Quebec still waiting patiently.

[MNNumbers]

If Arizona relocates it will be to Houston

Florida just spent millions to get Q - there are not moving anytime soon.

Florida's situation doesn't depend on Q at all. The team is bound by the lease, with no buy out provision at all, until about 2023. At that time, it would cost 72M to buy out the last 5 years of the lease.

Florida MIGHT be available for relocation in 2028. I don't think the market is really warming up to the Panthers, and Broward County is moving more slowly toward being less subsidizing to the team. So, maybe when the current lease expires.

 

[Newsworthy]

I hope no teams are relocated to Quebec.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Quebec city had the most mitigated response for Quebec sovereignty referendum amongst widely majority french canadian ridings. Maybe check an history books and then talk about Quebec. Plus, it's pretty much a moot point since it's dying anyway.

You should read some posts before yours, some of the maritimes would come. Not all and they wouldn't necessarily be Nords fans, but that's not all what’s matter. They would helps to pack the house, that's it. It's still a necessary income for a team and a must have. Most if not all of Quebec city center have bilingual peoples working in it. Pretty much everybody aged 35 or less in Quebec city have a very functionning english, stop living in the 80s.

Baie-Comeau and Quebec City have nothing in common like you claims, have you been to either one ? The former is a 800 000 + population city with an historic touristy attraction center and the other is a small 22 000 population isolated town.

Lower income in Quebec city is less a problem since a big part of the peoples works for the government and while they have less income as their salary is lower, they have a guaranteed pension. They have much more money to spend. Plus, the low unemployment rate is incredible.

Even the business sector is rising and getting good.

The problem with Quebec city is this : it's not a new market for the NHL. Plus, the potential owner is a big minus for the NHL.

Québec nationalism is a mute point but you have one the former leaders of the Parti Québécois, a man who actively spent a large amount of his political career removing Québec from Canada, trying to buy a hockey team in PK Péladeau? Where almost his entire ownership group, not just his cronies either, were separatists? Where everything that’s put out about his reason for buying a NHL team is saying “it’s our game.” Yeah, I don’t believe that.

I said comparatively between Bai-Comeau and Québec City with regards to the Q and NHL respectively. You notice it? One is close to 50 times bigger than the other one. But in the eyes of the Q and NHL, they’re both very small, French only, non-cash rich, out of the way markets.

For Atlantic Canadians coming, they won’t need to pack the house, QC like Winnipeg would be sold out every night. They don’t need people coming from 10 hours away. And 94% of the metro population is French speaking from the last census. Who cares about pension, that’s guaranteed income when their retired. Their income is low, no owner will look at a team and go there because when they're 70 they’ll have disposable income.

Business sector is rising but it isn’t enough to put it in contention while Houston, GTA2, Atlanta, Portland, etc. are much more enticing.

 

[Red Dread]

I hope no teams are relocated to Quebec.

Just curious, why?

 

[zetajerk]

Just curious, why?

I'm with Newsworthy. Try being a fan of one or more of the teams that get targeted and picked on every 5 minutes. And have people throwing "facts" in your face about how much you suck and don't deserve to be here, all whilst looking the other way when traditional teams struggle. And being told that Canes to QC was a "done deal" for three years despite a lack of any evidence beyond wishful thinking. And being looked down upon and told that hockey will be better without us.

If you're going to take every opportunity to spit in someone's face, don't be surprised if they aren't sympathetic towards you.

After the horror that Thrashers fans went through, I don't want anyone else to relocate.

 

[HugoSimon]

People in Atlantic Canada will not simply cheer for a QC team because it's geographically their closest team. For a lot of the Maritimes, Boston is almost the same distance as QC.

Whats your point? I grew up in an environment where it was pretty normal or there to be a three way split between Montreal, Toronto and Boston. Why would it be hard to imagine a fourth leg.

Baie-Comeau* and Québec City have a lot in common, with respects to their roles in the QMJHL and NHL. Small and out of the way markets,

So by this logic North Bay and Toronto are inseparable.

almost exclusively French speaking and not overtly welcome to Anglos, and not nearly as appealing as other bigger cities

What big cities are you even talking about?

QC is a top of the list site in Canada.

The exclusively French speaking is a massive part of the appeal.

Yes some people are die hard fans of whatever team their dad and grandfather was, and they'll never be a dirty traitor who doesn't support some "issue" from the 1950s, but a lot of people simply don't care.

