Quebec City trying to keep the flame alive

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,358
12,730
South Mountain
Is the fact that PKP is/was also a politician that prevents the minority investment necessary to drum up the expansion fee?

Like, I see PKP not having the dough to get NHL expansion done (nor Charles Bronfman having the dough to get MLB expansion done in Montreal).

Why wouldn't they be selling minority stakes in the franchise so they only have to come up with 60% of the expansion fee themselves?

I presume they considered that option and the financial numbers still didn’t work out amongst Quebecor/PKP and potential minority investors.
 

checkerdome

Registered User
Oct 31, 2006
1,041
12
So on the one hand - yes have some pity for Quebec City. They had a moderately successful team for several years. It relocated due to money struggle of the owner, not lack of support. The team then won the Stanley Cup the following year after relocation.

Years later the NHL then, with a wink and a nod, urged Quebec City to build a modern NHL-caliber arena which they did. But no team has moved in. And there's every reason to think a QC franchise would do well financially.


But on the other hand - pity doesn't mean QC is getting a team. And it doesn't look like they are. Money is the only thing that talks.

The Nordiques never had Patrick Roy in goal.

He was the key to Colorado winning the cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dj4aces

Cynicaps

Registered User
Aug 19, 2011
441
134
Isn't the territory rule that you can't overlap 50-miles radiuses from city limits? Essentially that city limits have to be 100 miles apart?

Orlando, Baltimore, Hartford, Cincinnati, Providence, Hamilton, and GTA2 all overlap a current territory. Cleveland's territory overlaps Detroit's, but only over water. Not sure if they'd consider that territory overlap.

If you don't have current owners willing to not veto and prospective owners willing to pay indemnity, that leaves Indianapolis, Charlotte, Virginia Beach, and Jacksonville.

If memory serves me right, Hartford is just outside of overlapping NYR/NYI(/NJD) and BOS but go in any direction more than 15 miles and you'd hit overlap. I don't think they had to pay an indemnity when they came over from the WHA either as such.
 

Yukon Joe

Registered User
Aug 3, 2011
6,277
4,342
YWG -> YXY -> YEG
If memory serves me right, Hartford is just outside of overlapping NYR/NYI(/NJD) and BOS but go in any direction more than 15 miles and you'd hit overlap. I don't think they had to pay an indemnity when they came over from the WHA either as such.

Hartford came in as part of the WHA merger, not through expansion. Soon the one hand I don't think the radius restriction applies, and on the other hand if any of those teams objected they could vote against the WHA merger (and quickly checking Boston did vote against it).
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,532
5,135
Brooklyn
Am I wrong for thinking Cincinnati might be more likely if they need another East team than Quebec City? At least with them Bettman said he had received interest from a party in the city (whether that was from a realistic ownership group, no one knows). Seems like more than Quebec has to offer at this point at least
Blue Jackets probably not gonna let that happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dj4aces

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
The thing that gets me about those who think Quebec is "too small" to be an NHL market...

Cincinnati is a small market MLB/NFL city and an MLS team. If 840,000 is too small for a major pro sports franchise, how is 2.2 million people big enough for a FOURTH?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kimota

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,532
5,135
Brooklyn
The thing that gets me about those who think Quebec is "too small" to be an NHL market...

Cincinnati is a small market MLB/NFL city and an MLS team. If 840,000 is too small for a major pro sports franchise, how is 2.2 million people big enough for a FOURTH?
Yea, I don't think Cincinnati is getting NHL team or NBA team. Its really 3 1/2 anyway. I still don't really take MLS seriously to be on the level of big 4.

And plus its all about corporate support. Cincinnati got couple big companies. Not sure about QC.
 

madhi19

Just the tip!
Jun 2, 2012
4,396
252
Cold and Dark place!
twitter.com
Yea, I don't think Cincinnati is getting NHL team or NBA team. Its really 3 1/2 anyway. I still don't really take MLS seriously to be on the level of big 4.

And plus its all about corporate support. Cincinnati got couple big companies. Not sure about QC.
Big pharma, a rather big tech sector with most of the serious players represented (Cheap electricity sure help for datacentre), a few pretty big video game studios... That's all a moot point. If I were to sell sponsorship for a Quebec city team the first thing I would do is open an office in Montreal and go after everybody who can't get in the Bell Centre. The corporate suites and tickets at the BC are sold out with a rather long waiting list. That's the money you go after same goes for beer advertisers, and everything else. You counter sell with whoever is not in a partnership with the Habs because a competitor got there first.
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,532
5,135
Brooklyn
Big pharma, a rather big tech sector with most of the serious players represented (Cheap electricity sure help for datacentre), a few pretty big video game studios... That's all a moot point. If I were to sell sponsorship for a Quebec city team the first thing I would do is open an office in Montreal and go after everybody who can't get in the Bell Centre. The corporate suites and tickets at the BC are sold out with a rather long waiting list. That's the money you go after same goes for beer advertisers, and everything else. You counter sell with whoever is not in a partnership with the Habs because a competitor got there first.
That sounds more like 2nd major team in Montreal is needed than an NHL team in QC. QC isn't exactly next to Montreal. Who is going to make that drive on weeknights?
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Yea, I don't think Cincinnati is getting NHL team or NBA team. Its really 3 1/2 anyway. I still don't really take MLS seriously to be on the level of big 4.

