Bettman says no expansion or relocation; why were Conferences made unequal?

[Tackla]

I wonder what the expansion fees would be. Could we see an expansion where the fees are not the same? For discussion sake, let's say that a franchise is granted to a group in Southern Ontario and one in Seattle. How on earth could you value those franchises the same?

Great question. I can see the NHL doing just that and I could also see the expansion fees never being revealed, which would be a huge disservice to fans and everyone on this board. We want to know.

 

[gstommylee]

The conferences were made unequal to satisfy the teams in the Eastern timezone. There is no plan to add Western Conference teams. Seattle and Portland are not locks at all like some are making them out to be. In fact I can't see Portland with an NHL team. The other candidates are likely in the Eastern timezone. So, conferences may never be balanced but that's not a priority.

When NHL expands and yes they are going to there will be at least 1 more western conference team. Don't always believe what Bettman says. Just cause they aren't saying it publicly right now doesn't mean it won't happen. They aren't gonna announce expansion and have it all fall apart. They will announce it when everything is ready which could potentially happen as early as summer/fall of 2014.

 

[gstommylee]

Great question. I can see the NHL doing just that and I could also see the expansion fees never being revealed, which would be a huge disservice to fans and everyone on this board. We want to know.

I would think Quebec city would have a much higher fee than Seattle given they are a better hockey market.

 

[Tackla]

I would think Quebec city would have a much higher fee than Seattle given they are a better hockey market.

Or the opposite. Seattle is a riskier market for the NHL so they perhaps should pay more.

 

[gstommylee]

Or the opposite. Seattle is a riskier market for the NHL so they perhaps should pay more.

Then you run into the issue of the owner backing out. Remember NHL group not only has to pay for the team they potentially will have to pay for the private cost of the arena never mind also taking a loss for a year or two while playing at Key arena.

Expansion fee is usually based on the market itself. No way a NHL franchise in Seattle is worth more than let say a team in QC or GTA2. GTA2 may fetch 400m but you can't fetch that same amount in Seattle.

NHL wants seattle so they won't charge way more than QC or GTA2 in that matter.

 

[BigZ65]

Then you run into the issue of the owner backing out. Remember NHL group not only has to pay for the team they potentially will have to pay for the private cost of the arena never mind also taking a loss for a year or two while playing at Key arena.

Expansion fee is usually based on the market itself. No way a NHL franchise in Seattle is worth more than let say a team in QC or GTA2. GTA2 may fetch 400m but you can't fetch that same amount in Seattle.

NHL wants seattle so they won't charge way more than QC or GTA2 in that matter.

Hasn't the NHL always asked for a set expansion fee when they've added multiple teams? For example, I believe the ask for the 1990 expansion (Ottawa and Tampa) and 1992 expansion (Anaheim and Florida) was $50 million. I guess you could argue that all of those markets were essentially equals.

 

[gstommylee]

Hasn't the NHL always asked for a set expansion fee when they've added multiple teams? For example, I believe the ask for the 1990 expansion (Ottawa and Tampa) and 1992 expansion (Anaheim and Florida) was $50 million. I guess you could argue that all of those markets were essentially equals.

I am not sure if that's what the NHL did or not i didn't really pay attention to expansion fees during the last expansion.

Your right NHL did have a set fee. But curious if that may change given for a fact that your talking about two different markets where one is clearly a hockey market and the other is not so much.

 

[Tawnos]

...and either way, sports economics has drastically changed over the last 20-25 years.

 

[Killion]

Or the opposite. Seattle is a riskier market for the NHL so they perhaps should pay more.

Its an interesting subject. Seattle is far larger & wealthier than Quebec which is about the size as Winnipeg. Past Expansions the NHL had set fee's, however here and now in 2013/14 & beyond you almost have to have some sort of graduated scale with various forms of criteria that would see a smaller market paying less than a bigger market. As Tawnos says, changed landscape. Far more sophisticated... however, when talking about Quebec there are several intangible factors (history of the game in the region, an exceptionally avid fan base, feral rivalry with Montreal & likely Ottawa as well as Toronto & so on) that also need be considered.