QC for virtually everyone I know is the top spot in Canada to go.

That whole tourist spot team idea is nonsense. That was a major factor Vegas had to overcome for the league, and they solved it be selling whatever insane number of season tickets and luxury box suites they sold. They had to prove to the league that local people and companies would support the team, not the tens of millions of tourists that visit for a week. .

Your trying to conflate that desert city known for gambling with the winter city that is known for its winter carnival and ice hotels.

It's not rational to think that the NHL or any NHL team owner will care about people a very long drive/flight away coming for a maximum of two or three games per season.

No rational owner with a billion dollars on the line would buy a team in QC because "Quebeckers love a road trip" as some posters have put on this thread.

Your using all or nothing phrasing and it's pretty hard to take seriously. As I said a 2 percent gain in audience from Atlantic Canada would be substantial for the team.

You could expect a much larger portion from the rest of Quebec.

The NHL when looking at teams, both with the last two expansion teams and with current teams, really only care about where the population is based, their income, their TV presence, and where the arena is.

Unless that fails and then the league will put its tail between its legs and sell a team for cheap and act like somehow it was a caculated move. Winnipeg got a team becaues it was a reliable market. Canadian markets are far more predictable than American markets.

For every Nashville, you have an Atlanta or a Phoenix.

For Quebec, it's close but not close enough for a lot of very small regions in what would be one of the smallest and most cash poor markets in the league and a TV market that would be aimed almost exclusively at French-Canadians.

And what proportion of the NHl's TV contracts come from Quebec plus Atlantic Canada?

This "small litle market" goes a long way to contribute to the NHL's bottom line.

A very small proportion of people give the NHL a lot more money than simply ticket revenue.

The reality is the NHL is bottle necking it revenue because of the influence of the habs and the leafs.

Winnipeg is generating revenue and that money didn't take form Toronto's or Calgary's income, this country is underserved.

I'm more than happy when the southern growth model works but its taking money from safe markets to prop up money sinks you have a problem.

 

[Peiskos]

I was in Quebec City this past winter, beautiful city and a beautiful brand spanking new Centre Videotron NHL arena. Its not even in question if QC could support a team, the answer is a clear yes..like many others have said Quebec City would be another carbon copy of Winnipeg, a packed house every night.

I personally believe its not a question of if but of when. It was my second time there, the first as an adult and I just fell in love with the city, nothing else like it in North America. When they eventually get a team they'll become my #2.

 

[HugoSimon]

Québec nationalism is a mute point but you have one the former leaders of the Parti Québécois, a man who actively spent a large amount of his political career removing Québec from Canada, trying to buy a hockey team in PK Péladeau? Where almost his entire ownership group, not just his cronies either, were separatists? Where everything that’s put out about his reason for buying a NHL team is saying “it’s our game.” Yeah, I don’t believe that.

What is your point, most people agree that for this to happen the nationalists would have to be shoved down an elevator shaft. But this is the paradox of your point. You want us to believe that southern markets will pay off and change and yet you can't accept that younger people on both sides could not care less about something that happen 30-40 or 150 years ago.

I said comparatively between Bai-Comeau and Québec City with regards to the Q and NHL respectively. You notice it? One is close to 50 times bigger than the other one.

By this logic there'd be 350 CHL teams in the country there is not.

These numbers do not scale.

But in the eyes of the Q and NHL, they’re both very small, French only, non-cash rich, out of the way markets.

So why is Phoenix a central, very english, large, well off place so bad at supporting a team?

The fact is Canada generates a ton of revenue for the NHL, in both regular ticket buying and tv revenue. Trying to trivialize this is ignoring the simple numbers.

Who cares about pension, that’s guaranteed income when their retired. Their income is low, no owner will look at a team and go there because when they're 70 they’ll have disposable income.

Income is low but so is the cost of living and other entertainment alternatives.

In larger cities a team becomes the flavour of the week "if" it happens to do well. In places like QC its expected to be part of a lifestyle.

Business sector is rising but it isn’t enough to put it in contention while Houston, GTA2, Atlanta, Portland, etc. are much more enticing.

Houston? The place that is completely unproven, that has virtually all of the same vitals as Atlanta/Phoenix.

Atlanta? The place that just lost a team?

GTA2? This would likely be the first choice but its far less likely to happen because of the leafs.

Portland? A small city that has no proven market for hockey, that already has several major league teams.

