there will be opportunities moving forward?
 

Matt Foley*

Guest
triggrman said:
Let me re-iterate again! The money they might miss in endorsements, they will easily get back with the lower cost of living. If you save 300k a year in state income taxes then another 500k in housing wouldn't that cover almost any endorsement deal?

Puckhead's ignoring you because you are making a good point, IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NYIsles1*

Guest
Puckhead said:
Hockey being a lesser sport in the States means that very few if any players, will actually get national advertising deals. That being said though, they will get regional deals, and you can't tell me that a regional deal in NY or Philly would be the same as that of Nashville or Washington.
What regional deals for products have local hockey players received because they played in New York or another specific market the last thirty years? The impression you give is endorsements in Canada are everywhere in Manhattan also.

It's just not the case, never has been.
 

rwilson99

Registered User
Puckhead said:
You should try to have your big 4 back under contract before you talk about dynasties to rival the Oilers. You have St. Louis, Richards, LeCavalier and Khabibulan, and with a new hard cap system, it looks very unlikely that you can have all of them back with the money they will be looking for.

Richards is under contract, the others will be RFAs in a very buyer friendly market.

MSL just wants a long term contract, and was pivotal in helping Tampa secure the Frozen Four. Vinny is only 24 or 25, again an RFA in a year where there will be little RFA traffic. Finally Habby might be tough, he is an RFA, however the systemic advantage remains due to the lower cost of living and no state income tax.
 

se7en*

Guest
rwilson99 said:
All your FAs belong to Tampa. Get ready for a dynasty to rival the 80s Oilers. :clap:

Why stop there?

Tampa could rival the '70s Canadiens!

As glad as I am that Tampa stopped Calgary from getting the Cup (how weird is it saying that?), I doubt any team in the future could rival the 80s Oilers.
 

rwilson99

Registered User
Puckhead said:
Hockey being a lesser sport in the States means that very few if any players, will actually get national advertising deals. That being said though, they will get regional deals, and you can't tell me that a regional deal in NY or Philly would be the same as that of Nashville or Washington.

Your whole argument is garbage.

It's based on huge endorsement deals that didn't exist before and certainly won't exist in the short term.

Furthurmore you dismiss incontrivertible facts regarding taxation and cost of living differentials that have a definite effect on a players short and long term bottom line.

You have no facts on your side, just speculation. Your argument is getting chewed up quite nicely.

Certain immutable economic factors favor a substantial number of non-traditional hockey markets. This is why population continues to immigrate to places like Tampa, Dallas, Atlanta, Nashville & the Carolinas. This is why the vast majority of expansion teams in ALL PROFESSIONAL SPORTS, not just the NHL, from the 90s forward has been in southern markets.

The people move here.
The teams move here.
The FAs will move here.
 

Magnus Fulgur

Registered User
Nov 27, 2002
7,354
0
LeBron James is doing okay with his endorsements, and he plays in Cleveland, OH which is NOT a big market at all, and is comparable to Columbus. Columbus and the area is growing.
 

Sotnos

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
10,885
1
Not here
www.boltprospects.com
Top Shelf said:
....UNLESS you are a "generational talent" like Gretzky, Lemieux or a guy like Crosby and those guys will get their endorsements no matter where they are playing.
Obviously. Oddly enough, I do remembering seeing an Atlanta player in ads for Nike Canada. Two Tampa players have endorsement deals with big companies that I know of (Lecavalier and Khabibulin), and the most players I've seen in local tv ads was during...Carolina games! To act like this is some major enticement that's open to players only in certain markets is silly; there may be more opportunities in certain markets, but that hasn't been proven here whatsoever.

Puckhead said:
I make a statement like the southern US franchises being false hockey markets, and I am getting lambasted for insulting the President and using the flag for toilet paper.
You post a bunch of biased & uninformed opinions and try to pass them off as fact, people correct you, and you are being "lambasted"? What did you expect really?
 

