If London, ONT got a Stadium?

[Cams]

Uh, the Knights already sell enough STH for 3-5K to be supported. The wait list for STH in London is easily over 1000 right now. A lot of those people would probably purchase tickets for an NHL team at a reasonable price, given how expensive TOR is.

Corporate boxes are generally fairly sold out here, although they change a fair bit. The colleges have some, but so do the nurses, hospitals, teachers and businesses like Convergys/Stream, Harveys, etc.

I'm not sure if you're aware but the Ceeps/Barney's aren't exactly super popular entertainment here at the moment.

I don't really know if it's possible that TOR ever lets a new franchise in so close, but I don't think DET cares that much. Most people here are MTL or TOR fans, not DET, though there are a fair few. The "advantage" of a team in London would be that newcomers probably have more of a reason to get behind a new team than a storied one, and that fans from Guelph, Windsor, NIA, Kitchener, Sarnia etc would probably be more willing to go to LON than TOR for NHL hockey.

I don't think it's likely but maybe Melnyk will sell OTT to someone and they get relocated. Or Edmonton will cave. Fantasy, but plausible.

Why would fans from Windsor go to London for NHL and not go 10 minutes to Detroit? The Wings are NOT selling out when they aren't winning, unless the Leafs/Habs are in town. It's the same for concerts, and thus why the WFCU Centre struggles for event bookings. You have how many 15,000 + seat venues in metro Detroit..... I know I'd rather just hop on the tunnel bus and go to LCA and be home within an hour of the game ending, then drove the almost 2 hours to London and back. That, or I'll just go to Toronto to watch my Leafs.

I'll echo the sentiments that London is a great junior hockey city, but don't think it's even on the NHL radar (NHL capacity arena or not).

 

[CBJ goalie]

No. No freaking way.

Where would the arena go? Budweiser Gardens already occupies downtown - there is absolutely no land to house an arena and parking to accommodate 16k fans.

London's roadways are already one of the least desirable - terrible, terrible road system here.

 

[WingsFan95]

Ottawa is blacked out in the GTA, and only can air local games as for west as Belleville. Leafs will block you out of the GTA, and you have almost no local television area to speak of. Kitchener would likely stay part of the existing territory it is a part of. London makes no sense for an NHL team because it is a tiny market, with a tiny television footprint.

The price difference between the Knights and an NHL franchise is astronomical. The last time the Knights tickets have been publically listed, the most expensive seats in the arena were $31 per game (this was 12-13, Knights don't have them publically anywhere else).

London has nowhere near the corporate support of any market that currently is in the NHL. Yes, you can get people to drive one or two hours when there is a price break. But, you likely aren't getting people to do that very often. The area simply doesn't have the population to sell a viable amount of season seats or corporate boxes, at NHL prices.

You asked if London would be even close. They wouldn't. They aren't even the most desirable CHL market, which would be Portland.

On the resale market I've paid as much as $55 each for 1st or 2nd row seats. Reality is combined with Kitchener a season ticket drive of 5,000 people is more than plausible if the average ticket price per game was about $50. There are many 3+ million homes in London outside the downtown core where I could see people investing. It's a very hockey mad town. I've personally never attended a Knights game that wasn't just packed but the bars were booming, on a weeknight. Just my experience with the town.

Metro area is too small. They’re not going to draw from any other big metro areas. Their total population draw isn’t much bigger than Halifax. And it’s starting to get big businesses. So is Oklahoma City, and they still have a bigger base. It’s all about the huge companies that buy the corporate boxes.

The minimum value of all NHL teams is now $650 million. See recent expansion fees and the sale of the Canes to Dundon. Daly, and to a lesser extent Bettman, aren’t allowing sales for anything less.

You’re not going to get thousands of people flocking to London NHL games from the GTA. That was one of the claims Ottawa had and they are a few hours from Montreal and Toronto. That’s been proved to be faulty logic. Throw that out.

The price differential won’t be much. Knights tickets are a fraction of a NHL teams. If there is that difference like you said, then they’re burning money. Especially with no TV market, corporate base (or “growing corporate base”), or other NHL revenue streams.

The NHL’s Most Valuable Teams

Panthers and Coyotes are worth under 300 million. Fact Bettman knows how to squeeze a penny doesn't mean it's never an option to relocate like how Atlanta went to Winnipeg for 170 million.