The fact is we have every reason to think most larger cities are oversaturated with other major league sports.

The handful of successes like nashville are likely the product of expanding directly when those places were underserved.

Nowadays most cities have been over saturated, its as it always was those areas that are underserved(like vegas) where one can hope to have the most success.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Whats your point? I grew up in an environment where it was pretty normal or there to be a three way split between Montreal, Toronto and Boston. Why would it be hard to imagine a fourth leg.




So by this logic North Bay and Toronto are inseparable.




What big cities are you even talking about?

QC is a top of the list site in Canada.

The exclusively French speaking is a massive part of the appeal.

Yes some people are die hard fans of whatever team their dad and grandfather was, and they'll never be a dirty traitor who doesn't support some "issue" from the 1950s, but a lot of people simply don't care.

QC for virtually everyone I know is the top spot in Canada to go.


Your trying to conflate that desert city known for gambling with the winter city that is known for its winter carnival and ice hotels.







Your using all or nothing phrasing and it's pretty hard to take seriously. As I said a 2 percent gain in audience from Atlantic Canada would be substantial for the team.

You could expect a much larger portion from the rest of Quebec.






Unless that fails and then the league will put its tail between its legs and sell a team for cheap and act like somehow it was a caculated move. Winnipeg got a team becaues it was a reliable market. Canadian markets are far more predictable than American markets.

For every Nashville, you have an Atlanta or a Phoenix.






And what proportion of the NHl's TV contracts come from Quebec plus Atlantic Canada?

This "small litle market" goes a long way to contribute to the NHL's bottom line.

A very small proportion of people give the NHL a lot more money than simply ticket revenue.

The reality is the NHL is bottle necking it revenue because of the influence of the habs and the leafs.

Winnipeg is generating revenue and that money didn't take form Toronto's or Calgary's income, this country is underserved.

I'm more than happy when the southern growth model works but its taking money from safe markets to prop up money sinks you have a problem.

In the eyes of major junior, North Bay has decent support for its team and not many businesses centered there. In the eyes of the NHL, Toronto is one of the biggest metro areas in North America with high disposable income and dozens of Fortune 500 companies. Not at all the same. The NHL doesn’t feel that way about QC.

Winnipeg is one of the smallest teams by revenue. Ottawa makes more than it according to the Forbes assessment. It was down with Buffalo. It wasn’t helping the league out a ton. It’s a solid market but one NY Rangers is worth several Winnipegs. If you think franchises will be selling for what they’re supposedly worth, look at the Dundon sale and the failed Ottawa sale. For solid southern markets, the only ones in trouble are Florida and Arizona. That’s it. And Florida has a lease for like 6 more years. You’re really gonna say that for every Nashville there’s a Florida and Arizona? Those are the only two that are in any trouble. Dallas, San José, St. Louis, and Anaheim all have much higher total incomes than Winnipeg. Nashville too.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

What is your point, most people agree that for this to happen the nationalists would have to be shoved down an elevator shaft. But this is the paradox of your point. You want us to believe that southern markets will pay off and change and yet you can't accept that younger people on both sides could not care less about something that happen 30-40 or 150 years ago.





By this logic there'd be 350 CHL teams in the country there is not.

These numbers do not scale.



So why is Phoenix a central, very english, large, well off place so bad at supporting a team?

The fact is Canada generates a ton of revenue for the NHL, in both regular ticket buying and tv revenue. Trying to trivialize this is ignoring the simple numbers.




Income is low but so is the cost of living and other entertainment alternatives.

In larger cities a team becomes the flavour of the week "if" it happens to do well. In places like QC its expected to be part of a lifestyle.





Houston? The place that is completely unproven, that has virtually all of the same vitals as Atlanta/Phoenix.

Atlanta? The place that just lost a team?

GTA2? This would likely be the first choice but its far less likely to happen because of the leafs.

Portland? A small city that has no proven market for hockey, that already has several major league teams.

The fact is we have every reason to think most larger cities are oversaturated with other major league sports.

The handful of successes like nashville are likely the product of expanding directly when those places were underserved.

Nowadays most cities have been over saturated, its as it always was those areas that are underserved(like vegas) where one can hope to have the most success.