HSHS

Losing is a disease
Apr 5, 2005
17,981
233
Redondo Beach, Ca
You contraction people are so short-sighted it boggles the mind. If the internet and your mentality would have converged in the 50s, the Red Sox would have been written off for dead due to their mediocre stadium, small fan base that fills it, and the fact that they were routinely getting destroyed by their biggest rival. :shakehead
 

Boltsfan2029

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
6,264
0
In deleted threads
Sotnos said:
Obviously. Oddly enough, I do remembering seeing an Atlanta player in ads for Nike Canada. Two Tampa players have endorsement deals with big companies that I know of (Lecavalier and Khabibulin), and the most players I've seen in local tv ads was during...Carolina games! To act like this is some major enticement that's open to players only in certain markets is silly; there may be more opportunities in certain markets, but that hasn't been proven here whatsoever.

Who was that guy in the national TV commercial w/Joe Thornton, anyway? ;)
 

FlyersFan10*

Guest
arrbez said:
Toronto has like 5x more people than Columbus and is the largest media and economic centre in Canada. Bringing an exciting home-grown superstar like Nash into Toronto would just be a license to print money. $3 million is an awful lot for a hockey player to make in endorsements, but I'm sure he could make significantly more in T.O. than in Columbus

In the best of interest of the league, it is important that guys like Nash, Heatley, Kovalchuk, etc....stay where they are in terms of marketing the league. If they go to Toronto, the market becomes over saturated and the rest of the league suffers as a result (contrary to popular belief, the hockey world does not revolve around the Toronto).

Besides, markets like Columbus offers a lot in terms of potential. That is what the league needs right now in terms of being successful in the U.S. When you consider that you also have major markets in Cleveland and Cincinatti, wouldn't it make sense as a league to keep one of the young superstars there to build off the potential marketing bonanza there?

I think what everyone else fails to realize is that guys like Nash, Kovalchuk, Heatley, etc.....are still gonna get paid under the CBA.
 

missK

Registered User
Aug 1, 2002
2,136
0
Lightning country
Visit site
NYIsles1 said:
What regional deals for products have local hockey players received because they played in New York or another specific market the last thirty years? The impression you give is endorsements in Canada are everywhere in Manhattan also.

It's just not the case, never has been.

The NY/NJ metro area is too saturated with sports figure endorsements and always has been with 2 MLB teams, 2 NFL teams, 2 NBA teams and 3 NHL teams. Hockey loses out to the other sports every time. I lived in NJ for 33 years and the only BIG endorsement deal for hockey was the "Oo-la-la" Sasson campaign with Esposito and Don Dugay in the 80s.

I think endorsement deals for hockey players are the lowest of all the sports figures anyway. Lecavalier originally signed a 2-year with Nike (I think it was in 1999) but never even made a commerical with them, we only knew about it in Tampa because he wore/used Nike equipment (the only guy on the team that did). Vinny signs with CCM 2 years ago and next thing you know he's in a commerical with Thornton. You can check out Vinny and all the other CCM hockey players at CCM sports Click on the PRO ZONE button.
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
thirty years ago philly was not a "hockey market." it takes time, and success doesn't hurt. in terms of endorsements there are obviously limiting factors depending on the market that the player is in (this is true in canada as well). the bigger the market (in general), the better the possibilities. however, this does not mean that players cannot get excellent endorsements in smaller cities as the "hockey market" hopefully grows. they won't be at the same level as a player in NYC/Philly/Boston would be... however, the opportunities for a player in Toronto/Montreal are better as well...
 

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
FlyersFan10 said:
In the best of interest of the league, it is important that guys like Nash, Heatley, Kovalchuk, etc....stay where they are in terms of marketing the league. If they go to Toronto, the market becomes over saturated and the rest of the league suffers as a result (contrary to popular belief, the hockey world does not revolve around the Toronto).

Besides, markets like Columbus offers a lot in terms of potential. That is what the league needs right now in terms of being successful in the U.S. When you consider that you also have major markets in Cleveland and Cincinatti, wouldn't it make sense as a league to keep one of the young superstars there to build off the potential marketing bonanza there?

I think what everyone else fails to realize is that guys like Nash, Kovalchuk, Heatley, etc.....are still gonna get paid under the CBA.

Hey, I'm not saying he should or will play in Toronto. I'm just saying that if he did, it would undoubtably be more profitable
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->