Comparing London to Halifax, I'll stop you right there because the average available salaries after taxes in Halifax are far, far lower than London. They're having trouble getting a CFL team for 3 decades.

Ottawa claiming Toronto is way more crazy than London claiming west Toronto. I'm talking Mississauga, Brampton, Hamilton areas. Those are 90-100 min drives, 2 hours at most. GTA to Ottawa is 4 hours at minimum. Massive difference. There are plenty of people who commute from the Niagara region to the GTA so I don't see a problem driving to London once a month or so. Furthermore Montreal and Ottawa are very culturally different. The overwhelming majority of Leaf fans are simply priced out. I know people with well paying jobs who grew up Leafs fans and they go to a game maybe once every 3 years. These same people were excited at a Markham team because they'd be able to watch NHL hockey at a discount. Lot of Leaf fans are also hockey fans.

Any link?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada-could-support-12-nhl-teams-new-report-says-1.630431
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canada-can-support-more-nhl-teams-study-argues-1.1087155

Am I the only one confused by the use of the word stadium instead of arena?

Stadium typically refers to a bigger arena. Although the terms are interchangeable that's how a lot of people look at it. So for a pro sports team, stadium seems to work better as oppose to any local arena.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

On the resale market I've paid as much as $55 each for 1st or 2nd row seats. Reality is combined with Kitchener a season ticket drive of 5,000 people is more than plausible if the average ticket price per game was about $50. There are many 3+ million homes in London outside the downtown core where I could see people investing. It's a very hockey mad town. I've personally never attended a Knights game that wasn't just packed but the bars were booming, on a weeknight. Just my experience with the town.



The NHL’s Most Valuable Teams

Panthers and Coyotes are worth under 300 million. Fact Bettman knows how to squeeze a penny doesn't mean it's never an option to relocate like how Atlanta went to Winnipeg for

Comparing London to Halifax, I'll stop you right there because the average available salaries after taxes in Halifax are far, far lower than London. They're having trouble getting a CFL team for 3 decades.

Ottawa claiming Toronto is way more crazy than London claiming west Toronto. I'm talking Mississauga, Brampton, Hamilton areas. Those are 90-100 min drives, 2 hours at most. GTA to Ottawa is 4 hours at minimum. Massive difference. There are plenty of people who commute from the Niagara region to the GTA so I don't see a problem driving to London once a month or so. Furthermore Montreal and Ottawa are very culturally different. The overwhelming majority of Leaf fans are simply priced out. I know people with well paying jobs who grew up Leafs fans and they go to a game maybe once every 3 years. These same people were excited at a Markham team because they'd be able to watch NHL hockey at a discount. Lot of Leaf fans are also hockey fans.


https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada-could-support-12-nhl-teams-new-report-says-1.630431
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canada-can-support-more-nhl-teams-study-argues-1.1087155



Stadium typically refers to a bigger arena. Although the terms are interchangeable that's how a lot of people look at it. So for a pro sports team, stadium seems to work better as oppose to any local arena.

no, stadium typically refers to an open air arena, think baseball and football stadiums

secondly, sorry the market is not big enough or rich enough to support an NHL team. you need far more than just tickets and attendance to keep a team afloat.

You need big money sponsorships and advertising deals. 2 things you are up a creek with in London considering you're fighting against Toronto, Detroit and Buffalo for the same dollars.

 

[cheswick]

Stadium typically refers to a bigger arena. Although the terms are interchangeable that's how a lot of people look at it. So for a pro sports team, stadium seems to work better as oppose to any local arena.

I've never heard that usage before. Stadiums are where football is played, often open aired, sometimes domed. Rare for other events to be held there. Arenas are enclosed venues with smaller playing surfaces where hockey and basketball is played, and often holding other concert events. A musician holding a stadium tour isn't playing NHL venues, they're playing NFL venues.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

The NHL’s Most Valuable Teams

Panthers and Coyotes are worth under 300 million. Fact Bettman knows how to squeeze a penny doesn't mean it's never an option to relocate like how Atlanta went to Winnipeg for 170 million.

Comparing London to Halifax, I'll stop you right there because the average available salaries after taxes in Halifax are far, far lower than London. They're having trouble getting a CFL team for 3 decades.