Most of those first two points were completely incoherent. 3 southern markets aren’t working out extremely well. Atlanta didn’t due to the incompetence of ownership, Florida who still has like 6 years left on a lease, and Phoenix, whose grown hockey to the point the first overall pick played there almost his whole life and the local state university added a D1 program. For great successes, look at Nashville, St. Louis, Anaheim, and St. Louis. I have no idea where you pulled that 350 CHL teams from. Living is cheaper in QC because the income is lower. That’s economics and inflation 101. And the hockey as lifestyle goes back to the Quebec nationalism point I made earlier. All places have more money to offer than Quebec City. More potential hockey fans. Read anything Bettman has said and put out about the growth of the NHL, I’m not going to preach it to you here. As for Phoenix, it’s in the middle of the desert with an arena in the wrong part of the city that’s been had for a decade and then some.

 

[Newsworthy]

Just curious, why?

The obvious reasons I guess. My earliest memories of relocation was when the Hartford Whalers left.
My adopted second favorite hockey team. Only Pro franchise in Connecticut at the time.
That means those NHL teams are struggling to succeed financially in their current location and that stinks for the real and true fans of those cities who invested years of their lives and have their heart in it. Also the Florida Panthers who are rumored to be a candidate hold some personal interest to me. It would be very hard for that City to lose a sports team and as a visiting fan it's a nice arena to visit in sunny Florida. As much as I would understand Arizona as a more likely choice I hate to see any team leave unless absolutely necessary.

 

[HugoSimon]

.like many others have said Quebec City would be another carbon copy of Winnipeg, a packed house every night.
.

It really comes down to two factors, can the league take the shame of giving a team back and is there a team needing to relocate.

 

[Red Dread]

I'm with Newsworthy. Try being a fan of one or more of the teams that get targeted and picked on every 5 minutes. And have people throwing "facts" in your face about how much you suck and don't deserve to be here, all whilst looking the other way when traditional teams struggle. And being told that Canes to QC was a "done deal" for three years despite a lack of any evidence beyond wishful thinking. And being looked down upon and told that hockey will be better without us.

If you're going to take every opportunity to spit in someone's face, don't be surprised if they aren't sympathetic towards you.

After the horror that Thrashers fans went through, I don't want anyone else to relocate.

The obvious reasons I guess. My earliest memories of relocation was when the Hartford Whalers left.
My adopted second favorite hockey team. Only Pro franchise in Connecticut at the time.
That means those NHL teams are struggling to succeed financially in their current location and that stinks for the real and true fans of those cities who invested years of their lives and have their heart in it. Also the Florida Panthers who are rumored to be a candidate hold some personal interest to me. It would be very hard for that City to lose a sports team and as a visiting fan it's a nice arena to visit in sunny Florida. As much as I would understand Arizona as a more likely choice I hate to see any team leave unless absolutely necessary.

Very fair.

 

[Newsworthy]

I'm with Newsworthy. Try being a fan of one or more of the teams that get targeted and picked on every 5 minutes. And have people throwing "facts" in your face about how much you suck and don't deserve to be here, all whilst looking the other way when traditional teams struggle. And being told that Canes to QC was a "done deal" for three years despite a lack of any evidence beyond wishful thinking. And being looked down upon and told that hockey will be better without us.

If you're going to take every opportunity to spit in someone's face, don't be surprised if they aren't sympathetic towards you.

After the horror that Thrashers fans went through, I don't want anyone else to relocate.

Exactly my point and those Thrasher fans were devastated.

 

[Peiskos]

It really comes down to two factors, can the league take the shame of giving a team back and is there a team needing to relocate.

The shame? I don’t understand what you mean by this. If there is a market that can sustain an NHL team and have a full house every night it should have a team.

Personally when I see this in Florida it becomes very clear that there is a need to relocate.

Quebec City has 800,000 people in the metro area. Everything checks out, if “shame” is the NHL’s main argument not to relocate Florida to QC than what can I say, it’s not a very sound or rational business logic. Everybody with a functional brain knows Quebec City would be more profitable than the Florida Panthers.

 

[voyageur]

In the eyes of major junior, North Bay has decent support for its team and not many businesses centered there. In the eyes of the NHL, Toronto is one of the biggest metro areas in North America with high disposable income and dozens of Fortune 500 companies. Not at all the same. The NHL doesn’t feel that way about QC.

