Six Clubs dragging down the rest of the league???

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by DeadPool, Sep 13, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DeadPool

    DeadPool Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was reading an article on the impending lock-out. There was this interesting tid-bit midway through the article:

    Does anyone have any ideas which 6 clubs are dragging the rest of the league???
     
  2. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Nobody knows for sure, but the best guesses are New York, Washington, St. Louis, Carolina, Islanders and Florida.

    Tom
     
  3. broman

    broman Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2003
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    HEL's antechamber
  4. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,266
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    232

    There is another thread on this. At least 4 of them are Rangers, Islanders, Penguins and Devils. Another is the Blues but they told the league they are fine and know what they're doing. The last one is likely to be either Anaheim or Carolina.
     
  5. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    If it was just six clubs "dragging down the rest of the league" how could they get the ownership groups to agree to a lockout?

    I'll buy that six clubs amount for a significant portion of the losses, but if those six clubs were more in line with the other 24 I think we'd still be in this situation. Why would 24 ownership groups agree to this lockout to just help the six who can't get it together?
     
  6. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,153
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    146
    because they see the jackpot at the end of the rainbow.

    dr
     
  7. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    Pretty big risk to take, don't you think? Willing to throw everything away? Seems like a simpler answer is that a majority of the teams are having troubles that they don't think they can solve without a new CBA, not just 6.
     
  8. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,266
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    232

    There's those 6 teams, but there are 14 more who claim losses on the season and 30 of them want to make more money.


    Although I can't see 30 NHL owners wanting a lockout. I'm interested in seeing what the vote is for a lockout. I'm assuming they need 24 for it to be a go.
     
  9. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Is it? There are hundreds of millions of dollars in profits a year at stake if the owners get their way. It will be a very big payoff for them if they win.

    At what cost? As long as the NHL has a playoff - that's where the profits are with big revenues and small costs - they won't lose much if they lose half a season to a lockout. The best strategy for the owners is to rattle sabres and lock out the players hoping they will crack. If they do not, the teams extract other concessions in January and cave on the core issue.

    If they win, they win big. If the lose, they lose small. They are eliminating the least profitable games of the year.

    Tom
     
  10. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    Assuming anyone cares when they come back, right? Seems like here in the US people already have given up. There's not even much talk about the NHL, and the lock-out hasn't happened yet. If there's any sort of fan backlash like there was with baseball (coupled with a pretty small tv contract), I think the owners stand to lose a pretty significant amount of money.
     
  11. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,266
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    232

    They're still losing money though. That's a lot of games. How will they get that money back? Well, they'll make the fans pay for it of course.
     
  12. CREW99AW

    CREW99AW Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    37,101
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Trophy Points:
    214

    Forbes magazine's Dec. 2003 issue ranked the 30 teams in terms of financial value.Part of the article showed how much $ each team claimed to be making or losing.The only team listed in the top 10 that dropped significant salary by the end of the 2003-2004 season,are the Caps.


    http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2003/1208/094tab.html

    St.Louis lost $29.4m
    Phoenix lost $21.1m
    Washington lost $21m
    Detroit lost $13.7m
    Carolina lost $13m
    NY Isles lost $10.9m
    Anaheim lost $10.8m
    NJ Devils lost $9.4m
    FL Panthers lost $9.2m
    San Jose lost $8.6m
     
  13. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I agree that this is the wild card. The real danger is that hockey in the non-traditional areas goes back to square one at a time when really good teams are emerging in Florida, Atlanta and Nashville. But hockey is never on the radar screen in the US - absent a Bertuzzi or two. The chance of a fan backlash in the US seems slim when there isn't a "lash" to start with.

    In the traditional areas fans will come back. There won't be a backlash because the NHL has done a masterful propaganda job and the fans are onside. If most fans support the owner's position, there can't be a backlash. Unless the fans signal loud and clear that a work stoppage is unacceptable, the risks are pretty small.

    Baseball really took the hit when a World Series was cancelled. The other disputes didn't cause nearly the same problems. As long as there is a Stanley Cup awarded, I doubt if there will be long term problems. There weren't any last time even though the eventual deal could have been signed without a lockout.

    Tom
     
  14. CREW99AW

    CREW99AW Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    37,101
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Trophy Points:
    214

    Those other 24 teams wouldn't lockout the players to 'help' the other 6 teams.Most of those other 24 teams, are also losing millions or barely breaking even.
     
  15. hockeytown9321

    hockeytown9321 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    On a TSN article today they said it would be unanimous. The question is how long will they be so unified?
     
  16. likea

    likea Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    the Pittsburgh Penguins ARE NOT one of the teams talked about in the 6 teams losing 76% of the money the NHL suggested it lost last season...

    if you look at the Levitts report the Pens are the team that lost the least that year

    since Mario has owned the team the Pens have made money or broke even for the first 3 years, not alot but some, then the next 2 years when they started to decline the lost money but only somewhere around 3-5 million

    the Pens have been very honest about what the lost this year and the year before and both times they stated it was below or about 5 million

    I'm not sure where some of you get your information but the Pens are the one team that actually runs its team like business...which is the reason we sold off players, because we could not afford to pay the 5-11 million the all wanted
     
  17. chriss_co

    chriss_co Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    CALGARY
    There are more than 6 teams losing money.

    Lets face it, ticket prices are already too high. Not many fans can afford to attend a hockey game. So lets control player salaries and then reduce ticket prices as well.

    That will bring interest to the game again because now the average fan can afford to attend games.
     
  18. zico

    zico Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    as far as the Blues are concerned, the reason why they claim 29 million in losses is that when Laurie bought the team for 100 million he financed it completley over a very short time period. His net worth is almost 3 billion dollars, he could have easily paid cash for it but didnt. Why not? because it is a huge tax write off for him. If you take out the interest and depreciation of the building the Blues are close to breaking even.

    Just another way to make the books look bad for a team.
     
  19. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,266
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    232
    The NHL doesn't care about who is attending the games. Most of the lower level seats are almost exclusively big shot, corporate people nowadays. People who can afford it. If people are coming to the games who can afford those seats night in and night how then screw the average fan.


    I kind of like my row 14 seat in the 2nd level (there's 15 in the Wachovia Center)
     
  20. The Panthers are definitely one of those 6 teams that has been losing money.

    Russo of the Sun-Sentinel confirmed it in a recent story, and said as well the Panthers lost about 20 Million instead of the 9 Million associated with the Forbes story.

    If this lockout goes longer than one season, look for the Panthers to be sold or folded.
     
  21. Terrier

    Terrier Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,018
    Likes Received:
    400
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Newton, MA
    Home Page:
  22. jol

    jol Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    Miami Beach, Florida
    Home Page:
    For Panthers losing $20 million would mean that even if players
    were playing for free (I think Panthers' payroll were little higher),
    Panthers wouldn't make any money, almost.

    So that would mean that they really don't have any revenues?
    (I know that almost any time you wanted to go to Panthers' game
    you got a free ticket)
     
  23. THEPROPHET

    THEPROPHET Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    overseeer
    Location:
    orange county ca.


    if i remember corectly there was no vote to lock out the players. Gary bettman
    has sole dissision making power in regards to the new CBA that was given to him
    in his last contract extention by the owners
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"