Ottawa claiming Toronto is way more crazy than London claiming west Toronto. I'm talking Mississauga, Brampton, Hamilton areas. Those are 90-100 min drives, 2 hours at most. GTA to Ottawa is 4 hours at minimum. Massive difference. There are plenty of people who commute from the Niagara region to the GTA so I don't see a problem driving to London once a month or so. Furthermore Montreal and Ottawa are very culturally different. The overwhelming majority of Leaf fans are simply priced out. I know people with well paying jobs who grew up Leafs fans and they go to a game maybe once every 3 years. These same people were excited at a Markham team because they'd be able to watch NHL hockey at a discount. Lot of Leaf fans are also hockey fans.

Doesn't matter what they're worth according to Forbes. All NHL teams are now worth minimum $650 million. That's the new cost to play in the league, the rights to a NHL franchise with no assets, contracts, staff, only the right to ice a team in the league is $650 million. Tom Dundon last year bought 61% of the Hurricanes from Karmanos for $420 million. Do the math and that makes the total value of the Hurricanes ~$690 million. One of the biggest benefits of expansion is that the values of the teams are now clearly defined. Fertitta lowballed a $400 million bid at Melnyk and the NHL stepped in and said "not a shot, guy" and had a backroom meeting. No one reputable has said anything since other than Fertitta was put off by the price.

Population wise, Metro Halifax is not much smaller than Metro London. GDP per capita is comparable, and Halifax has a bigger corporate base as well. They're very comparable overall markets.

As for drawing from the GTA, whenever the Sens play the Habs or the Leafs, the crowd has always been packed with Habs and Leafs fans. Every game. While using that logic, why the heck would people from Southern Ontario not just continue going to Sabres games and people from Windsor continue to go to Detroit games since they're still closer than London. And once again, with the ticket prices, they won't be at a discount. Understand that. The team will be burning money if they aren't more than triple the current London Knights tickets. It isn't going to be like Florida or Arizona or major junior teams where you can get $15-$20 nosebleeds and an insanely nice $50 second row seat on the blue line.

As for your links, one claims that Vancouver and Montreal could both support second teams. I'm not going to go into other claims it makes, but if you or anyone else actually believes that then you need to do some major reevaluations. While they're clearly delusional and dated, it's also from 2011 when the dollars were trading at about equal for the first time in a while, and allowed True North to do a nice cut rate business transaction. The dollars haven't been trading equal for more than a few weeks in the 8/9 years since that was written, and unlike Alberta and many other places in Canada, the economies of Nashville, Carolina, and Florida doesn't immediately tank when the price of oil and timber fall.

 

[Jets4Life]

On the resale market I've paid as much as $55 each for 1st or 2nd row seats. Reality is combined with Kitchener a season ticket drive of 5,000 people is more than plausible if the average ticket price per game was about $50. There are many 3+ million homes in London outside the downtown core where I could see people investing. It's a very hockey mad town. I've personally never attended a Knights game that wasn't just packed but the bars were booming, on a weeknight. Just my experience with the town.

Problem is that the big obstacle with the NHL granting a team to London, is that Toronto, and Buffalo would likely try and veto the move, unless they were compensated. Not sure if they ahve the power to do so, but I would imagine they would try. There is also competition from the GTA, as the league could make a killing with a second team in the GTA.

Panthers and Coyotes are worth under 300 million. Fact Bettman knows how to squeeze a penny doesn't mean it's never an option to relocate like how Atlanta went to Winnipeg for 170 million.

Winnipeg really lucked out, as the Atlanta team has nowhere to play, and with the NHL taking over Phoenix, Bettman was not going to bail out a second team, as it would likely drive franchise values down. Atlanta had no arena to play in (The ASG wanted them out to focus on the NBA Hawks), and TNSE was lucky enough to put in a bid for the team, as AFAIK, there was no other group outside Atlanta that bid for the Thrashers.

Comparing London to Halifax, I'll stop you right there because the average available salaries after taxes in Halifax are far, far lower than London. They're having trouble getting a CFL team for 3 decades.

Halifax has the advantage. There are no teams anywhere near Nova Scotia, the closest likely being Boston. They do not have to worry about problems with competition from cities close by.

Having said that, the huge problem that any potential buyer in the London area would ahve is Toronto, Detroit, and Buffalo using their pull to prevent the move. The NHL is drooling at the prospect of placing a second team in the GTA, as not only would it succeed, but they can charge a king's ranson for expansion fees.