And plus its all about corporate support. Cincinnati got couple big companies. Not sure about QC.

Well, you're not wrong about the revenue needed to support an MLS team vs NBA/MLB/NHL franchise. But the ratio of MLS to NHL is about the same as NHL to NFL.

It's way easier for a market to support a new franchise if they don't have an NFL team. They get all the dollars first. Part of the reason why the San Diego Padres could start throwing money at Machado, Tatis, Soto and Bogaerts is that the Chargers left and the Padres became THE franchise in town.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,362
13,227
Illinois
The size ratio of Goliath to David being about similar as the size ratio of David to a cat isn’t really making a point about the cat being large, tbqh.

We’re all used to the idea of a Big Four in North American sports, but in reality it’d be way more accurate to say that there are tiers of pro sports, with the NFL on a level of its own, the NBA and MLB a step or two below, the NHL another step or two below, and the MLS on a step or two below further, speaking solely in terms of revenue generation, I mean.
 

cowboy82nd

Registered User
Feb 19, 2012
5,113
2,320
Newnan, Georgia
It also highlights how dumb it is that they have three teams in New York, not that I would advocate that any one of them move. Each of the three have carved out their spot nicely. But when I hear talk about the league and not being in enough US markets, they currently have 25 US teams, but only in 22 US markets.

So, are you saying that all three New York teams are part of the same market or are you leaving out Buffalo and adding New Jersey? Also by this logic, wouldn't that be 21 markets because the Ducks and Kings share the same?
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
187,194
39,224
So, are you saying that all three New York teams are part of the same market or are you leaving out Buffalo and adding New Jersey? Also by this logic, wouldn't that be 21 markets because the Ducks and Kings share the same?
Devils are part of the New York market. Don’t know why you’d think Buffalo is part of that.

Ducks and Kings are in the same market.

25 NHL teams in the US minus, 3 of which do not have their own media market.
 

cowboy82nd

Registered User
Feb 19, 2012
5,113
2,320
Newnan, Georgia
Devils are part of the New York market. Don’t know why you’d think Buffalo is part of that.

Ducks and Kings are in the same market.

25 NHL teams in the US minus, 3 of which do not have their own media market.

I only asked because you said this, "It also highlights how dumb it is that they have three teams in New York,. You didn't say the New York market. You said three teams in New York. Well, since the Devils play in New Jersey, I was just clarifying.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,057
10,730
Charlotte, NC
If memory serves me right, Hartford is just outside of overlapping NYR/NYI(/NJD) and BOS but go in any direction more than 15 miles and you'd hit overlap. I don't think they had to pay an indemnity when they came over from the WHA either as such.

Hartford's territory would overlap all 4 of them. Barely overlapping the Devils, but there's a good amount of overlap with the other 3. The WHA merger wasn't expansion.

Screenshot 2024-04-18 095427.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
So, this isn't really addressed in the NHL Constitution. NHL teams have exclusive rights to a radius 50 miles from their cities (we all know that).

The NHL Constitution does NOT say that the radii of teams cannot overlap. If your city is 50 miles from their city limits, you're good to get in without paying territorial rights fees. So Hartford wouldn't have to pay Boston or New York to get into the league.

But the overlap would likely be negotiated in terms of operations. As in, Hartford doesn't have to pay off the NY teams to play in Hartford, but they can't play home games in Bridgeport without paying the NY teams.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,730
4,368
Auburn, Maine
So, this isn't really addressed in the NHL Constitution. NHL teams have exclusive rights to a radius 50 miles from their cities (we all know that).

The NHL Constitution does NOT say that the radii of teams cannot overlap. If your city is 50 miles from their city limits, you're good to get in without paying territorial rights fees. So Hartford wouldn't have to pay Boston or New York to get into the league.

But the overlap would likely be negotiated in terms of operations. As in, Hartford doesn't have to pay off the NY teams to play in Hartford, but they can't play home games in Bridgeport without paying the NY teams.
don't the Islanders own Bridgeport, Kev.... just as MSG Owns the Wolf*Pack
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
NHL Territory and AHL territory are not the same thing and not really related. NHL territorial rights supersede AHL rights.

Like I said in one of the other times you've brought this thing up, the Utah Grizzlies arena is 7.3 miles from the Delta Center. That did not stop Salt Lake from getting the NHL franchise formerly known as the Coyotes without any kind of indemnification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dj4aces

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,730
4,368
Auburn, Maine
NHL Territory and AHL territory are not the same thing and not really related. NHL territorial rights supersede AHL rights.

