Why did Winnipeg build the MTS Centre to only 15,015 seats?

[vezna*]

$2.2 billion and dropping as Apple continues to steal RIM's market share.

Balsillie, putting aside the issue that he will not own a team in the foreseeable future, showed no signs of a willingness to upgrade Copps on his own back.

Remember, if Copps operated as an NHL arena today it would be the 5th oldest arena in the league. Within 5-10 years, Copps could very well be the second oldest arena in the league behind only MSG.

lol you're acting like 2.2 and dropping as if he won't be able to afford to throw 500M at the NHL within 3 years

within 5-10 years, there'd be enough interest to build a new arena

toronto can support another team and make it more profitable than a team in winnipeg or quebec city

 

[Hackett]

within 5-10 years, there'd be enough interest to build a new arena

toronto can support another team and make it more profitable than a team in winnipeg or quebec city

I would imagine that there's some major politics that would prevent this from happening specifically from the leaf reps on the bog.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

I have a better chance of owning a NHL franchise than Jim Balsillie.

 

[Brodie]

Jim Balsillie didn't just try to move a team, he tried to destroy the NHL's right to determine where its own franchises are located and forced the league to buy and operate a team. He will never, ever own a team. He could throw all $2.2 billion at someone and he would still never be approved by the BOG.

Plus, RIM is on a major downward spiral and if they can't compete with Apple and HTC, he won't be a billionaire for much longer.

 

[SirQuacksALot]

do you know how wealthy Jim Balsillie is?

No, but his bals are sillie.

 

[vezna*]

oh well, i guess i can't argue with financial analysts predicting RIM's ruin

maybe Rogers would be interested in buying a team

 

[end]

Smaller arena = limited supply = ability to charge more money for tickets. Plus, if the team tanks, you don't lose those 3000-5000 extra ticketholders.

In a market like Winnipeg, this is the best financial model possible.

In a market like Winnipeg, you don't bring in an NHL franchise.

Winnipeg loves hockey, but Winnipeggers also love feeding their kids and having heat in the winter. Things are better than they were in the 90s, but it's not all sugar and rainbows on Portage all of a sudden. Winnipeggers cannot afford the kind of prices you find in other Canadian cities, not for long. Once the shine is gone, the team is going to find themselves in the same kind of financial straits Sun Belt teams are in, and unlike those teams, there is basically no chance of longterm growth. Atlanta is unpopular, but due to the market, there is the potential for growth that there simply is not in Winnipeg. But with Winnipeg, the money you make in year 3 is going to be the same as you make in year 20, adjusting for inflation.

And guaranteed, unless the Canadian dollar jumps ahead of the American, a Winnipeg team cannot play to the cap. And if you're not playing to the cap, any success is going to come in spite of yourself. Imagine Nashville without Barry Trotz. They'd be the Islanders.

 

[Tavaresmagicalplay*]

In a market like Winnipeg, you don't bring in an NHL franchise.

Winnipeg loves hockey, but Winnipeggers also love feeding their kids and having heat in the winter. Things are better than they were in the 90s, but it's not all sugar and rainbows on Portage all of a sudden. Winnipeggers cannot afford the kind of prices you find in other Canadian cities, not for long. Once the shine is gone, the team is going to find themselves in the same kind of financial straits Sun Belt teams are in, and unlike those teams, there is basically no chance of longterm growth. Atlanta is unpopular, but due to the market, there is the potential for growth that there simply is not in Winnipeg. But with Winnipeg, the money you make in year 3 is going to be the same as you make in year 20, adjusting for inflation.

And guaranteed, unless the Canadian dollar jumps ahead of the American, a Winnipeg team cannot play to the cap. And if you're not playing to the cap, any success is going to come in spite of yourself. Imagine Nashville without Barry Trotz. They'd be the Islanders.

You're really underrating Nashville.

You can have success even if you're not always against the cap(or even remotely close). This is a bit of a fallacy.

 

[end]

You're really underrating Nashville.

You can have success even if you're not always against the cap(or even remotely close). This is a bit of a fallacy.

I'm going imagine that you didn't finish reading my post.

And if you're not playing to the cap, any success is going to come in spite of yourself.

 

[Brodie]

Winnipeg has an absurdly low cost of living. There is plenty of disposable income in the city.

Also, considering the money backing TNSE I think it's silly to assume they wouldn't be able to pay to the cap if need be.

 

[Hackett]

In a market like Winnipeg, you don't bring in an NHL franchise.

Winnipeg loves hockey, but Winnipeggers also love feeding their kids and having heat in the winter. Things are better than they were in the 90s, but it's not all sugar and rainbows on Portage all of a sudden. Winnipeggers cannot afford the kind of prices you find in other Canadian cities, not for long. Once the shine is gone, the team is going to find themselves in the same kind of financial straits Sun Belt teams are in, and unlike those teams, there is basically no chance of longterm growth. Atlanta is unpopular, but due to the market, there is the potential for growth that there simply is not in Winnipeg. But with Winnipeg, the money you make in year 3 is going to be the same as you make in year 20, adjusting for inflation.

And guaranteed, unless the Canadian dollar jumps ahead of the American, a Winnipeg team cannot play to the cap. And if you're not playing to the cap, any success is going to come in spite of yourself. Imagine Nashville without Barry Trotz. They'd be the Islanders.

That is the case right now, but I also wonder about the long term viability of the franchise especially if the dollar spirals like it did in the 90's.

Having said that, you'd figure that the potential ownership group would do its homework very carefully.

 

[AugustBurnsRed*]

Really hope I get to see SOME NHL action soon

 

[end]

Winnipeg has an absurdly low cost of living. There is plenty of disposable income in the city.

I know we have low rent, although the housing market has gone up 300% in the last five years. The people with that disposable income aren't the people who buy arena seats, they buy luxury boxes. Of which the MTS Centre is lacking.

 

[Tavaresmagicalplay*]

I'm going imagine that you didn't finish reading my post.

Sorry can you clarify what you mean by that? In spite of as in you're hurting your team by not having them play to the cap? Well sorry to say but this happens with every small market team. You're going to have it in every sport. A team can be consistently successful and a competitor while not spending boatloads of cash and if the owner is a good one, he'll be willing to lose money some years. This is what teams like Buffalo and Nashville have done. When they are ready to compete they bring their team up to the ceiling and when that window is closed it's see ya' to the big money.

 

[end]

Sorry can you clarify what you mean by that? In spite of as in you're hurting your team by not having them play to the cap? Well sorry to say but this happens with every small market team. You're going to have it in every sport. A team can be consistently successful and a competitor while not spending boatloads of cash and if the owner is a good one, he'll be willing to lose money some years. This is what teams like Buffalo and Nashville have done. When they are ready to compete they bring their team up to the ceiling and when that window is closed it's see ya' to the big money.

I think it's pretty obvious what I mean. If you aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else, you have much less chance of success. Any success you have comes in spite of that.

Who on earth would ever want to be a fan of that team? A team that is designed to be a development farm for spenders? I've ended up by my own fault being a fan of small market teams, and it's a ridiculous existence. It would be like if your defensive zone had no offsides, and there was nothing you could do to change it.

If Winnipeg gets a team, and spends to the cap floor, I'm not going to invest anything in them. The only money they'll get is when the Pens come to town.

 

[Tavaresmagicalplay*]

I think it's pretty obvious what I mean. If you aren't playing by the same rules as everyone else, you have much less chance of success. Any success you have comes in spite of that.

Who on earth would ever want to be a fan of that team? A team that is designed to be a development farm for spenders? I've ended up by my own fault being a fan of small market teams, and it's a ridiculous existence. It would be like if your defensive zone had no offsides, and there was nothing you could do to change it.

If Winnipeg gets a team, and spends to the cap floor, I'm not going to invest anything in them. The only money they'll get is when the Pens come to town.

You don't have to be. Doesn't mean you can't enjoy a good hockey game.

Just because a team doesn't spend to the cap doesn't mean the games are going to be garbage. Look at Los Angeles. They are the furthest thing from a cap team.

Plenty of other examples too, nhl hockey is great hockey.

 

[tsnTpoint]

why did the devils new arena cut ~1500 seats compared to their old one?

A smaller arena has lower operating costs and the limited demand can help sustain higher price levels.

The "jets" could earn more revenue, at a lower cost, by selling 15000 tickets in the current MTS center than they can by selling 15000 tickets in an 18000 seat arena.

Arena's should be built to the market, and that's what winnipeg did.

Winnipeg built that Arena for an AHL market, not for an NHL one.

The OP is wondering why they built for an AHL market. He like myself believe they should have built with possible NHL future in mind.

 

[Hank Chinaski]

I know we have low rent, although the housing market has gone up 300% in the last five years. The people with that disposable income aren't the people who buy arena seats, they buy luxury boxes. Of which the MTS Centre is lacking.

Not to get this thread further OT, but I don't quite follow this statement.

Disposable income is disposable income, whether it's me scrounging together money for a 7-game pack, a small business owner who can buy season's in the club section, or a huge corporation that is buying luxury boxes.