 

[WingsFan95]

I've never heard that usage before. Stadiums are where football is played, often open aired, sometimes domed. Rare for other events to be held there. Arenas are enclosed venues with smaller playing surfaces where hockey and basketball is played, and often holding other concert events. A musician holding a stadium tour isn't playing NHL venues, they're playing NFL venues.

I think it's semantics really. Many NHL arenas are named Centers. If all but a few were named arenas it would be more concrete but as it is I think it's semantics and preference.

Doesn't matter what they're worth according to Forbes. All NHL teams are now worth minimum $650 million. That's the new cost to play in the league, the rights to a NHL franchise with no assets, contracts, staff, only the right to ice a team in the league is $650 million. Tom Dundon last year bought 61% of the Hurricanes from Karmanos for $420 million. Do the math and that makes the total value of the Hurricanes ~$690 million. One of the biggest benefits of expansion is that the values of the teams are now clearly defined. Fertitta lowballed a $400 million bid at Melnyk and the NHL stepped in and said "not a shot, guy" and had a backroom meeting. No one reputable has said anything since other than Fertitta was put off by the price.

Population wise, Metro Halifax is not much smaller than Metro London. GDP per capita is comparable, and Halifax has a bigger corporate base as well. They're very comparable overall markets.

As for drawing from the GTA, whenever the Sens play the Habs or the Leafs, the crowd has always been packed with Habs and Leafs fans. Every game. While using that logic, why the heck would people from Southern Ontario not just continue going to Sabres games and people from Windsor continue to go to Detroit games since they're still closer than London. And once again, with the ticket prices, they won't be at a discount. Understand that. The team will be burning money if they aren't more than triple the current London Knights tickets. It isn't going to be like Florida or Arizona or major junior teams where you can get $15-$20 nosebleeds and an insanely nice $50 second row seat on the blue line.

As for your links, one claims that Vancouver and Montreal could both support second teams. I'm not going to go into other claims it makes, but if you or anyone else actually believes that then you need to do some major reevaluations. While they're clearly delusional and dated, it's also from 2011 when the dollars were trading at about equal for the first time in a while, and allowed True North to do a nice cut rate business transaction. The dollars haven't been trading equal for more than a few weeks in the 8/9 years since that was written, and unlike Alberta and many other places in Canada, the economies of Nashville, Carolina, and Florida doesn't immediately tank when the price of oil and timber fall.

I stipulated a canadian dollar at or above 90 cents in a scenario where London can get a team. And yes you make some good points with the cost of teams recently but the Jets cost 170 million including fees. That happened. I'm not going to consider that being possible now at that price but in a recession at 350 million? Obviously that's a scenario where in a recession London is somehow doing well but in such economic times businesses do tend to move to cheaper domains so it's not completely irrelevant. Ultimately London would have more hockey fans and while yes attendance isn't everything, it is a big part in why Winnipeg has been successful.

Problem is that the big obstacle with the NHL granting a team to London, is that Toronto, and Buffalo would likely try and veto the move, unless they were compensated. Not sure if they ahve the power to do so, but I would imagine they would try. There is also competition from the GTA, as the league could make a killing with a second team in the GTA.

The NHL is drooling at the prospect of placing a second team in the GTA, as not only would it succeed, but they can charge a king's ranson for expansion fees.

I don't see how Toronto or Buffalo have regional autonomy since London lies more than 100 miles from their metro areas. Buffalo especially being a foreign border. Obviously Toronto would try but it's not a Hamilton situation.

I'm also looking at the margins of having a 2nd GTA team and a London based team and I think it would be triple the cost. Remember now I'm only looking at relocation, not London getting a team via expansion.

Halifax has the advantage. There are no teams anywhere near Nova Scotia, the closest likely being Boston. They do not have to worry about problems with competition from cities close by.

I think because of how remote it is and the heavy taxation, Nova Scotia can only hope for a CFL team at best. Once they get one, even the thought of an NHL team would be lunacy. Having visited and knowing several people who live in the Maritimes, which includes all 3 provinces, the other big issue is with an NHL season itself running through the months of Dec-Feb when a lot of people with money go south. In fact there's people who are very much mid-income that take a trailer to stay in the US during the snow months. That to me simply means no major team can survive with home games during that stretch.

 

[Metnut]

The travel and time difference would be a big hurdle to overcome but Bettman loves big markets and London would be a huge market to add. NHL did beat NFL into Vegas, so I wouldn't count them out of London either.

