Total gate revenues - You'd be surprised

[thinkwild]

A luxury tax in tandem with revenue sharing solves the problem, imo.

Which problem though? If a major part of the problem now is that the teams that would likely be paying a luxury tax are the ones currently losing the majority of the money, this would seem to exacerbate it. I think thats a word. And if its true, is it a problem or a perfect market check and balance?

From what i've gathered from internet rumours, the players had initially proposed a large amount of revenue sharing. The owners balked at that being too much and wanted less money being redistributed. The players redid their proposal with a smaller amount of revenue sharing which led to Daly saying their proposal was a step backwards. Its all so confusing

 

[thinkwild]

Rank	Team 		Avg Tckt	Avg Attn	Home	Total Gate Revenue
1	Detroit		57.11	20,066	41	46,984,739
2	Philidelphia	57.06	19,375	41	45,327,037
3	Toronto		56.9	19,376	41	45,202,270
4	Vancouver	50.03	18,630	41	38,214,414
5	Ottawa		52.36	17,758	41	38,122,164
6	Minnesota	49.72	18,530	41	37,773,775
7	Phoenix		57.06	15,592	41	36,476,860
8	Montreal		40.84	20,555	41	34,418,144
9	Los Angeles	46.63	17,855	41	34,135,724
10	Boston		54.1	15,070	41	33,426,767
11	New Jersey	54.67	14,912	41	33,424,800
12	New York Rags	44.58	18,073	41	33,033,467
13	St. Louis		42.78	18,560	41	32,553,868
14	Colorado		42.18	18,007	41	31,140,945
----------------------------------------------------------
15	Columbus		41.77	17,339	41	29,654,291
16	Dallas		38.34	18,350	41	28,844,599
17	New York Isles	53.14	13,431	41	28,833,133
18	Chicago		50	13,253	41	27,168,650
19	Edmonton	36.59	17,698	41	26,550,362
20	Tampa Bay	36.25	17,820	41	26,489,875	
21	Washington	43.85	14,720	41	26,464,352
22	San Jose		39.15	15,835	41	25,417,550	
23	Anaheim		41.25	14,987	41	25,346,763
24	Calgary		36.46	16,600	41	24,814,676
25	Nashville		42.5	13,177	41	22,960,922
26	Buffalo		35.46	15,343	41	22,306,573
27	Atlanta		34.87	15,121	41	21,618,040
28	Pittsburgh	41.65	11,877	41	20,281,759
29	Florida		29.76	15,904	41	19,405,424
30	Carolina		31.77	12,171	41	15,853,579

	Average		44.63	16,533	41	30,408,184
					Total	912,245,522

Now those are really interesting numbers in a relative way. And it totals less than half what the NHL defines as hockey revenue too. All the other stuff like advertising, suites, and playoff revenue must sure generates a ton of cash.

Raise attendance by a couple of thousand is $10mil, and then get average price over $50 and tens of more millions. Which of the teams on the bottom of this list arent in an NHL market that can potentially generate those revenues if for example the Senators contracted and moved there? I think none. I bet everyone one of them bought their team believing that if they had the success that Colorado or Vancouver did, they could get that attendance at an average price of $50 a ticket and become a big revenue team. And if lucky like Vancouver, sell for a quarter billion dollars. I wonder if the Vancouver buyers are aware of the Levitt report. Levitt wouldnt make that investment

 

[thinkwild]

I don't see it quite the same way. I probably would fire the marketing people and use their salary to hire a lobbyist to get the local government to build a new arena, or else call Allied Van Lines and move my team out of town.

In the case you are describing, you probably have a very serious problem with an obsolete arena, or else your team is in a very soft hockey market that can only attract fans by selling hockey tickets as part of some kind of promotion (supermarket ticket sales, free beer, etc... Your product is perceived as "cheap" entertainment). You clearly are not finding an audience for your NHL team from among la creme de la creme in your local market, and without the support of these people, an NHL hockey team in any market is dead in the water. It doesn't matter if you are talking about Dallas or Edmonton, Nashville or New York City...

One thing the NHL does is attract a rather impressive demographic. Some markets do better than others, but I would say the "average" fan going to a game especially in Vancouver, New York City, Toronto, Philadelphia has an above average income, plus has some say in how the company he/she works for spends some of their entertainment, employee rewards, and other similar funds. Teams like Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa - well, they are doing their best to gradually replace "Joe Fan" with "Joe" and "Joanne Businessperson."

Does hockey want to appeal to the "average" fan, the typical family?...Yes, hockey does, but the NHL does not, at least not to the degree that we are lead to believe. Take the kids to see the Mississauga Ice Dogs , the Michigan Spartans, or the Hamilton Bulldogs, but take that out of town business client to a Maple Leafs or Rangers or Thrashers game...maybe once in a while, give your Employee of the Month the company tickets so that he/she can give the kid a huge birthday treat - the kid might walk away from the arena with a new jersey or hat.

Gary Bettman perpetuates that myth about affordable ticket prices, but I'll bet he sings a completely different tune when he goes out and sells the NHL to corporate sponsors. He isn't going to be helping your marketing people turn those $100 tickets into $ 40 tickets, but if you are going to rip out about 5,000 of those $ 10 seats and replace them with about 50 luxury boxes that hold 50 people each and lease for about $ 120,000/year with other fringe benefits, Bettman will fly into your town and buy lunch for you and your marketing people. Bettman will give up those 5,000 $ 10 dollar tickets for 2,500 luxury box "occupants" (fans? maybe, maybe not) any day....

This would definitely seem the smart plan. How can atlanta get its price and attendance to Minnesota levels? Shouldnt every team be eventually able to? Joe and Joanne Businessperson are a great target. The NHL isnt a family night out on a regular basis, but a high end entertainment event, one of those special occasion things, with luxury seats and perks for people able and willing to spend. There's still tv.