Also, it's a bit of a myth that Winnipeg has a large amount of said income (I realize it's over a year old, but I wouldn't imagine much has changed):

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/disposable-income-lowest-in-manitoba-64477767.html?path=/business&id=64477767&sortBy=newest&viewAllComments=y

I agree with your earlier post that the growth potential in Winnipeg is very limited (and probably will be for the foreseeable future), but I think that's moot. The prospects of Winnipeg gaining a franchise are based on being a soft landing spot, not because of spectacular potential to generate revenue.

Winnipeg built that Arena for an AHL market, not for an NHL one.

Anything to back this up?

 

[Hardyvan123]

It's not about seats. It's about suites.

Types of seats, and customers is very important.

Smaller arena = limited supply = ability to charge more money for tickets. Plus, if the team tanks, you don't lose those 3000-5000 extra ticketholders.

In a market like Winnipeg, this is the best financial model possible.

Works for the AHL but very hard in the NHL

money talks. you can't ban the guy from bidding just because you don't like him

Might help if he did something illegal, it seems to be the sure way to become a new owner for Bettman, of course he would have to hide it a teeny bit but not a whole lot.

In a market like Winnipeg, you don't bring in an NHL franchise.

Winnipeg loves hockey, but Winnipeggers also love feeding their kids and having heat in the winter. Things are better than they were in the 90s, but it's not all sugar and rainbows on Portage all of a sudden. Winnipeggers cannot afford the kind of prices you find in other Canadian cities, not for long. Once the shine is gone, the team is going to find themselves in the same kind of financial straits Sun Belt teams are in, and unlike those teams, there is basically no chance of longterm growth. Atlanta is unpopular, but due to the market, there is the potential for growth that there simply is not in Winnipeg. But with Winnipeg, the money you make in year 3 is going to be the same as you make in year 20, adjusting for inflation.

And guaranteed, unless the Canadian dollar jumps ahead of the American, a Winnipeg team cannot play to the cap. And if you're not playing to the cap, any success is going to come in spite of yourself. Imagine Nashville without Barry Trotz. They'd be the Islanders.

Pretty much sums it up, maybe not the last paragraph but everything before is the proper perspective..

 

[Carlton Orr*]

Jim Balsillie didn't just try to move a team, he tried to destroy the NHL's right to determine where its own franchises are located and forced the league to buy and operate a team. He will never, ever own a team. He could throw all $2.2 billion at someone and he would still never be approved by the BOG.

Plus, RIM is on a major downward spiral and if they can't compete with Apple and HTC, he won't be a billionaire for much longer.

haha, he is always going to be a billionaire.

 

[AlexandreBurrows]

I have a better chance of owning a NHL franchise than Jim Balsillie.

Ther's not enough money in all of montana to buy an nhl team :LAUGH:

 

[MoreOrr]

How many people have asked that question... There never seems to be a logical answer. It's as if they built it only to accommodate a minor league team. With no other logical explanation, they should almost only ever have a minor league team until they eventually build another arena.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

Ther's not enough money in all of montana to buy an nhl team :LAUGH:

Hurr hurr hurr, we're one of like 3 or 4 states that runs with a surplus and sit on more natural resources than anyone outside of California and Alaska. Money is such a non-issue here that we don't even have a sales tax.

I can name a guy who lives practically down the street that's worth double what Balsillie is worth (Dennis Washington worth $4.5+ billion...$1.3 billion more than Ron Burkle, who is the 2nd richest individual owner in the NHL).


Now had you said not enough people in Montana to support a team...well...yeah, obviously. And I'm worth about...uh...$55k in debt as a student. Still, in the off-chance that I got into an ownership package as some small-time investor or something I don't really see the board of governors voting against me. Balsille, on the other hand, has no chance ever. He spat in the face of the NHL with the Penguins and then again the Predators. He's not ever going to be allowed to sit at the big boy table, not when he acts like a 3 year-old.

 

[Hank Chinaski]

How many people have asked that question... There never seems to be a logical answer. It's as if they built it only to accommodate a minor league team. With no other logical explanation, they should almost only ever have a minor league team until they eventually build another arena.

Danishh, Brodie and a couple others provided perfectly logical answers.

So I'll reiterate what they said...it makes no sense to have an arena much larger than 15,000 in Winnipeg.

 

[seanlinden]

Like others have mentioned, it's much better to play in an artificially small arena. It keeps tickets relatively scarce and contributes to the "allure" of going to a game. There wasn't really any sense in spending tons of money and upkeep to have an 18,000 seat arena where it wouldn't be at capacity for the AHL.

The chances of the NHL coming back when that arena was built were minimal. Business people don't operate on pipedreams (generally).