 

[tony d]

It's a good city, the Knights are among the best CHL teams, only way I see London getting a NHL team is if the NHL goes to 50 or more teams which is very doubtful.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The travel and time difference would be a big hurdle to overcome but Bettman loves big markets and London would be a huge market to add. NHL did beat NFL into Vegas, so I wouldn't count them out of London either.

not that London...

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

The travel and time difference would be a big hurdle to overcome but Bettman loves big markets and London would be a huge market to add. NHL did beat NFL into Vegas, so I wouldn't count them out of London either.

This is London, Ontario. Metro population of under 500,000 and no major corporation HQs. You might have it confused with the overseas "Capital of the British Empire" London. And while we've spent 3-4 pages bashing the idea of putting a NHL team in London, Ontario, a team in London, England would be on the receiving end of many more pages absolutely ripping apart that horrible idea.

I stipulated a canadian dollar at or above 90 cents in a scenario where London can get a team. And yes you make some good points with the cost of teams recently but the Jets cost 170 million including fees. That happened. I'm not going to consider that being possible now at that price but in a recession at 350 million? Obviously that's a scenario where in a recession London is somehow doing well but in such economic times businesses do tend to move to cheaper domains so it's not completely irrelevant. Ultimately London would have more hockey fans and while yes attendance isn't everything, it is a big part in why Winnipeg has been successful.

We've already been through this. The Jets acquired the Thrashers for $170 million because the dollar was about equal, the team had nowhere to play, and again it was pre-VGK/Seattle expansion. Franchises after those two expansion teams have been awarded are now $650 million dollars at a minimum. You can go through all the sales of NHL teams in this century and they're all irrelevant. Melnyk bought the Sens for $100 million in 2003, so what? That all means nothing See value of Hurricanes sale to Dundon, failed Melnyk sale to Fertitta, etc. A sale of under that valuation either will be blocked by the league or not even accepted.

Attendance isn't everything. Winnipeg's operating income was $11 million last year. That is it. In a hockey obsessed area of the country with nothing else to do. For reference, even non-traditional markets like San Jose, Dallas, New Jersey, LA, and Vegas all did better along with the usual suspects. Great fan support isn't everything. Sell out all you want, he real money is in the TV deals, merchandise sales, and corporate boxes. Pittsburgh is still one of the highest earners despite being in a fairly small, football obsessed market because they have sold out every one of their 66 corporate boxes since their new arena was built. Tons of Fortune 500 companies in Pittsburgh have been buying them and have been buying them and it rakes in more dough than you're giving it credit for. Selling out in a hockey obsessed province where there's little other entertainment is not impressive or financially advantageous.

 

[93LEAFS]

I think it's semantics really. Many NHL arenas are named Centers. If all but a few were named arenas it would be more concrete but as it is I think it's semantics and preference.



I stipulated a canadian dollar at or above 90 cents in a scenario where London can get a team. And yes you make some good points with the cost of teams recently but the Jets cost 170 million including fees. That happened. I'm not going to consider that being possible now at that price but in a recession at 350 million? Obviously that's a scenario where in a recession London is somehow doing well but in such economic times businesses do tend to move to cheaper domains so it's not completely irrelevant. Ultimately London would have more hockey fans and while yes attendance isn't everything, it is a big part in why Winnipeg has been successful.



I don't see how Toronto or Buffalo have regional autonomy since London lies more than 100 miles from their metro areas. Buffalo especially being a foreign border. Obviously Toronto would try but it's not a Hamilton situation.

I'm also looking at the margins of having a 2nd GTA team and a London based team and I think it would be triple the cost. Remember now I'm only looking at relocation, not London getting a team via expansion.



I think because of how remote it is and the heavy taxation, Nova Scotia can only hope for a CFL team at best. Once they get one, even the thought of an NHL team would be lunacy. Having visited and knowing several people who live in the Maritimes, which includes all 3 provinces, the other big issue is with an NHL season itself running through the months of Dec-Feb when a lot of people with money go south. In fact there's people who are very much mid-income that take a trailer to stay in the US during the snow months. That to me simply means no major team can survive with home games during that stretch.

