Gagarin Cup Playoffs 2020 (UPD: Cancelled)

Winner?!


  • Total voters
    83

Jussi

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
91,402
11,081
Mojo Dojo Casa House
Denmark has closed its borders and Stockholm region is considering a strict quarantine zone. Corona has spread at a faster rate in Finland than in Sweden or Denmark, so it's quite likely that drastic measures will be soon taken in Finland as well. I really don't see a chance for Jokerit to continue playing, unless they leave the country and stay in Russia for the remainder of the season. Not sure the players or the organization would agree to that.

Nope.
 

Caser

@RUSProspects
May 21, 2013
13,647
12,425
Riga/Yaroslavl
twitter.com
Is artyom zub injured? Why isn't he playing?

Yeah, back in the game 1 of the series Vs Vityaz, blocked a shot there badly.


Btw, to everyone: pre-game threads for the first games of the conference semifinals have been created, so some game-related stuff might be more comfortable to discuss there.
 

Atas2000

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
13,601
3,269
If for some reason Jokerit could not make it to Saint Petersburg, could KHL replace Jokerit with Lokomotiv Jaroslav in the second round of playoffs against SKA?
No, Jokerit would forfeit one game at a time.
 

Atas2000

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
13,601
3,269
Teams are heavily subsidised by big (Russian) corporations. For example, Nornickel is Jokerit's main sponsor and minority owner. Gazprom sponsors SKA Saint Petersburg while their subsidiary Gazprom Export sponsors Avangard Omsk, Dinamo Riga and Vityaz Podolsk. The oil company Rosneft is the majority owner and main sponsor of CSKA Moscow and VTB Bank is the main sponsor of both the hockey and soccer section of Dynamo Moscow. Russian Railways sponsor Lokomotiv Yaroslavl.

The rest of the teams are mostly sponsored by regional companies unless I forgot any team.

But yeah, not any of the teams would be able to have the current payrolls without the subsidisation of bigger corporations, although the league is trying to long-term shift it into a more westernised, revenue driven league.
You, like many people, forget revenue is not everything. There is TV rights, advertizing and merchandizing. And except for revenue KHL teams are well on par(better than other european leagues). One might hate SKA for everything hockey operations related, but I admit they are doing a great job on the business side. So it's not that far off that KHL franchises might become profitable very soon.

As for sponsorship by big corps. the NHL is not much different, nor is any professional sport. Teams are billionaires' playthings.
 

Atas2000

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
13,601
3,269
How do they make their money? As opposed to nhl?
The mechanism is the same obviously. The scale is different. The league itself is a profitable enterprize, SKA is probably the only team that is. Other than that teams are still below break-even. But then again, not all NHL teams are profitable.

The biggest difference is revenue. You can't ask people in Russia to pay 50-100 bucks at the gate or buy a slice of pizza for what ist in the NHL 5-10 dollars? All that while arenas are significantly smaller in capacity. They make money through TV contracts and advertising.
 

Garl

Registered User
Oct 7, 2006
8,029
1,014
You, like many people, forget revenue is not everything. There is TV rights, advertizing and merchandizing. And except for revenue KHL teams are well on par(better than other european leagues). One might hate SKA for everything hockey operations related, but I admit they are doing a great job on the business side. So it's not that far off that KHL franchises might become profitable very soon.

As for sponsorship by big corps. the NHL is not much different, nor is any professional sport. Teams are billionaires' playthings.

It is very far off
 

Garl

Registered User
Oct 7, 2006
8,029
1,014
The mechanism is the same obviously. The scale is different. The league itself is a profitable enterprize, SKA is probably the only team that is. Other than that teams are still below break-even. But then again, not all NHL teams are profitable.

The biggest difference is revenue. You can't ask people in Russia to pay 50-100 bucks at the gate or buy a slice of pizza for what ist in the NHL 5-10 dollars? All that while arenas are significantly smaller in capacity. They make money through TV contracts and advertising.

SKA is not profitable without Gazprom. League is not profitable either.
 

Atas2000

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
13,601
3,269
SKA is not profitable without Gazprom. League is not profitable either.
By stating things you can't change facts. SKA is profitable since 2018(543 Mio. Rub.). The league is prifitable for 5+ years now. It's just a fact.

And your claim that ownership money somehow does not add to the equation is downright stupid. It's like saying that the Leafs are not profitable without the Rogers money.
 

Atas2000

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
13,601
3,269
It is very far off
It is not. Many teams are starting to get a grip on making money rather than spending it. There are different concepts to it too. Smaller tes follow Dinamo Riga footsteps.
 

Exarz

Registered User
Jan 1, 2014
2,415
339
Helsinki
You, like many people, forget revenue is not everything. There is TV rights, advertizing and merchandizing. And except for revenue KHL teams are well on par(better than other european leagues). One might hate SKA for everything hockey operations related, but I admit they are doing a great job on the business side. So it's not that far off that KHL franchises might become profitable very soon.

As for sponsorship by big corps. the NHL is not much different, nor is any professional sport. Teams are billionaires' playthings.
I am well aware that revenue is not everything, but the TV rights is not really something to brag about from the league considering its status. I don't really know about the income from merchandise sales so I can't really comment that part. I am just glad that the league is trying to shift from team sponsorships to league sponsorships and revenue sharing, although it might take some time.


By stating things you can't change facts. SKA is profitable since 2018(543 Mio. Rub.). The league is prifitable for 5+ years now. It's just a fact.

And your claim that ownership money somehow does not add to the equation is downright stupid. It's like saying that the Leafs are not profitable without the Rogers money.
Well they are profitable on paper but by taking a look at their financial statement from 2018, it is visible that they received donations (добровольные имущественные взносы и пожертвования) of over 110 million rubles (which is close to 1.4 million euros), so I doubt that they de facto are profitable...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jussi

Jussi

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
91,402
11,081
Mojo Dojo Casa House
It's more to do with disobeying government guidelines. It would be terrible PR and above all, reckless behavior. Even Jokerit fans are calling for the the season to end.

The decision was based on the concern over the health of players and staff as well as trying to slow down the spread of the coronavirus by following the guidelines given by the government and officials of the Finnish institute of health and welfare.

Expected outcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Exarz

SoundAndFury

Registered User
May 28, 2012
11,331
5,299
Yeah, money from TV rights covered roughly one player's salary last year so they are almost non-factor.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->