Winnipeg is one of the smallest teams by revenue. Ottawa makes more than it according to the Forbes assessment. It was down with Buffalo. It wasn’t helping the league out a ton. It’s a solid market but one NY Rangers is worth several Winnipegs. If you think franchises will be selling for what they’re supposedly worth, look at the Dundon sale and the failed Ottawa sale. For solid southern markets, the only ones in trouble are Florida and Arizona. That’s it. And Florida has a lease for like 6 more years. You’re really gonna say that for every Nashville there’s a Florida and Arizona? Those are the only two that are in any trouble. Dallas, San José, St. Louis, and Anaheim all have much higher total incomes than Winnipeg. Nashville too.

Anaheim Ducks on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Ottawa Senators on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Winnipeg Jets on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

You may want to rethink that assertion. Gate receipts especially the Jets clobber them. And if anyone accounted for merchandising revenue, which the NHL collects, I guarantee the city of Winnipeg is contributing a greater share than the city of Anaheim, by quite a margin. The drawback is seating capacity. The Jets arena is the smallest by a country mile.

But the rest of what you say is true. The NHL eats off the revenues of New York, Toronto, Montreal. Chicago and Boston are big drivers of revenue as well. Florida is a joke. But they built an arena for hockey before Quebec did. They have #1 and #2 on Bettman's list of franchise needs. Arizona has less than that. All 3 suburban arenas in the NHL are black holes, so that's something that needs to be addressed. Too bad for Quebec, but when old man Jacobs kicks the can, they'll get in. Bettman will gone by then too.

 

[zetajerk]

I like how people think Bettman and Jacobs are the only thing preventing a mass exodus of teams from the south. As if whoever comes after them isnt going to understand the importance of being in these markets vs placating xenophobes.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

Anaheim Ducks on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Ottawa Senators on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Winnipeg Jets on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

You may want to rethink that assertion. Gate receipts especially the Jets clobber them. And if anyone accounted for merchandising revenue, which the NHL collects, I guarantee the city of Winnipeg is contributing a greater share than the city of Anaheim, by quite a margin. The drawback is seating capacity. The Jets arena is the smallest by a country mile.

But the rest of what you say is true. The NHL eats off the revenues of New York, Toronto, Montreal. Chicago and Boston are big drivers of revenue as well. Florida is a joke. But they built an arena for hockey before Quebec did. They have #1 and #2 on Bettman's list of franchise needs. Arizona has less than that. All 3 suburban arenas in the NHL are black holes, so that's something that needs to be addressed. Too bad for Quebec, but when old man Jacobs kicks the can, they'll get in. Bettman will gone by then too.

I was under the impression that Winnipeg was still receiving north of $16 million annually in public assistance, something that would be included in their income statement but isn’t actually operating revenue. Something which Anaheim only got 1 million and change in and that was for their practice facility.

 

[MNNumbers]

Anaheim Ducks on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Ottawa Senators on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

Winnipeg Jets on the Forbes The Business of Hockey List

You may want to rethink that assertion. Gate receipts especially the Jets clobber them. And if anyone accounted for merchandising revenue, which the NHL collects, I guarantee the city of Winnipeg is contributing a greater share than the city of Anaheim, by quite a margin. The drawback is seating capacity. The Jets arena is the smallest by a country mile.

But the rest of what you say is true. The NHL eats off the revenues of New York, Toronto, Montreal. Chicago and Boston are big drivers of revenue as well. Florida is a joke. But they built an arena for hockey before Quebec did. They have #1 and #2 on Bettman's list of franchise needs. Arizona has less than that. All 3 suburban arenas in the NHL are black holes, so that's something that needs to be addressed. Too bad for Quebec, but when old man Jacobs kicks the can, they'll get in. Bettman will gone by then too.

I was under the impression that Winnipeg was still receiving north of $16 million annually in public assistance, something that would be included in their income statement but isn’t actually operating revenue. Something which Anaheim only got 1 million and change in and that was for their practice facility.

To run through this again....

"The NHL eats off of....." is a completely meaningless statement. The NHL itself hardly exists as an entity with its own financing. Each team is on its own, for the most part.

There are shared revenues. The shared revenues are:
National TV contracts
Merchandising and national sponsorships

There are redistributed revenues. These are, by CBA, 6% of total league revenues, and are shared from 10 or 11 teams to the rest (I don't know how the CBA was amended when Vegas joined, that's the reason for the 10/11 question).
Of these revenues, 50% come from the top teams. That means that 3% of league wide revenues are shared from those high-income markets. 3%. That's very little. It's equivalent to one more team in the league. It's a bit, but not very much.
The next 35% come from playoff ticket sales. While there is no doubt that playoff ticket sales would be very high priced in Toronto, Montreal and at MSG, it's also true that only 1 of those even qualified this year. This means that money from Tor, Mont and the Rangers hardly contributes to this piece.