Toronto has control over the Television market likely all the way to Kitchener, as it already lies in their existing allocate region. London would have the smallest local television market. You seem to overlook that. Again, 55 bucks CAD for 2nd row Knights tickets is not the market that is the lifeblood of a team. They need to be selling those tickets at around 150 CAD for 41 games a year. Having lived in London for multiple years, I fail to see how that market exists. You seem to be relying heavily on Kitchener/Waterloo, which is likely going to be a disputed area for local television rights, and will probably stay with Toronto. Look at how small a television territory Ottawa was able to carve out in Ontario because the Leafs wouldn't share the region.

 

[GuelphStormer]

Toronto has control over the Television market likely all the way to Kitchener, as it already lies in their existing allocate region. London would have the smallest local television market. You seem to overlook that. Again, 55 bucks CAD for 2nd row Knights tickets is not the market that is the lifeblood of a team. They need to be selling those tickets at around 150 CAD for 41 games a year. Having lived in London for multiple years, I fail to see how that market exists. You seem to be relying heavily on Kitchener/Waterloo, which is likely going to be a disputed area for local television rights, and will probably stay with Toronto. Look at how small a television territory Ottawa was able to carve out in Ontario because the Leafs wouldn't share the region.

What does this mean and how do you know this?

 

[93LEAFS]

What does this mean and how do you know this?

When the Senators moved in, they only got up to Belleville for local television. So, when a new team is added to a region, they get 50 miles within the vicinity and the territory that isn't particularly close to another market. Ottawa with the Habs was able to reach an agreement to share the marketplace in Quebec, which kept the Habs access to Gatineau. The Leafs had absolutely no interest in a region sharing agreement with that small a market. In the case of Guelph and Kitchener, they are pretty much in-between Toronto and London but outside the 50-mile range. But, they will still always remain exclusive to one of the teams television footprints unless they agree to share the region. Since Toronto is the established team, and as close to Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, it is likely that they will remain part of the Leafs local television contract. For Toronto, it makes no sense to make any sort of region sharing agreement on local television rights, as they will still pretty much exclusively have the Golden Horseshoe, which kills the value of any local TV deal for London.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

London, Ontario is more of an OHL city, just like how Columbus is an NCAA football city, which is why I can't ever see them getting NFL, plus Cincinnati and Cleveland have teams.

 

[Jets4Life]

The travel and time difference would be a big hurdle to overcome but Bettman loves big markets and London would be a huge market to add. NHL did beat NFL into Vegas, so I wouldn't count them out of London either.

London, would be by far, the smallest market in the NHL.

 

[Jets4Life]

Attendance isn't everything. Winnipeg's operating income was $11 million last year. That is it. In a hockey obsessed area of the country with nothing else to do. For reference, even non-traditional markets like San Jose, Dallas, New Jersey, LA, and Vegas all did better along with the usual suspects. Great fan support isn't everything. Sell out all you want, he real money is in the TV deals, merchandise sales, and corporate boxes. Pittsburgh is still one of the highest earners despite being in a fairly small, football obsessed market because they have sold out every one of their 66 corporate boxes since their new arena was built. Tons of Fortune 500 companies in Pittsburgh have been buying them and have been buying them and it rakes in more dough than you're giving it credit for. Selling out in a hockey obsessed province where there's little other entertainment is not impressive or financially advantageous.

Sorry to correct you,as I agree with most of what you ahve to say. The NHL will always be a gate-driven league. TV revenue is a fraction of what it is in the 3 other big sports, especially the NFL.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Bettman loves big markets

The owners do too. Probably because pro teams have an easier go of it in big markets than they do in small markets.

Doesn't matter what they're worth according to Forbes. All NHL teams are now worth minimum $650 million. That's the new cost to play in the league, the rights to a NHL franchise with no assets, contracts, staff, only the right to ice a team in the league is $650 million.

Yes, and no. $650 million also gets you
-- entry into the league and all the centrally generated revenue streams it produces
-- exclusive control over the market you're granted a franchise for
-- access to revenue streams from merchandise, ticket sales, advertising, etc. not tapped by prior activity and not potentially affected positively or negatively by past actions of the team
-- no debt incurred [just yet] - meaning a $650 million valuation is net value, after offsetting debt

and there's a premium built into that price tag for some of those things. If you buy an existing franchise, some of those items are already tapped into and some may be affected because of what team has done [hasn't done] in the past and it may require work [and expense] to build up that value. Plus, there's no need to incur all the start-up costs of building a franchise ground-up; the infrastructure is already set in place, you're just deciding if you want to tweak it and how much. If there's debt attached, it arguably drags down the net value of the franchise.