Like I said in one of the other times you've brought this thing up, the Utah Grizzlies arena is 7.3 miles from the Delta Center. That did not stop Salt Lake from getting the NHL franchise formerly known as the Coyotes without any kind of indemnification.
IRRELEVANT, You're the one who brought Bridgeport into the discussion, which makes the point about Hartford moot..... the Rangers aren't leaving Hartford anytime soon... Utah isn't going anywhere either, so what's your beef w/ the Grizzlies.... when the reports directly from them said they're not going anywhere and welcomed the former Coyote franchise.... what does any of that have to do w/ QC being a viable market or realistic market.... the only way QC gets considered is an existing EC Team collapses the way the Coyotes did to the point where's it's a drain on the NHL...
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
IRRELEVANT, You're the one who brought Bridgeport into the discussion, which makes the point about Hartford moot..... the Rangers aren't leaving Hartford anytime soon... Utah isn't going anywhere either, so what's your beef w/ the Grizzlies.... when the reports directly from them said they're not going anywhere and welcomed the former Coyote franchise.... what does any of that have to do w/ QC being a viable market or realistic market.... the only way QC gets considered is an existing EC Team collapses the way the Coyotes did to the point where's it's a drain on the NHL...

I brought up Bridgeport to point out the difference between a city INSIDE the 50 mile radius vs OUTSIDE the 50 mile radius.

You keep bringing up AHL franchises being in places and acting like that prevents an NHL team from going there. It does not. I bring up the Utah Grizzlies because are sitting there helplessly while an NHL team moves into their market. That would happen in ANY AHL MARKET the NHL chooses to go to, regardless of who the owner of the AHL team is.


I honestly don't remember what any of this has to do with Quebec, other than people lobbing out other cities without NHL teams who could get one "ahead" of Quebec.

The issue with Quebec or any city is having an owner with an arena plan and a check the size the NHL wants. Quebec doesn't have a big enough check. That's the issue.

(Obviously a guy with a huge check saying "I want to put a team in (tiny market)" would be a massive stretch based on market size. But Quebec can prove a commitment to an NHL franchise by its population, like Winnipeg could, while a comparably sized US market could not.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,730
4,368
Auburn, Maine
I brought up Bridgeport to point out the difference between a city INSIDE the 50 mile radius vs OUTSIDE the 50 mile radius.

You keep bringing up AHL franchises being in places and acting like that prevents an NHL team from going there. It does not. I bring up the Utah Grizzlies because are sitting there helplessly while an NHL team moves into their market. That would happen in ANY AHL MARKET the NHL chooses to go to, regardless of who the owner of the AHL team is.


I honestly don't remember what any of this has to do with Quebec, other than people lobbing out other cities without NHL teams who could get one "ahead" of Quebec.

The issue with Quebec or any city is having an owner with an arena plan and a check the size the NHL wants. Quebec doesn't have a big enough check. That's the issue.

(Obviously a guy with a huge check saying "I want to put a team in (tiny market)" would be a massive stretch based on market size. But Quebec can prove a commitment to an NHL franchise by its population, like Winnipeg could, while a comparably sized US market could not.

show me where it has been stated ANYWHERE..... THAT
ECHL Utah is being relocated, Kev.... it isn't..... KSL interviewed the Grizzlies representatives and they aren't being relocated.... the only ream that might be is their AHL Affiliate in Tucson.... and that's not a guarantee.... WHY would the Grizzlies tweet a statement out welcoming the NHL TO Utah when the sale/relo was finalized/approved then if the team was being relocated out of market.... nothing has changed in either Tucson or WVC since this announcement, it is business as usual in both markets....
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
show me where it has been stated ANYWHERE..... THAT
ECHL Utah is being relocated, Kev.... it isn't.....

Why are you acting like that's an argument I'm making?

You're the one saying NHL franchises can't go to places where there are minor league teams, like that the Rangers "own" the Hartford market, and the Ducks "own" San Diego.

They don't own those markets. They operate AHL teams in those markets, just like the Grizzlies operate an ECHL team in the Salt Lake market. Their existence do not stop NHL franchises from being established there.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,730
4,368
Auburn, Maine
Why are you acting like that's an argument I'm making?

You're the one saying NHL franchises can't go to places where there are minor league teams, like that the Rangers "own" the Hartford market, and the Ducks "own" San Diego.

They don't own those markets. They operate AHL teams in those markets, just like the Grizzlies operate an ECHL team in the Salt Lake market. Their existence do not stop NHL franchises from being established there.
where was there a NHL Franchise in San Diego anywhere..... Kev.... there's no logical reason to bring Hartford back to the NHL, Either..... WHY DID MSG AKA the Rangers take that market when Karmanos bolted 1st to Greensboro, then Raleigh... why did the same Carolina franchise acquired and used the Whalers trademarks in 2023
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,203
3,435
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
I have no idea what you're saying.

The Rangers put their AHL team in Hartford to expand their brand and fill the void for the now NHL-less market.

Carolina didn't "acquire" the Whalers trademarks/logos. They screwed up and accidentally "abandoned" them, prompting the NHL to go get them -- because the NHL had a much better claim about their usage (since the Hurricanes were operating in Raleigh as not the Hartford Whalers).

And neither of those things have anything to do with franchise territorial rights.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad