What you describe is market capitalism. And if you read what I wrote, that has no place in sport, and you are degrading your sporting culture by accepting the shameless over-corporatization of sport. (I'm not saying americans are stupid, because there are considerable PR machines at work here and other factors)
What you describe is market capitalism. And if you read what I wrote, that has no place in sport, and you are degrading your sporting culture by accepting the shameless over-corporatization of sport. (I'm not saying americans are stupid, because there are considerable PR machines at work here and other factors)
Finlandia WOAT
js7.4x8fnmcf5070124
- May 23, 2010
- 24,165
- 23,797
You didn't answer my question of why attendance should have nothing to do with on field performance.
None Shall Pass
Dano moisturizes
Shawa666
Registered User
PR machines? What are you high on? Is it *really* that hard to understand that casual fans don't like to go to games and see their team get blown out or lose EVERY TIME?
I'm a diehard- I've been to nearly every Thrashers home game over the 5 seasons and had a blast. Yet sometimes I'll take a friend who only casually follows hockey and it's pretty clear that watching the home team get slaughtered depresses them a bit. Blaming corporations for people not liking to watch their team get ***** is one of the zaniest, most liberal comments I've ever heard.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Division-III athletics is the most un-corporate thing going in North America. No scholarships, no big sponorship deals, very little media presence.
Take a look at the attendance leaders for D-III football.
Now take a look at a list of national champions.
jangster
Registered User
- Aug 30, 2009
- 221
- 0
I love paying hard earned money to go watch my team play like garbage. It's definitely in my top 5 favorite things do.
The Blues and Sabres have had "powerhouse" teams? LOL REALLY?
And when you say they were horrible teams the year before....the year before WHAT?
That is NOT where these figures are coming from. They came from ESPN's website.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
KevFu
Registered User
You have to understand that for the Islanders, we've been dealing with pretty much 25 years of shoddy ownership, on-ice product, mismanagement, and the worst arena in all of major pro sports.
It's a commonly known fact that if the Islanders sell out every game, they still lose money. So why am I going to line SMG's pockets with my money if it won't lead to us investing in the team?
If the Town of Hempstead, Nassau County and everyone else said "We will approve a new arena for the Islanders if they hit an attendance mark of ________," there should be no doubt that we'd hit it.
But barring that, it makes no sense to support the team financially when it makes no difference. We're hostages to the lease/Town of Hempstead. But there's millions of us out there waiting in the woodwork for the team to be liberated.
When we had the #1 draft pick, we had 10,000 people show up to watch us take John Tavares.
When the new arena opens, we'll see how many straight games sell out. But when things have been exactly the same for so long, we're going to remain in the woodwork until there's a shovel in the ground.
That story is NO DIFFERENT than Mangano's Casino story that came out last summer. Except the one quoted above continues:
We've been hearing "we're trying to get a new arena, but politics are holding up the works" since Pat LaFontaine was our best player.
It's a commonly known fact that if the Islanders sell out every game, they still lose money. So why am I going to line SMG's pockets with my money if it won't lead to us investing in the team?
If the Town of Hempstead, Nassau County and everyone else said "We will approve a new arena for the Islanders if they hit an attendance mark of ________," there should be no doubt that we'd hit it.
But barring that, it makes no sense to support the team financially when it makes no difference. We're hostages to the lease/Town of Hempstead. But there's millions of us out there waiting in the woodwork for the team to be liberated.
When we had the #1 draft pick, we had 10,000 people show up to watch us take John Tavares.
When the new arena opens, we'll see how many straight games sell out. But when things have been exactly the same for so long, we're going to remain in the woodwork until there's a shovel in the ground.
That story is NO DIFFERENT than Mangano's Casino story that came out last summer. Except the one quoted above continues:
We've been hearing "we're trying to get a new arena, but politics are holding up the works" since Pat LaFontaine was our best player.
Last edited:
If a team is avg 15k with atleast 60% tickets are sold the yes if a team is avg 15k but with alot of give aways then thats reason for concern.
WWAD
Registered User
- Aug 20, 2009
- 894
- 48
Why do you keep going on with this anti-corporate ******** in the Business Of Hockey sub-forum?
People here want to talk about the business side of hockey. Take your hippie rants to some other part of the forum.
The Expos died because they had a horrible owner who sabotaged the team. He owns the Marlins now.
I know hockey is not ingrained in the south but I am so sick and tired of the excuses the fans down there make for not going. When the majority of the tickets are so cheap and they don't go is a shame. No wonder so many teams are losing money.
KuralySnipes
Registered User
Finlandia WOAT
js7.4x8fnmcf5070124
- May 23, 2010
- 24,165
- 23,797
And I for one am sick and tired of the elitism that seems to permeate these threads.
No wonder people never attempt to understand the reasons why some franchises fail.
46zone
Pass me the soft pretzels
If the team stinks for years on end (Panthers, Thrashers, Coyotes, Blue Jackets), then attendance and fan interest will drop significantly. You have to remember that these franchises are competing with the NFL, MLB, NBA, Nascar, and NCAA Football & Basketball. This isn't the case in Canada, where the NHL (or hockey in general) is the top dog with little competition.