Ultimately, an asset is only worth what someone else will pay for it in an arm's length transaction. [See: Atlanta Spirit trying to unload the Thrashers at whatever price tag an out-of-town team would pay.] The league can say it wants [finger by lip] $1 billion, but if no one is offering it and circumstances dictate that a sale needs to happen sooner rather than later, ... well, the league has to decide what's more important: preserving the valuation of franchises at a level it thinks is appropriate, or preserving the viability of one of its franchises.

Fertitta lowballed a $400 million bid at Melnyk and the NHL stepped in and said "not a shot, guy" and had a backroom meeting. No one reputable has said anything since other than Fertitta was put off by the price.

Do you have that confused with the alleged offer from Laliberte? Fertitta had apparently discussed the Coyotes, but I don't see or recall anything where he talked about buying the Senators.

I'll also note that the $400 million offer was allegedly really $630 million, because it included $230 million of debt repayment. So, while on the surface it probably wasn't too far off I suspect the league was looking at the value attributed to the franchise and said, "nope - you need to value that at $650 million first, then offer whatever for debt relief." Which, the NHL can say that's what needs to happen - but then see my comment above on how to value assets and what happens in a push-comes-to-shove situation.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Do you have that confused with the alleged offer from Laliberte? Fertitta had apparently discussed the Coyotes, but I don't see or recall anything where he talked about buying the Senators.

I'll also note that the $400 million offer was allegedly really $630 million, because it included $230 million of debt repayment. So, while on the surface it probably wasn't too far off I suspect the league was looking at the value attributed to the franchise and said, "nope - you need to value that at $650 million first, then offer whatever for debt relief." Which, the NHL can say that's what needs to happen - but then see my comment above on how to value assets and what happens in a push-comes-to-shove situation.

I'll look for the link. I remember seeing something on the Athletic or something that during the Bettman-Fertitta meeting, Fertitta was kicking the tires and made a pass at Ottawa. He was under the impression he could get a cut rate deal because of the situation there, owner and arena issues and all. Bettman and Daly pretty much told him to look elsewhere if he wants that.

and there's a premium built into that price tag for some of those things. If you buy an existing franchise, some of those items are already tapped into and some may be affected because of what team has done [hasn't done] in the past and it may require work [and expense] to build up that value. Plus, there's no need to incur all the start-up costs of building a franchise ground-up; the infrastructure is already set in place, you're just deciding if you want to tweak it and how much. If there's debt attached, it arguably drags down the net value of the franchise.

Ultimately, an asset is only worth what someone else will pay for it in an arm's length transaction. [See: Atlanta Spirit trying to unload the Thrashers at whatever price tag an out-of-town team would pay.] The league can say it wants [finger by lip] $1 billion, but if no one is offering it and circumstances dictate that a sale needs to happen sooner rather than later, ... well, the league has to decide what's more important: preserving the valuation of franchises at a level it thinks is appropriate, or preserving the viability of one of its franchises.

None of the teams are in, or will likely be in, a situation where they're being forced to leave and the owners will listen to anyone with a checkbook, like Atlanta saw in 2011. Carolina has turned it around, Florida still has something like 6 years left on a lease and pretty good negotiating power, people have been saying the Yotes will relocate for over a decade but they've got an arena that they won't be forced out of. Some people have been crazy enough to suggest Calgary. The NHL and team owners have all of the negotiating power.

 

[HugoSimon]

Toronto has control over the Television market likely all the way to Kitchener, as it already lies in their existing allocate region. London would have the smallest local television market. You seem to overlook that. Again, 55 bucks CAD for 2nd row Knights tickets is not the market that is the lifeblood of a team. They need to be selling those tickets at around 150 CAD for 41 games a year. Having lived in London for multiple years, I fail to see how that market exists. You seem to be relying heavily on Kitchener/Waterloo, which is likely going to be a disputed area for local television rights, and will probably stay with Toronto. Look at how small a television territory Ottawa was able to carve out in Ontario because the Leafs wouldn't share the region.

I not remotely claiming that I have any idea how this works, but I'm not getting how Toronto isn't horribly over saturated.

You have a region that has a region with 10 times as many fans as buffalo and you don't think you'll have any cross over to london?

Not to mention all the corporate interests who'd like to attach themselves into an NHL team for cheap.

I honestly have no understanding of how the television market works, but isn't it drastically different when online?

London has 4 things on its side.

1) A well established high density of hockey fans, the idea that people wouldn't pay drastically higher prices for the NHL is farcical.

2) It is just outside Toronto's territorial rights, which pretty much means the team comes at half the cost of hamilton/markham.


3) There's 12 million people in the region.

4) Because of Ontario's green belt, the surrounding regions will likely grow faster than anywhere else in the country. Your talking about an area with 2.5 million people which will be far closer to 3 million by the time a stadium gets built.


The big obstacles are as follows

1) Obviously getting a team for cheap, which shouldn't be taken likely. The nhl could easily decline in value, it's a 2/3 ownership crises away from that. With a seattle expansion this risk only increases.

2) The league being ok with it, which seems like a long shot, but I think they'd look the other way if economic entities in Toronto were hyped to have access to an alternative to the leafs.

3) Figuring out some way of cracking television rights with some form of online viewership.

4) Waiting a handful of years for population growth to continue/infrastructure to be developed.



Regardless as someone who hates London, they have a ridiculously good location, both in terms of population growth and proximity to Toronto. Finding a way to make online viewership count would be the obvious trick.

 

[alko]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada-could-support-12-nhl-teams-new-report-says-1.630431
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canada-can-support-more-nhl-teams-study-argues-1.1087155

A report out today says the Toronto area could support two more NHL teams.

 

[GuelphStormer]

A report out today says the Toronto area could support two more NHL teams.

that's from 8 years ago. but its basic conclusions still stand, i think.

 

[Dogewow]

I not remotely claiming that I have any idea how this works, but I'm not getting how Toronto isn't horribly over saturated.

You have a region that has a region with 10 times as many fans as buffalo and you don't think you'll have any cross over to london?

Not to mention all the corporate interests who'd like to attach themselves into an NHL team for cheap.

I honestly have no understanding of how the television market works, but isn't it drastically different when online?

London has 4 things on its side.

1) A well established high density of hockey fans, the idea that people wouldn't pay drastically higher prices for the NHL is farcical.

2) It is just outside Toronto's territorial rights, which pretty much means the team comes at half the cost of hamilton/markham.


3) There's 12 million people in the region.

4) Because of Ontario's green belt, the surrounding regions will likely grow faster than anywhere else in the country. Your talking about an area with 2.5 million people which will be far closer to 3 million by the time a stadium gets built.


The big obstacles are as follows

1) Obviously getting a team for cheap, which shouldn't be taken likely. The nhl could easily decline in value, it's a 2/3 ownership crises away from that. With a seattle expansion this risk only increases.

2) The league being ok with it, which seems like a long shot, but I think they'd look the other way if economic entities in Toronto were hyped to have access to an alternative to the leafs.

3) Figuring out some way of cracking television rights with some form of online viewership.

4) Waiting a handful of years for population growth to continue/infrastructure to be developed.



Regardless as someone who hates London, they have a ridiculously good location, both in terms of population growth and proximity to Toronto. Finding a way to make online viewership count would be the obvious trick.

Some questions I have regarding the bolded:

-Define "High Density", as there are plenty of Canadian markets that support Hockey in varying degrees, in which one could argue is "high density" based on the personal parameters they set. It's also been established that there is a pretty big difference between supporting a junior franchise, versus supporting a professional sports organization. This is magnified when we're talking about a market like London, that is most certainly not a high density/large market population wise when compared to other NHL markets.

Also, please provide evidence as to why you believe that it would be"farcical" that London would not pay the increased NHL ticket prices. It's already been argued fairly well by a few posters why it would not work. You need to provide some type of evidence or reasoning to counter this other than just stating it's "farcical".

-How much of that 12 million is part of the GTA or very close to it? At least 6 million of those people are actually part of this metro area and are extremely unlikely to make the trek to London for a game. I'd also venture a guess that a few more millions are close to the GTA or Buffalo area and are more likely to support these franchises in these markets, as opposed to taking the additional time/travel to London. There's also the Windsor, Ontario area, which has already been explained to be part of Detroit's territory.

-You're last point for #4 isn't specifically an argument that London should get a team, but that hypothetically a second team in Toronto or a team in a city like Hamilton could potentially work in the future.

 

[DowntownBooster]

Am I the only one confused by the use of the word stadium instead of arena?

Agree. A stadium is for football whereas an arena is for hockey.