With Seattle, you've got some history albeit broken, former minor pro stronghold, very supportive of Junior, a rivalry with Vancouver easily cultivated (along with Calgary, Edmonton & the 3 Californian teams & even Colorado to a lesser extent). So to me, all things being equal, I could see both cities paying in the range of $250M each, same amount. Pluses & minuses in both cases. Then again maybe Im $50M off there, could be $300M by 2014/15. Really hard to say. According to Forbes Winnipeg is worth a whole lot more than the $170M they paid ($110M for the team & $60M in Relo Fee's) and even at the time many felt it was heck of a bargain....

as for not announcing what the Expansion Fee's might be, I dont think the NHL would with hold that information. Its good for business, letting people know that Franchise Values are robust, ever increasing & escalating. Southern Ontario is an entirely different matter and right off the charts. Whatever anyone else anywhere else pays is almost non-applicable. Depends on exactly where the teams located, then youve got some serious indemnification payments to pay MLSE & the Sabres. You could well be looking at $500M+ before the shovels even hit the ground on a new arena or retro-fit Copps Coliseum in Hamilton.

And though Gary Bettman & the league claim "no list" of expansion cities exists, top of mind and in order of priority would just have to be the long coveted Pacific NW city of Seattle and a return to Quebec, with Peladeau just recently shelling out $1.5B for broadcast rights. That kind of money buys a lot of favors & theyve got a building on the go. Could be as tommy opines above the only thing holding back an announcement is the situation in Seattle with the arena. Once the Environmental Issues are dealt with, the MOU redressed and if all's favorable, away we go.

 

[Tawnos]

Something also to mention... Bettman says there's no plan right now on a formal bidding process...

Well, if they're already going to QC and Seattle, there's no bidding process involved, as understood that an expansion bidding process is from different cities.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

lol Sacramento? Seattle is a much larger city and the California hockey market is totally saturated. Sacramento probably wouldn't even make the top 15 of consideration. They can't even get people to Sacramento Kings games...hockey would be a disaster there.

You have no basis for any of these claims. In reality, Seattle is certainly a better option for the NHL right now since the NBA isn't there but Sacramento will be a legitimate option once the arena is built. [mod] I guess then Canada is over-saturated since they serving 34 million people whereas California is serving 38. And there's legitimate reasons why people stopped showing up to Kings games and there's a reason why it's improved this year over last year.

[mod]

 

[gstommylee]

Its an interesting subject. Seattle is far larger & wealthier than Quebec which is about the size as Winnipeg. Past Expansions the NHL had set fee's, however here and now in 2013/14 & beyond you's almost have to have some sort of graduated scale with various forms of criteria that would see a smaller market paying less than a bigger market.... however, when talking about Quebec there are several intangible factors (history of the game in the region, an exceptionally avid fan base, feral rivalry with Montreal & likely Ottawa as well as Toronto & so on) that also need be considered.

With Seattle, you've got some history albeit broken, former minor pro stronghold, very supportive of Junior, a rivalry with Vancouver easily cultivated (along with Calgary, Edmonton & the 3 Californian teams & even Colorado to a lesser extent). So to me, all things being equal, I could see both cities paying in the range of $250M each, same amount. Pluses & minuses in both cases. Then again maybe Im $50M off there, could be $300M by 2014/15. Really hard to say. According to Forbes Winnipeg is worth a whole lot more than the $170M they paid ($110M for the team & $60M in Relo Fee's) and even at the time many felt it was heck of a bargain....

as for not announcing what the Expansion Fee's might be, I dont think the NHL would with hold that information. Its good for business, letting people know that Franchise Values are robust, ever increasing & escalating. Southern Ontario is an entirely different matter and right off the charts. Whatever anyone else anywhere else pays is almost non-applicable. Depends on exactly where the teams located, then youve got some serious indemnification payments to pay MLSE & the Sabres. You could well be looking at $500M+ before the shovels even hit the ground on a new arena or retro-fit Copps Coliseum in Hamilton.

And though Gary Bettman & the league claim "no list" of expansion cities exists, top of mind and in order of priority would just have to be the long coveted Pacific NW city of Seattle and a return to Quebec, with Peladeau just recently shelling out $1.5B for broadcast rights. That kind of money buys a lot of favors & theyve got building on the go. Could be as tommy opines above the only thing holding back an announcement is the situation in Seattle with the arena. Once the Environmental Issues are dealt with, the MOU redressed and if all's favorable, away we go.

Yea and the recent rumor of expansion summer/fall 2014 matches the timing of which we'll know rather the Seattle arena will be shovel ready or not.

And if NBA does expand at the same huge IF the MOU does not need to be changed. We'll see in regards to the MOU being changed once the city and county council get to discussing it again post EIS.

 

[gstommylee]

You have no basis for any of these claims. In reality, Seattle is certainly a better option for the NHL right now since the NBA isn't there but Sacramento will be a legitimate option once the arena is built. I guess then Canada is over-saturated since they serving 34 million people whereas California is serving 38. And there's legitimate reasons why people stopped showing up to Kings games and there's a reason why it's improved this year over last year.

I doubt NHL will want another team in california not when you have superior choices plus its no guarantee Sacramento will actually built that arena. Bettman is not Stern. He actually wants Seattle more than stern wants Seattle to have a team again.

 

[gstommylee]

Something also to mention... Bettman says there's no plan right now on a formal bidding process...

Well, if they're already going to QC and Seattle, there's no bidding process involved, as understood that an expansion bidding process is from different cities.

To make another point they could easily expand to QC and Portland if they wanted to but that leave the issue with coyotes of where it'll go to if the team had to be relocated and Seattle's MOU would have expired by then.

So its possible they want Portland QC and Seattle but leaving one of Portland and QC in case Coyotes have to relocate in 5 years.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

Just adding in this link from yesterday, December 10th:

Gary Bettman says no formal NHL expansion plans
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/gary-bettman-says-no-formal-nhl-expansion-plans-1.2459022

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/10/bettman-no-decision-on-expansion-but-theyre-listening/

Dreger said this represents a big change in the Bettman's usual stance: Previously when he was asked about the subject, Bettman would simply shut it down; Dreger says he seemed more open to talk about.

 

[gstommylee]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/10/bettman-no-decision-on-expansion-but-theyre-listening/

Dreger said this represents a big change in the Bettman's usual stance: Previously when he was asked about the subject, Bettman would simply shut it down; Dreger says he seemed more open to talk about.

Agreed that helps me that something is going on behind closed doors.

 

[brewski420]

Or the opposite. Seattle is a riskier market for the NHL so they perhaps should pay more.

In business you typically charge more for less risk and guaranteed reward. Higher risk with potential high reward comes at a discount.

 

[PCSPounder]

I don't recall San Jose being a bidding process... for that matter, Anaheim and Florida might be in the same boat. I suspect every expansion is different. Sometimes there's a formal process, sometimes the commissioner will say "there is no expansion" until there's an expansion. So be it.

 

[Grudy0]

I don't recall San Jose being a bidding process... for that matter, Anaheim and Florida might be in the same boat. I suspect every expansion is different. Sometimes there's a formal process, sometimes the commissioner will say "there is no expansion" until there's an expansion. So be it.

San Jose wasn't a bidding process...

The Gunds wanted to move the North Stars, and could have. The NHL wanted to remain in Minnesota. So, the brilliant plan was conceived that the Gunds would sell the North Stars and the proceeds from the sale would be given to the NHL as the expansion fee.

Anaheim and Florida were added at a whim without a formal expansion process. With Gil Stein as acting NHL President and Bruce McNall as Chairman of the Board of Governors, the two added the CEO's of DIsney and Blockbuster to the NHL fold without a bidding process.