San Jose, Dallas, Tampa, and now Nashville have shown that if there is a competitive team (for more than 1 or 2 seasons) on the ice then people will come or start tuning in television wise.
And managed to win a World Series there.
Which simply proves my point: fan apathy occurs in spades when it isn't the number one sport within the market and ownership doesn't appear to be putting a decent product on the playing surface.
Jeffrey Loria is one of the worst human beings to operate a pro sports team, and any sort of beating around the bush like you are is willful ignorance of what he did to baseball in Montreal.
Moobles
Registered User
- Mar 15, 2009
- 2,555
- 0
QFT. Accepting on-ice failure and supporting a losing team is just encouraging owners to continue with the same mistakes and the same problems. A patient rebuild could do with some money yes- but the onus is on NHL teams to incentivize going out to games. The best and proven way to do that has long been known and is no secret to anyone. Like Charlie Sheen says: it's all about
WINNING
. Or as I see it, the perception that your team has a legitimate opportunity to win.
I'd question the bolded: capitalism's all about shoddy, we all import from China after all
.
On an emotional level I agree with you, but the NHL is not led by a sort of philosopher king who can deliver that product to us. It is and always has been corporate. There's no 'corruption' here: it was born into capitalism, it thrives and falls in capitalism and even its internal structure (with market FAs, the draft, etc.) is capitalist (though with notable socialist redistributive policies). Unless we get some idealist in charge that can handle the BoG, it's also going to remain this way for probably all of our lives (and I'd wager that won't happen).
WINNING
. Or as I see it, the perception that your team has a legitimate opportunity to win.I'd question the bolded: capitalism's all about shoddy, we all import from China after all
.On an emotional level I agree with you, but the NHL is not led by a sort of philosopher king who can deliver that product to us. It is and always has been corporate. There's no 'corruption' here: it was born into capitalism, it thrives and falls in capitalism and even its internal structure (with market FAs, the draft, etc.) is capitalist (though with notable socialist redistributive policies
). Unless we get some idealist in charge that can handle the BoG, it's also going to remain this way for probably all of our lives (and I'd wager that won't happen).
Last edited:
Kritter471
Registered User
From a Dallas perspective, the team missed the playoffs the two previous years, made no significant acquisitions over the summer, had virtually no marketing/advertising budget because it's being operated by lenders and kept stable or slightly raised ticket prices.
Yet the television ratings actually increased pretty substantially this year though the in-person attendance struggled. And citing 1999 or even 1997-2002 is not relevant to the team now. That's like saying people should have paid to see the terrible mid-90s Oilers (when attendance fell off) because of the Gretzky years.
All of the franchises save Montreal and Toronto have historical attendance issues that can be tied in with periods of terrible ownership or terrible on-ice play. It's not tied in to one region of the continent. And attendance is almost always tied to previous-season performance, not that-season performance. Season tickets make up a huge chunk of the base, and those are purchased in the summer.
Take the Blues. They made the playoffs last year IIRC and had high hopes going into this year. But they sucked and suffered some injuries and then sucked some more. I would be very surprised if they sold out every game next year even if they get better because they had a hard year this time around.
Yet the television ratings actually increased pretty substantially this year though the in-person attendance struggled. And citing 1999 or even 1997-2002 is not relevant to the team now. That's like saying people should have paid to see the terrible mid-90s Oilers (when attendance fell off) because of the Gretzky years.
All of the franchises save Montreal and Toronto have historical attendance issues that can be tied in with periods of terrible ownership or terrible on-ice play. It's not tied in to one region of the continent. And attendance is almost always tied to previous-season performance, not that-season performance. Season tickets make up a huge chunk of the base, and those are purchased in the summer.
Take the Blues. They made the playoffs last year IIRC and had high hopes going into this year. But they sucked and suffered some injuries and then sucked some more. I would be very surprised if they sold out every game next year even if they get better because they had a hard year this time around.
That was 2009 that the Blues last made the playoffs, and they did it with a 6th place team that vastly overachieved during the regular season and got swept in the first round. I'll bet getting Halak this summer energized the base more than that abortive playoff run did.
Shawa666
Registered User
TaketheCannoli
RIP
So the answer is obvious. The players should play without compensation, for the love of the sport. The tickets should be no charge and rent on arenas should also be gratis. Then only tr00 fans will be at games. After all, anything else would be degrading, would it not?
Trust me, I'm well aware what he did.
And it's not that I'm beating around the bush; it's that I'm more comfortable with others strongly fulfilling my side of the argument.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Game 2 Colorado Avalanche @ Winnipeg Jets - Jets lead series 1-0Wagers: 15Staked: $18,057.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
Game 2 Nashville Predators @ Vancouver Canucks - Vancouver leads series 1-0Wagers: 12Staked: $22,232.00Event closes
- Updated: