Will have a relocation of Kroenke's NFL team an impact on Avs?

[EurolancheDavid]

I read news about a relocation of Kroenke's NFL team - St. Louis Rams. When he bought this team years ago, I thought he is going to keep them forever. It was a team located in his native state. His main residence has been located there all the time. He loves his state... And now he is able to relocate them like nothing? I also believed the NFL is billionares-bussines and a relocation is less possible than in the other sports.

So my question is simple: Will have a relocation of Kroenke's NFL team an impact on Avs? Do you think there is any chance our team may be relocated? Probably to Quebec? Is there any guaranty the Avs will stay in Denver?

Click to read more...

 

[Hasbro]

They're contractually obligated to stay in Denver until 2025. They also own the arena so it would be counter productive for them to leave it without tenants at this point and moving only one of the teams would risk blowback on the other properties (no way QC is an NBA or MLS market).

 

[EurolancheDavid]

They're contractually obligated to stay in Denver until 2025. They also own the arena so it would be counter productive for them to leave it without tenants at this point and moving only one of the teams would risk blowback on the other properties (no way QC is an NBA or MLS market).

What is a source of that contract? I just can't rememebr if I ever read about it anywhere.

 

[Hasbro]

What is a source of that contract? I just can't rememebr if I ever read about it anywhere.

It was getting tax breaks from the city to build the Pepsi Center (and probably hiring enough of Wellington Webb's cousins).

Technically his son is the owner and forget packing up and moving everything to LA.

 

[Ivan13]

Stan is a business man, he knows the Rams are going to attract a lot of attention in LA, he'll also make tonnes of money by re-locating them.

 

[AMDZen]

Stan is a business man, he knows the Rams are going to attract a lot of attention in LA, he'll also make tonnes of money by re-locating them.

That isn't the only reason. St Louis is a terrible city. It ranks at the very bottom of the nation economically for a large city. It has some of the highest crime rates in the country, and the fans are not appreciative of the NFL product. This is very indicative of the southern culture any way who prefer college football. St Louis was not selling out games. And lastly the residents would not help him build a new stadium.

LA was a no brainer in every conceivable way. The Rams came from LA originally so it's kind of like them going back home. Denver does not have any of the issues I just brought up with St Louis. First and foremost, we have a thriving economy and thanks to Marijuana, are at the top of the country in relation to our size. We didn't give him any reason not to want to stay either, we helped build the stadium he wanted. Avs aren't going any where for a long long time.

I forgot to mention the Nuggets to which he owns and which share the Pepsi Center. It simply wouldn't make sense financially to move one and not the other, so they basically tether each other.

 

[AslanRH]

Stan was forced to "un-own" the team do to NFL rules, so unless another Hockey and Basketball team are needed in LA, the Avalanche and Nuggets won't be affected by the move. They may actually benefit a little if that added money KSE makes from LA gets shared a little bit among the other pieces of the group.

 

[Rumplesnipeskin]

Only a positive impact, if you ask me. Avs aren't a money-pit, rather are financially fine and have the potential to be a cash-cow in their current market. Not many other markets are more attractive.

On top of that, the Rams will make a ton more money in LA; St. Louis for football was like Phoenix for hockey... could it work? yes, and did at times. Was there a large enough fan-base to weather down years? Nope. Simple business decision here, and probably a no-brainer for a team that needed a new stadium whether they played in STL or LA. Not to mention attracting talent... "Hey, you wanna come live in STL?" hahaha NOPE (lived there, take my word for it).

 

[tigervixxxen]

Stan owns everything in the "chain" in the Denver market. The teams, arena, ticketing system, tv network, he just bought radio stations. It's clear that he prefers the supply chain management business model, one reason for his moving the football team to LA so that he can begin the same thing with ownership of the stadium and I'm sure other things along with it. I'm not worried what will happen with the Avs, if anything his type of ownership has provided more stability.

 

[henchman21]

I'd say the LA NFL team will have no impact on the Avs. The Avs and Nuggets were a stepping stone for him and have done their job admirably. Now they are just an asset in the pile... an asset that's value appreciates at a higher rate than most other investments and are fairly safe. He is treating the Avs and Nuggets as if they are just good assets to have, but not priorities... I don't expect anything to change as long as the attendance doesn't fall or the media contracts for the league as a whole bottom out.

 

[Hennessy]

I'd be more concerned about them getting a new arena out of the city. By 2025 the Pepsi Center will be ancient by ownership standards. Whether they want the city to front a portion of the funds required or demand tax breaks, it's a bad deal for anyone not named Kroenke.

