- Status
And I'll clarify: This is old news. I was quite surprised to learn that it was Tampa because I thought it was New Jersey who were trying to gain leverage and obtain some funding for a new arena of their own (which they got) I really didn't believe any team was serious about Winnipeg, rather just using a shiney new arena to their advantage --- thinly veiled relocation threat with absolutely no motivation to carry through with it. I think the people of Winnipeg are in for a few heartaches like this until the shine is off the new building.Sotnos said:It just annoys me seeing this highlighted, of course, because as I'm sure you've noticed, people here have a hard time with reading comprehension, and now I'll have to put up with "Tampa is moving to Winnipeg!" threads for the next year. Thanks for nothing, Mac!
And like the article said, Tampa was singing a different tune shortly thereafter, if it was indeed true and the councillors aren't just playing with Taylor.
kenabnrmal
Registered User
Scott Taylor, while he was asked to resign by the Winnipeg Free Press, has never said anything that wasn't true. It isn't in the rumor-mongering business (note: Not a part of the Sun Media chain). He has close contacts in city hall, and throughout Winnipeg. Pretty much, if he tells you something happened, it happened. It doesn't matter much now because I don't see the Lightning moving anytime soon, I don't see Winnipeg getting a team anytime soon (not till the new CBA is in place and its affect on league economics are truely felt, and even then its far from a sure thing), and I'm sure they were mearly only exploratory talks and hardly anything of substance.
And for those who don't quite grasp it yet, despite the myriad of "Return of the Jets", or "Which teams would you contract/move?" types of threads on these boards, what makes Tampa a more attractive market for the Bettman-lead NHL isn't so-much the population/market size...its the corporate base and ownership as well as the arena. While Winnipeg has a vastly smaller population size, nearly all of its 700,000+ people are at least hockey aware and literate, if not already fans of the game. In the city's new arena, the team would have little problem selling the place out for most of their games. The Moose are already playing to rather large crowds, and anyone who knows Winnipeg hockey fans know that the city has a misguided grudge against the Moose the size of...well...a moose. No, pointing to attendance figures from 1992 and suggesting that there isnt the fanbase to support a team is rather misguided, not to mention wrong. However, the question mark for a team in Winnipeg is generating revenue beyond ticket sales. Corporate sponsorships, the ability for a local ownership group to weather the rough patches, and the smallish size of the new arena.
Defend your team to the very end. Trust me, its worth it. Surprisingly little feels worse than the feeling of losing the home team, a team you lived and died for, for years. However, while do so be careful not to fall into the "Winnipeg-sucks" trap. Because, this city is a hockey town, and the FANbase here could support an NHL team. Its the "suits", or lack there of, that is the problem.
And for those who don't quite grasp it yet, despite the myriad of "Return of the Jets", or "Which teams would you contract/move?" types of threads on these boards, what makes Tampa a more attractive market for the Bettman-lead NHL isn't so-much the population/market size...its the corporate base and ownership as well as the arena. While Winnipeg has a vastly smaller population size, nearly all of its 700,000+ people are at least hockey aware and literate, if not already fans of the game. In the city's new arena, the team would have little problem selling the place out for most of their games. The Moose are already playing to rather large crowds, and anyone who knows Winnipeg hockey fans know that the city has a misguided grudge against the Moose the size of...well...a moose. No, pointing to attendance figures from 1992 and suggesting that there isnt the fanbase to support a team is rather misguided, not to mention wrong. However, the question mark for a team in Winnipeg is generating revenue beyond ticket sales. Corporate sponsorships, the ability for a local ownership group to weather the rough patches, and the smallish size of the new arena.
Defend your team to the very end. Trust me, its worth it. Surprisingly little feels worse than the feeling of losing the home team, a team you lived and died for, for years. However, while do so be careful not to fall into the "Winnipeg-sucks" trap. Because, this city is a hockey town, and the FANbase here could support an NHL team. Its the "suits", or lack there of, that is the problem.
rwilson99
Registered User
no13matssundin said:
The truth is the TBL average attendence from the last two seasons wouldn't fit in the Peg's new building.
Don't forget, the CDN dollar is still worth .83 American cents. We all know how financially successful the teams in Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa are doing.
Slats432
Registered User
The proof of this other than your opinion would be good.kenabnrmal said:
How is it misguided and wrong to suggest that a team wouldn't be a success when in it's history in the NHL, when the average salary was $500K or less, didn't have above the league average in attendance more than twice?
Slats has already addressed the rest of KenAbs' post, but I will state this: Scott Taylor is to be taken seriously. Like Abs' says he isn't a rumour monger like those little Sun weasels Strachan, Simmons, and Garrioch. He is very imformative and one of the few that you can take his word to the bank.kenabnrmal said:
kenabnrmal
Registered User
slats432 said:
First, I can't "prove" something that hasn't happened yet. I can, however, point to support the World Juniors get when played in the city or nearby, the support the Brandon Wheat Kings get when they play in the city, the support the Moose are getting now that they have an arena that isn't falling apart, the support that junior A hockey gets, as proof that this is a hockey market. Can I prove that the city would support an NHL team? I don't have a link or a stat that will make you happy, but its my belief that with a new arena it would.
