The Question that continually gets danced around

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

Brian Burke was asked if the situation was reversed and the last CBA was killing the players, not the owners, would the owners have agreed mid deal to change it ?

he said not a chance.

so, whats good for the goose ...

dr

Fair enough, i would agree they would not have changed it.

 

[joechip]

In the perfect world, yes. In the current capitalistic world, hell no.

I pay 13USD to get in to see the same movie here that you pay what 10USD to see over there. Should I have the right to expect a better movie than you?

Perfect world? Define that term please, and how is that different than a 'capitalistic' one? B/C from my perspective there is no difference, and your statement is nonsense until clarified.

What is it that makes the differences in ticket prices imperfect, that you don't want to pay the higher one?

Ta,

 

[joechip]

Is what necessarily true? That ticket prices are function of local supply and demand? That consumers in Manhattan have more discretionary income to spend than consumers in Calgary? That consumers value some event tickets higher than others? That hockey competes with other forms of entertainment? That winning teams generally draw better than losers? Is what necessarily true?

You are also leaving out the things that go into the underlying costs of doing business in New York, which are higher compared to Calgary: local taxation and labor costs for everything that goes into putting on a hockey game.

Comparing ticket prices for hockey games in New York and Calgary is a meaningless analysis, because the markets have completely different underlying architechtures.

Ta,

 

[txomisc]

Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???

of course not
if i buy a widget from sears for 40 $ and you buy the same widget from walmart for 35$ do i expect my widget to be better than yours?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

of course not
if i buy a widget from sears for 40 $ and you buy the same widget from walmart for 35$ do i expect my widget to be better than yours?

More analogous, a house costs many multiples in LA or NY than it does in Pittsburgh or Columbus. Should we institute equal pricing for comparable houses? That is just one of many costs associated with living in certain areas. Most things cost more. That is life.

 

[quat]

Brian Burke was asked if the situation was reversed and the last CBA was killing the players, not the owners, would the owners have agreed mid deal to change it ?

he said not a chance.

so, whats good for the goose ...

dr

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. The players had a contract they had every right to stick with.

You had mentioned the Owners "raming" their side of the bargain to the players... I was simply suggesting a reason why they were so amped. I would imagine that if the past agreement had been more amenable to both sides, todays negotiations wouldn't be nearly so nasty.

 

[me2]

Brian Burke was asked if the situation was reversed and the last CBA was killing the players, not the owners, would the owners have agreed mid deal to change it ?

he said not a chance.

so, whats good for the goose ...

dr

And why shouldn't they talk? They don't have to change the CBA mid-deal. They can get the next CBA negotiations underway without the pressure of a deal, get many of the lesser issues sorted. Start working out the cap v tax scenarios.

Around comes Sept 04 and and sign the new CBA. Common sense, rebuffed.

 

[Scoot]

ok, understood. but clearly the majority of NHL teams can compete. this lock out is about raising the franchise values, nothing else.

dr

No sir,
The salary cap is about stopping big money teams stealing all the good players from small market teams with offers of big money contracts.
It is a common misconception that teams like Florida and Pheonix (among other small market teams) are not well supported, why? because they know before the puck is droppped in the first game of the season that their team has no chance of winning the cup because the big money teams will come in a take their star players away, so why bother going to the game?
If you go back over the last few years and see how Carolina, Anaheim and Tampa Bay were playing in packed houses in the playoffs, it was ONLY because they had a chance at the cup, whereas teams like Pit, Phx etc were still only getting low crowds.
If there is a salary cap, parity, and even playing field, where big money teams cannot poach away players because of the cap, it will work wonders for the league, and EVERY team will have a chance, especially the small ones because at long last, they will be able to keep their star players.

 

[Scoot]

No.

The market in Detroit allows them to charge more for a seat than Edmonton.

Furthermore, paying for a ticket (regardless of price) entitles to purchaser entrance to a game, that's it. There is no guarantee of wins, quality of product, or level of competition - - such is the nature of the sports beast.