Point being: No team continues in its present market because the league takes money from Toronto, Montreal and NY and gives it to them.

Next point:
Some markets receive subsidies from local government. Among the ones who do are Winnipeg and Florida. Let's examine that....
Florida: As mentioned before in another thread, Broward County and the Panthers organization recently amended their lease. It now runs through 2028. In that lease is a decreasing subsidy from Broward. The fact that the subsidy decreases from 12M to 2M a year suggests that the idea is that the team needs this time to penetrate the market. Whether that will happen or not, I don't know. But the fact of a payment remains.

Winnipeg: The organization TNSE receives 12M or so from Winnipeg. The vast majority of this is because of other business NOT connected to hockey at all. The Jets, however, are not the cash cow that some expected they would be. They are consistently in the 15-20 range in revenue. Some of that is due to the CDN dollar. Some is due to the size of their arena.

As to how those relate to Quebec:
Compared to Winnipeg
Arena: Bigger
Population served: Similar, perhaps slightly larger
Benefit to league wide shared revenues: Almost nothing, in actuality (same as Winnipeg)

In short, no matter how you try to slice it:
There is very little reason for league offices (BOG) to try to force a move from Florida to Quebec. Quebec, while it would be a stable franchise, adds little to the league's future. (This was also true of Winnipeg). To the BOG, it's better to have a team in Florida, because of the exposure to the US TV.
Which means, again, that Quebec will only get a team if some current team is bleeding cash enough that it needs to move.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

In the eyes of major junior, North Bay has decent support for its team and not many businesses centered there. In the eyes of the NHL, Toronto is one of the biggest metro areas in North America with high disposable income and dozens of Fortune 500 companies. Not at all the same. The NHL doesn’t feel that way about QC.

Winnipeg is one of the smallest teams by revenue. Ottawa makes more than it according to the Forbes assessment. It was down with Buffalo. It wasn’t helping the league out a ton. It’s a solid market but one NY Rangers is worth several Winnipegs. If you think franchises will be selling for what they’re supposedly worth, look at the Dundon sale and the failed Ottawa sale. For solid southern markets, the only ones in trouble are Florida and Arizona. That’s it. And Florida has a lease for like 6 more years. You’re really gonna say that for every Nashville there’s a Florida and Arizona? Those are the only two that are in any trouble. Dallas, San José, St. Louis, and Anaheim all have much higher total incomes than Winnipeg. Nashville too.

The Business Of Hockey

The Forbes assessment has Winnipeg ($135 million) with higher revenues then Ottawa ($124), Anaheim ($134), Nashville ($132), Buffalo ($128)

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

The Business Of Hockey

The Forbes assessment has Winnipeg ($135 million) with higher revenues then Ottawa ($124), Anaheim ($134), Nashville ($132), Buffalo ($128)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/budget-pro-sports-contributions-1.4423605 That's including $14 million in public assistance directly from the government as part of revenue. Not many teams get this form of subsidy deposited as operating income, many have it as part of the lease like Panthers do with Broward County. I'm not entirely sure but it could also include $5.5 million from gambling machines at the Shark Club. If you take out this subsidized and unearned revenue, it is between the Senators and Avalanche.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

I was under the impression that Winnipeg was still receiving north of $16 million annually in public assistance, something that would be included in their income statement but isn’t actually operating revenue. Something which Anaheim only got 1 million and change in and that was for their practice facility.

Approx. 7 million is an entertainment tax that is reimbursed to the team. This tax is incorporated into the ticket prices. The other Winnipeg pro teams are also reimbursed this tax. I think the symphony, ballet and playhouses are as well. I don't believe charging this entertainment tax for pro teams in other NHL cities is common. Bottom line is that the Jets are being reimbursed for the total value of ticket sold - a revenue source. I don't really agree that this particularly subsidy distorts the Jets' true revenue.

