NHL in Seattle?

[Matrix78]

Another possibly important point in the Seattle vs Quebec City might be... Will League think it 'needs' an immediate money-maker, or will it think that it simply needs to bail itself out of the bad situation in Phoenix?

And would Seattle be losing money if it has to do with an sub-par arena for a period of time? Or could it at least break even under such a scenario until a new facility would be up and ready?

You are wondering if Seattle could not lose money in the Key Arena
you can't be serious...

 

[Mungman]

I have trouble buying the $400 million cost. The $800 just seems silly, although I guess land might be worth a small fortune. The total cost of the MTS Centre in Winnipeg was only 133.5. Add in the NHL required renos and maybe you've hit 150. With a generous inflation factor call it 175.

I know it's smallish at 15k seating, but even adding 3-5 thousand more at the top of the arena, the $400 always being tossed out there seems like just going for style points. not that that's necessarily a bad thing. Could it be that when the arena is built with almost all private money (like MTS centre) there's a little more attention paid to revenue generators versus frivolous expense?

You can't even look at the cost of the MTSC anymore. TNSE lucked out on their timing, construction costs took off very shortly after the MTSC was built. Steel and concrete way more than doubled in costs. Construction inflation is a different number than the general inflation rate. Top of head number for MTSC today would be in the $250MM range (I wouldn't use this number in any business cases but if an inital estimate were too far off this number I'd do some digging through the line items).

 

[MoreOrr]

You are wondering if Seattle could not lose money in the Key Arena
you can't be serious...

I'm serious enough to wonder. Are you serious enough to give me a definitive answer? What kind of Seasonal losses are we talking here, assuming that at least for a couple of years the arena would be full to capacity just for the sake of something new drawing in the fans, and having a team that wasn't starting from Expansion scratch.

 

[beenhereandthere]

I'll call for Bettman's head if he would use Key Arena as a temporary venue....you'd probably be talking average ticket prices of $80 (the Seahawks have an average price of $63) if there was an NHL team in there. The Tacoma Dome is the only logical temporary venue. Wouldn't lose as much $ there, as they would at Key Arena, even if they charged $80 per average......
I wonder if Canadians would have the same attitude about more franchises in Canada if they had to live in the US and put up with the way the sport is dissed all the time (example by ESPN, etc).....it's very important to grow the game where it needs it, while it's not unimportant to go where the game is already king....I don't think this is the time for it, at least with the Coyotes, coming off the Thrashers move and the NBC contract.

 

[Melrose Munch]

NO to Key Arena!!!

 

[Grudy0]

Your first point: I would be able to buy season tickets and make every game. Hockey would officially be affordable to watch live for me and others in the surrounding gta.

I'm just thinking out loud...

There is an assumption that an NHL game in Hamilton would be more affordable than an NHL game at Air Canada Centre. I honestly don't know whether or not that is true. It could be on-par with the Leafs, it could be 5 percent less, it could be 20 percent less. However, the assumption here is that if the Coyotes are moved to Hamilton and then the team is sold, it will sell for quite a bit of money. The team's owner would then require a load of revenue in order to start paying down the debt.

As for your second point, individually the Leafs gain nothing. They would lose a few fans but not enough to damage them. This is irrelevant however because the 29 other owners would make money off a new team in Hamilton. The Leafs would make some bucks too.

The only way the other owners make money is by the sale of the team. The collective owners of the NHL purchased the Coyotes out of bankruptcy about three years ago at $140 million. To recoup the investment, for each owner to make at least $5 million out of the deal, the franchise would have to sell for $285 million at least. And then let's not forget to add the indemnification fee that would have to be paid to both the Leafs and the Sabres. Yes, there is a reduction in cash calls for the money-losing Coyotes, but receiving one-time payments for a franchise sale is far from simply "making money".

All I'm asking is to run the math through in your head.

 

[MoreOrr]

I'll call for Bettman's head if he would use Key Arena as a temporary venue....you'd probably be talking average ticket prices of $80 (the Seahawks have an average price of $63) if there was an NHL team in there. The Tacoma Dome is the only logical temporary venue. Wouldn't lose as much $ there, as they would at Key Arena, even if they charged $80 per average......
I wonder if Canadians would have the same attitude about more franchises in Canada if they had to live in the US and put up with the way the sport is dissed all the time (example by ESPN, etc).....it's very important to grow the game where it needs it, while it's not unimportant to go where the game is already king....I don't think this is the time for it, at least with the Coyotes, coming off the Thrashers move and the NBC contract.

I agree that the Tacoma Dome would certainly seem the more logical temporary choice. But whereas the Key could be used immediately as a subsatisfactory 'hockey' venue, wouldn't the Tacoma Dome first need some modifications just to even play hockey there? I don't know! If that's the case, then would it be possible that the Key be used in the first Season, then a modified Tacoma Dome for 2 or 3 Seasons more, until ultimately a new arena? I'm just asking.

 

[beenhereandthere]

I agree that the Tacoma Dome would certainly seem the more logical temporary choice. But whereas the Key could be used immediately as a subsatisfactory 'hockey' venue, wouldn't the Tacoma Dome first need some modifications just to even play hockey there? I don't know! If that's the case, then would it be possible that the Key be used in the first Season, then a modified Tacoma Dome for 2 or 3 Seasons more, until ultimately a new arena? I'm just asking.

Just use the Tacoma Dome from the get go....it's just off a transit station line (Key Arena you have to fight several side streets to get to it)....while the T Dome sucks for hockey....I think people would put up with it for 2 to 3 years....while the new arena in Seattle is being built.
Actually, there's been talk about just totally redoing the Tacoma Dome to make it a modern facility so it would be a permanent home instead. I don't think this is a bad idea at all, since, the population from Seattle to Olympia, is = to or not more than at least 3 current NHL markets (leaving out north of Downtown Seattle and north of Renton). That would be also a very easy drive, just over 2 hours, for NHL fans, which there are a good # of, in Metro Portland.

 

[JawandaPuck]

New Thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1094241

 

[Power Man]

NO to Key Arena!!!

Oh man

I'm no Sonics fan, but man ........