No sir,
Detroit HAS to charge more to support its high payroll.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

No sir,
The salary cap is about stopping big money teams stealing all the good players from small market teams with offers of big money contracts.

Surely you have an example of a big money team stealing even a few good players from a small market team, never mind ALL the good players.

dr

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

No sir,
Detroit HAS to charge more to support its high payroll.

why would they charge less, even if the players played for free ?

dr

 

[CoupeStanley]

Not at all. While every NHL team is an unique business they're all franchise tied together and the quality of product should be the same for all the franchise.

If I buy a BigMac 3.99$ CAN at McDo's Next door and I buy another one 6.99$ CAN at an amusement park. Should I expect a better BigMac ?

 

[me2]

why would they charge less, even if the players played for free ?

dr

yes, because fans would complain about pay $60 a ticket to watch something that is almost cost free.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

yes, because fans would complain about pay $60 a ticket to watch something that is almost cost free.

well, if they sell out with a $5000 ticket then who cares who complains ? if they cant fill half the building with a $10 ticket, they will change their price.

dr

 

[Bruwinz37]

Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???

It depends really. It is not as black and white as you make it out to be. 40 bucks CDN might go a lot further in Edmonton than 50 bucks US goes in Detroit. Its like the realty market. Where I live you can't buy a good house for under 290k, but I go to other parts of the country and I see people living in brand new 4 bedroom 3000 square feet houses for 190k (or less). Does that person have a "right" to own that type of house for that amount? Its all relative.

 

[Winger98]

Not at all. While every NHL team is an unique business they're all franchise tied together and the quality of product should be the same for all the franchise.

If I buy a BigMac 3.99$ CAN at McDo's Next door and I buy another one 6.99$ CAN at an amusement park. Should I expect a better BigMac ?

But the two McDonald's aren't really competing against eachother, either, at least not in the way two NHL teams compete against eachother. While all of the teams are bound together by the league, they are also competing directly against eachother and using whatever resources are at their disposal. If one team (or resteraunt) has better resources, do they not deserve to use them?

I'm a Tigers fan and a Wings fan, so I've been on both sides of the issue (small market/big market), and it's unfair either way you slice it. Part of me really believes that if a team has the resources, they should use them. But part of me also believes that every team should have a realistic (though not necessarily equal) opportunity to build a winning organization.

This is why I keep hoping for a middle ground (like a decent Tax or soft cap set up) is found. If a team has cultivated better resources, they should be able to put them to use to a degree. Meanwhile, lesser teams/markets deserve a fair opportunity at creating their own resources, which is hard to do if they can't build their team to a point to draw interest.

 

[Fan-in-Van]

Icewind et al,

Let's extend this hypothetical situation out a little further ... In Detroit, let's assume that Edmonton is the visiting team, and in Edmonton it would be vice versa with Detroit in their away jerseys. Theoretically, the product would be the same. However, expectations about what constitutes a desirable outcome, and therefore, a "better product" are completely opposite.

 

[hockeytown9321]

No sir,
Detroit HAS to charge more to support its high payroll.

Or do they have a high payroll to justify their expensive tickets?

Either way, their ticket prices are affected (to however small a degreee) by their payroll, and as we know, one team's payroll affects every other tam in the league.

 

[SuperUnknown]

Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???

No, and to think otherwise is crazy!

The product is two teams playing together, not just one team. Are you saying that nightly tickets should vary in value (Detroit-Colorado costing more, while Detroit-Edmonton costing less, both games being played in Detroit?). Also, how do you define a "products" worth? It's all about perception.

Do you really think that people in Edmonton pay $40can and do not expect the best product? In sports, no one wants to support losers. If that's the fate of a team, better fold it already.

Also, what's the disposable income for entertainment in both markets? If it's higher in Detroit, then the people WILL pay more for the same entertainment than the people in Edmonton. That's capitalistic economy at work. Offer meets Demand. Which doesn't necessarily depend on the quality of the product.