The team also receives an annual subsidy of around $6.5 - $7 million from VLTs/slot machines at the Shark Club next door to the arena. When the team relocated to Winnipeg, an agreement between the province and True North was reached which saw "underperforming" VLTs from the casinos in Winnipeg relocated to the Shark Club and any revenues derived from these machines would accrue to True North. The assumption, of course, is that Jet games and any other events at the Bell MTS Place would result in a marked increase in sales for the surrounding businesses, including the Shark Club and those VLTs. I don't really agree with the team receiving this subsidy.

For the Jets to retain this subsidy, they are required to expend all of it on arena improvements which they have. Even with this condition attached (which has brought the arena in line with the more typical standards of other NHL arenas) I do agree with you that this particular revenue source does boost the Jets' overall revenue. For the record, I do not believe the team would have received this specific subsidy if they had originally built an arena similar to those in places like St. Paul, Phoenix, Columbus around the turn of the millennium - not necessarily as large in capacity as those particular places, but with greater revenue potential.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

To run through this again....

"The NHL eats off of....." is a completely meaningless statement. The NHL itself hardly exists as an entity with its own financing. Each team is on its own, for the most part.

There are shared revenues. The shared revenues are:
National TV contracts
Merchandising and national sponsorships

There are redistributed revenues. These are, by CBA, 6% of total league revenues, and are shared from 10 or 11 teams to the rest (I don't know how the CBA was amended when Vegas joined, that's the reason for the 10/11 question).
Of these revenues, 50% come from the top teams. That means that 3% of league wide revenues are shared from those high-income markets. 3%. That's very little. It's equivalent to one more team in the league. It's a bit, but not very much.
The next 35% come from playoff ticket sales. While there is no doubt that playoff ticket sales would be very high priced in Toronto, Montreal and at MSG, it's also true that only 1 of those even qualified this year. This means that money from Tor, Mont and the Rangers hardly contributes to this piece.

Point being: No team continues in its present market because the league takes money from Toronto, Montreal and NY and gives it to them.

Next point:
Some markets receive subsidies from local government. Among the ones who do are Winnipeg and Florida. Let's examine that....
Florida: As mentioned before in another thread, Broward County and the Panthers organization recently amended their lease. It now runs through 2028. In that lease is a decreasing subsidy from Broward. The fact that the subsidy decreases from 12M to 2M a year suggests that the idea is that the team needs this time to penetrate the market. Whether that will happen or not, I don't know. But the fact of a payment remains.

Winnipeg: The organization TNSE receives 12M or so from Winnipeg. The vast majority of this is because of other business NOT connected to hockey at all. The Jets, however, are not the cash cow that some expected they would be. They are consistently in the 15-20 range in revenue. Some of that is due to the CDN dollar. Some is due to the size of their arena.

As to how those relate to Quebec:
Compared to Winnipeg
Arena: Bigger
Population served: Similar, perhaps slightly larger
Benefit to league wide shared revenues: Almost nothing, in actuality (same as Winnipeg)

In short, no matter how you try to slice it:
There is very little reason for league offices (BOG) to try to force a move from Florida to Quebec. Quebec, while it would be a stable franchise, adds little to the league's future. (This was also true of Winnipeg). To the BOG, it's better to have a team in Florida, because of the exposure to the US TV.
Which means, again, that Quebec will only get a team if some current team is bleeding cash enough that it needs to move.

This is why I get a kick out of people who are mad that posters from Quebec want a relocated team from a struggling market. What other option is there? They will not receive an expansion team as the league always believes greater revenue potential lies south of the 49th. Thus, hockey fans in Quebec have to hope for relocation of a franchise which is struggling with revenue, perceived or otherwise.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/budget-pro-sports-contributions-1.4423605 That's including $14 million in public assistance directly from the government as part of revenue. Not many teams get this form of subsidy deposited as operating income, many have it as part of the lease like Panthers do with Broward County. I'm not entirely sure but it could also include $5.5 million from gambling machines at the Shark Club. If you take out this subsidized and unearned revenue, it is between the Senators and Avalanche.

See my following post. Take note of the reimbursement of the entertainment tax on tickets.

To add, it includes the subsidies from the Shark Club. That actually makes up around half the total subsidies.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

This is why I get a kick out of people who are mad that posters from Quebec want a relocated team from a struggling market. What other option is there? They will not receive an expansion team as the league always believes greater revenue potential lies south of the 49th. Thus, hockey fans in Quebec have to hope for relocation of a franchise which is struggling with revenue, perceived or otherwise.

Wait, so you dont understand why fans of teams these QC fans want to see relocated are mad at said QC fans?