'Wrong' was a bit harsh on my part, I agree. True its only my opinion, but its an opinion built from 25 years of first-hand experience in the market, as opposed to an opinion based on living a continent away and scanning attendance numbers. Again, as has been stated numerous times before in numerous threads on these boards, the attendance numbers in Winnipeg don't begin to tell the story. The old arena was the main issue where attendance is concerned. The other issue was the lack of corporate support. Corporate sponsorships were lacking, and companies scooping up blocks of season tickets go hand-in-hand with that. That didn't happen in the old Winnipeg Arena. Its quite a bit easier to sell a building out when the majority of the lower bowl is sold to various local companies.
Like I said, there are many obstacles and question-marks. However, I see little question that the fanbase here is sufficient to support an NHL team. Short of hiring a marketing research firm to run some polling, some interviews, or maybe a focus group or six to test my theory, theres not much else I can say. But, I'll take 25 years of experience over a 30 second scan of attendance figures anyday.
Hockeyfan02
Registered User
PanthersRule said:Man, if only they hadn't won the cup
The cup had didnt have much to do with it. Like Sotnos said it was probably used as leverage back in December of 03 for the tax break and deal they just signed with the city on the Forum.
it will be interesting when it's reported who the other two sun belt teams in contact with the city of winnipeg and the true north group (owners of the mts centre) are, as i've usually heard nashville is one, but that's hearsay.
slats432 said:
Minnesota, Colorado, and San jose come from markets which could not draw flies when they had franchises the first time around. Now they sell out every game. Winnipeg's economic situation has greatly improved, and we now have an arena with 100% unobstructed view seats.
Finally, we were above league attendance average 5 times with a horrible arena, with only 10,000 good seats, not 2 as you suggested...
kenabnrmal
Registered User
This is the likely phone call when any team called Winnipeg about the possibility of relocating:
Team X: Yes, we are struggling down here in ___________. We understand you are building a new arena.
Winnipeg Rep: Yes, the Mts Centre should be ready to go November 2004.
Team X: Well tell me about it.
Winnipeg Rep: Well, it will be a state of the art facility that will seat 15 000 people.
Team X: 15 000?
Winnipeg Rep: Yes but we can always expand...
Team X: Isn't that the number one complaint about the old Arena?
Winnipeg: ..........
The Pro Winnipeg side is always talking in "ifs" rather than facts.
They point at World Junior Championships and say they support hockey. Those were short term committments. Do they have the wherewithal to stick by for the long run? Their tenure with the Jets suggests otherwise.
They blame an arena, yet they built one that has 15 000 seats. 100% capacity isn't even the average attendance mark.
They point at the 9000 that are showing up for Moose games this year and claiming to support that team. Where were they before?
I'm sorry, but I haven't seen one compelling piece of evidence to suggest that another team in Winnipeg would be any more successful than the Jets were. I have said before and will say again: The people of Winnipeg are in for a lot of heartache. They will be used until the MTS has lost it's shine by teams looking to leverage governments into funding arenas to be built for them in their present locations. If they are serious about relocating, they will stay in the United States.
Team X: Yes, we are struggling down here in ___________. We understand you are building a new arena.
Winnipeg Rep: Yes, the Mts Centre should be ready to go November 2004.
Team X: Well tell me about it.
Winnipeg Rep: Well, it will be a state of the art facility that will seat 15 000 people.
Team X: 15 000?
Winnipeg Rep: Yes but we can always expand...
Team X: Isn't that the number one complaint about the old Arena?
Winnipeg: ..........
The Pro Winnipeg side is always talking in "ifs" rather than facts.
They point at World Junior Championships and say they support hockey. Those were short term committments. Do they have the wherewithal to stick by for the long run? Their tenure with the Jets suggests otherwise.
They blame an arena, yet they built one that has 15 000 seats. 100% capacity isn't even the average attendance mark.
They point at the 9000 that are showing up for Moose games this year and claiming to support that team. Where were they before?
I'm sorry, but I haven't seen one compelling piece of evidence to suggest that another team in Winnipeg would be any more successful than the Jets were. I have said before and will say again: The people of Winnipeg are in for a lot of heartache. They will be used until the MTS has lost it's shine by teams looking to leverage governments into funding arenas to be built for them in their present locations. If they are serious about relocating, they will stay in the United States.
Mayor of MacAppolis said:
that's okay, the bandwagon is big enough for you to jump on at a later date ! everyone is welcome !!!
- Status
