Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Hawker14, Feb 18, 2007.
In other words the Yukon or Saskatchewan is going to get a team soon.
I'm pretty sure he was referring to Winnipeg.
I am sure there are a small group of Winnipeg residents who fervently believe that.
the Nashville market is bigger than Winnipeg's
Maybe so, but the corporate support teams need to survive isn't happening in Nashville. That wouldn't be a problem in Winnipeg. And as long as there's revenue sharing and a salary cap, Winnipeg will always remain competitive.
There is nothing to support that statement.
Is Daly Canadian or American?
You're kidding right? The problem would probably be even worse in Winnipeg.
Nashville would do better to just try and hammer out the problems with the corporate sector before relocating to a smaller market with even more risk.
That said, I doubt Winnipeg would even be a prospective city if the team were to relocate. No matter how badly Canadians like to think they're getting another team. It'd probably be KC or Houston.
And where would they play?
The new arena in Winnipeg is not big enough to house an NHL team. And I doubt they are going to build another new arena.
This article says nothing other than he is happy how hockey is doing in Canada (look at where he was speaking) and that mentions 3 cities and explains what is troubling them.
The quote about a new team in Canada can just as well mean an expansion team and not about moving. Certainly this author tries to make it seem like Daly suggested to be in favor of moving the team but without reading what is actually said we won't know.
Relative to what Nashville gets now, corporate support in Winnipeg wouldnt be a problem. Relative to the rest of the league, its a different story, unless Salsbury House can afford to be a prime sponsor....
There is no relevance of that to this situation....
Houston has the 4th market among the US and Canada and they've been an AHL/IHL market for almost 30 years.
It is interesting how the reporter strung those two points together. That is pretty well the oldest trick in the book.
Given that the NHL really plays its cards close to the vest in these matters, and Bill Daly is a very canny guy who thinks well on his feet, I seriously doubt those two points came within shouting distance of each other in his presentation. Just my speculation, mind you.
no winnipeg is too poor for the nhl....
majority of peggers are on fixed incomes and can't afford nhl prices.....
there is no corporate support in winnipeg....no fortune 500 multinational companies in that town......
the best bet is to get a major junior team......winnipeg is too poor for nhl...
People wise yes, true hockey fans.......NOPE
Winnipeg Predators, get used to it!
can true hockey fans afford $8,000 dollars in season tickets each year up in winnipeg? NOPE....
can affluent american markets afford $8,000 dollars in season tickets each year? YES...
Why don't people understand that the rink is simply too small? Since it is a new rink there is next to no chance of another being built for a few decades.
So if you want to dream just stick to Hamilton.
8,000 season tickets are you kidding me? $195 dollars a game. There are teams who don't sell a single seat at $195.
If Nashville has 10,000 hockey fans and the corporate sector could care less, and Winnipeg has 35,000 fans and corporate support...which market is bigger????
I got the number 35,000 because that is how many people where at the arena trying to save the Jets when they were moving.
And where'd the 10,000 number come from?
That's funny. More like, you should get used to the reality of it not happening.
So you think Nashville only has 10,000 hockey fans? That is, in a word, ridiculous.