I just watched an AHL game last night (Hamilton vs Edmonton) and it was a really good show. Intensity, hits, speed. It was better than many NHL games I watched last year. Does this mean that tickets should be $40? No, because perception of the people is that it is an inferior product, even if it is more entertaining.

 

[hockeytown9321]

No, and to think otherwise is crazy!

The product is two teams playing together, not just one team. Are you saying that nightly tickets should vary in value (Detroit-Colorado costing more, while Detroit-Edmonton costing less, both games being played in Detroit?). Also, how do you define a "products" worth? It's all about perception.

I might be wrong, but I think Ottawa was trying to get variable ticket prices a few years back.

 

[sabresfan65]

Icewind Dale essentially brought it up the other day.

Scenario

Exact same seat, say front row of the 2nd level, right at center ice.

Guy in Edmonton pays $40 cdn.

Guy in Detroit pays $50 us.


Does the guy paying $50 us. have the right to expect a better/more expensive product than the guy paying $40 cdn. ???

No, because there is another guy who will pay $50. My mom always told me that something was only worth what someone else would give for it. In some places tickets are worth more because there are more people willing to pay for them.

If an owner can sell 15000 tickets at $50 that nets $750000. If he sells those same tickets for $60 and sells only 14000 because 1000 people felt it was to much did he lose anything?

No he gained $90000.

If this was a 19000 seat stadium and he had to charge $40 to sell out would this be to his advantage?

Probably, that nets him $760000. $10000 more than $50 tickets but $80000 less than $60. However the extra programs, hot dogs, beer, popcorn, parking, etc... would more than make up the difference. The only trick is that each market will have it's own peak price point. It will not depend on other places and it will not be the same everywhere.

If we picked 20 items and each went to the local Wal-Mart (can I use them sense they own two teams?) I think that regional price differences would make the prices for those 20 items for each of us different. Is that right? Of course it is. How much is gas where you live? I pay about $2.00 per gallon. Do you pay the same? It's the same gas. Prices are based on the market.

 

[sabresfan65]

No, and to think otherwise is crazy!

The product is two teams playing together, not just one team. Are you saying that nightly tickets should vary in value (Detroit-Colorado costing more, while Detroit-Edmonton costing less, both games being played in Detroit?).

I agree with you totally, except Buffalo has implemented this for the coming season (if it ever happens) for single game tickets.
There are 7 Gold games, 11 Silver games, 11 Bronze games and 11 Value games (plus 1 that was scheduled to be played in Rochester makes 41). The 7 gold games are games that sell out frequently such as a Friday or Saturday night game against the Leafs. The value games were mostly Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday night games against less glamourous opponents that have a hard time selling out especially during the early part of the season while the Bills are playing.

If you want to see the complete details, just go to the Sabres website.

 

[iagreewithidiots]

I hope you all realize how utterly pointless this thread is.

Nope I dont think they get it.

Its actually scary that a thread this pointless has gotten this many responses.

 

[garry1221]

well, if they sell out with a $5000 ticket then who cares who complains ? if they cant fill half the building with a $10 ticket, they will change their price.

dr

IMO owners will have to lower proces. at least once after this lockout is over. if fans are stupid enough to pay the huge ticket prices then it's their problem, however most fans are smarter than that. they'll see less money going to the players and will look to the owners demanding lower ticket prices. sure there might be more people in line behind them, but eventually demand runs out and the owners' hands will be forced to lower prices. I dont' expect a dramatic drop, but take a few bucks off a ticket and i think most fans would be happy, so long as the owners don't try to make up the money they conceded by jacking up prices of food/drink

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

If you invest 80+ million on a team, do you think it's OK to have a negative return on investent?

Of course they want profit.

if i buy a stock at 40 dollars a share in november and its trading at 4 dollars a share in december do you think its OK that i have a negative return on my investment?

of course i want to profit.