 

[kdb209]

San Jose wasn't a bidding process...

The Gunds wanted to move the North Stars, and could have. The NHL wanted to remain in Minnesota. So, the brilliant plan was conceived that the Gunds would sell the North Stars and the proceeds from the sale would be given to the NHL as the expansion fee.

It was less about keeping the North Stars in Minnesota than preserving what the League viewed as their prime expansion site - San Jose - which already had a publicly funded arena in process and a potential ownership group (led by Howard Baldwin).

The Gunds threatened move to Oakland would have scuttled expansion to San Jose (and the League could do little to block a move in the post-Al Davis era), so the League brokered a deal - Baldwin and Belzberg (and later Norm Greene) bought the North Stars from the Gunds for $38M, the Gunds got the rights to San Jose for a $50M expansion fee, and there was that funky dispersal draft and subsequent joint expansion draft.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I doubt NHL will want another team in california not when you have superior choices plus its no guarantee Sacramento will actually built that arena. Bettman is not Stern. He actually wants Seattle more than stern wants Seattle to have a team again.

The NHL will listen if something comes up to their liking that fills their requirements which Sacramento is certainly capable of as is plenty of other markets. As for the arena, the chances of it not being built are next to nil. That issue is pretty much done. And to say Bettman wants Seattle is to make baseless assumptions. He hasn't said or done anything to that end for anyone and won't until decisions have been made behind the scenes. And those decisions won't come to light until it actually happens which they are not really close to yet right now.

 

[gstommylee]

The NHL will listen if something comes up to their liking that fills their requirements which Sacramento is certainly capable of as is plenty of other markets. As for the arena, the chances of it not being built are next to nil. That issue is pretty much done. And to say Bettman wants Seattle is to make baseless assumptions. He hasn't said or done anything to that end for anyone and won't until decisions have been made behind the scenes. And those decisions won't come to light until it actually happens which they are not really close to yet right now.

All the rumors point out Seattle is getting a expansion team. Seattle happens to be the last major top 15 in the tv market. Of course NHL wants Seattle. Rather or not Seattle gets the arena finalized is a whole different matter.

Now regarding the Sacramento's arena is still uncertain if it actually get built. And apparently it may very well go up for a public vote next June. I just don't think NHL wants Sacramento where as they can easily pick Portland or quebec city to be Seattle's partner.

 

[Killion]

And to say Bettman wants Seattle is to make baseless assumptions.

Not so much Pf... theres this intriguing snippet http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/...us-consideration-for-expansion-or-relocation/ & plenty more.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

For what it's worth, Bob McKenzie was saying that there's a good chance there will be 32 teams by the start of the 2015-16 season, and was pretty confident that Seattle would be one of them.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

All the rumors point out Seattle is getting a expansion team. Seattle happens to be the last major top 15 in the tv market. Of course NHL wants Seattle. Rather or not Seattle gets the arena finalized is a whole different matter.

Now regarding the Sacramento's arena is still uncertain if it actually get built. And apparently it may very well go up for a public vote next June. I just don't think NHL wants Sacramento where as they can easily pick Portland or quebec city to be Seattle's partner.

Yeah...rumors and interest but that's all it is right now.

As for Sacramento, it is highly likely that it won't go to a public vote. It's just a stall tactic that certain shady people are utilizing but it has no meat to it. Once that all gets pushed through, it's happening. And with that, if someone wants to step up to be an owner of an NHL team in Sacramento, which there is some underground interest at this point in time, they can certainly make a case for themselves. Certainly, Portland and Quebec City can make a case for themselves as well. It will depend on timing and what is available at the time the league decides it's in their best interests to expand.

Not so much Pf... theres this intriguing snippet http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/...us-consideration-for-expansion-or-relocation/ & plenty more.

Even off of that, it is a baseless assumption. Saying we'll give them serious consideration is what they've said about any general inquiry regarding a location for possible relocation or expansion. That line about we always listen and get calls for it all the time.