I don't really care about the Rams going back to LA. In my mind, it's righting a wrong that happened 20 years ago. But I get why St. Louis is pissed, beyond any sort of fan heartache. Kroenke never even negotiated. I'm not naive - I get that sports are a business. But I also like to hold to an ideal that franchises owe some loyalty to their communities. But, as I said, it's hard for me to get too self-righteous in this case as Los Angeles never should have lost the team in the first place.

All that said, I loved Bishop's tweet after he shutout the Avs. Obviously, I'd rather he'd not have gotten that opportunity, but he did and went big with it. I can appreciate the sentiment.

 

[AvsFanRCN]

I'd be more concerned about them getting a new arena out of the city. By 2025 the Pepsi Center will be ancient by ownership standards. Whether they want the city to front a portion of the funds required or demand tax breaks, it's a bad deal for anyone not named Kroenke.

I don't really care about the Rams going back to LA. In my mind, it's righting a wrong that happened 20 years ago. But I get why St. Louis is pissed, beyond any sort of fan heartache. Kroenke never even negotiated. I'm not naive - I get that sports are a business. But I also like to hold to an ideal that franchises owe some loyalty to their communities. But, as I said, it's hard for me to get too self-righteous in this case as Los Angeles never should have lost the team in the first place.

All that said, I loved Bishop's tweet after he shutout the Avs. Obviously, I'd rather he'd not have gotten that opportunity, but he did and went big with it. I can appreciate the sentiment.

I didnt see the tweet, what did it say?

 

[tigervixxxen]

I didn't care for it at all, it was unnecessary and the two sports have nothing to do with each other. Take your win but there's nothing to gloat about. A big FU to Bishop there.

It's pretty funny to me all the tears over St Louis (not here) and yet the same people rip on the Panthers and Yotes and can't wait for them to move. It's this whole thing about always having to be outraged about something. Unless you are a Rams fan, and really unless you are a Rams STH then you don't really GAF.

 

[Hennessy]

i didnt see the tweet, what did it say?

 

[LazRNN]

What is a source of that contract? I just can't rememebr if I ever read about it anywhere.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...AST-FOR-DENVER-ASCENT.aspx?printandclose=true

 

[Pokecheque]

My friend pointed out Chrysler should nab the naming rights to the stadium both the Rams and Chargers are moving into.

Really, the Rams and Chargers have had such un-noteworthy histories (the L.A. Rams as well) that in the end this won't make much of a difference either way. Apart from "The Greatest Show on Turf" and Deacon Jones there's very, very little I could really tell you about the Rams franchise.

Still, the whole practice of essentially ransoming municipal populations to fork over public funds for palatial venues has got to stop. We can bash on these two towns all we want but it's still criminal. And frankly, it was pretty criminal how we got our hockey team as well.

Lastly, how in **** is Los Angeles getting TWO teams, and neither of them are coming from Jacksonville?

As for Kroenke, let's not be naive here, Josh is officially in charge but you'll never convince me that Stan has nothing to do with the Avs and Nuggets. I don't think this will adversely affect the teams KSE owns in Denver, but it sure as hell gives me pause.

 

[LazRNN]

I don't think Kroenke is the greatest owner from a fan's perspective. Tickets out price demand... certainly if the teams were winning the demand would go up but while the Avs and Nuggets are young and developing people aren't going to fill up the arena at those prices. Perhaps they won't at reduced prices either, but certainly there would be more people coming and that would lead to greater concessions/gift sales and parking revenue, so I don't see how they're making more money by outpricing demand. It's contributed to a pretty anemic home atmosphere for both teams, and especially the Nuggets. Michael Malone has been criticizing the fans without much acknowledgment that maybe people don't find it worth it to spend that much money on tickets for a team that doesn't play that well at home.

Perhaps both teams would play a little better with a more boisterous home atmosphere, but it's not on fans to spend their money produce that kind of environment. There's definitely things KSE can do but it doesn't seem to be something they care about.

 

[tigervixxxen]

Werent ticket prices proven to be average? And there are so many freaking deals out there that anyone with one ounce of initiative or effort can find them. And it's always "oh look at this lower bowl center ice ticket price, it's too expensive to get to a game "

I also plotted the Avs and Nuggets attendance over the last 20 years. There's an inverse relationship there, it proves my theory that the market decides between the two, right now the Avs have the upper hand.

The Kroenkes are pretty much hands off owners, which is both good and bad. But there will never be any questions about stability or money.

 

[LazRNN]

Werent ticket prices proven to be average? And there are so many freaking deals out there that anyone with one ounce of initiative or effort can find them. And it's always "oh look at this lower bowl center ice ticket price, it's too expensive to get to a game "

I also plotted the Avs and Nuggets attendance over the last 20 years. There's an inverse relationship there, it proves my theory that the market decides between the two, right now the Avs have the upper hand.

The Kroenkes are pretty much hands off owners, which is both good and bad. But there will never be any questions about stability or money.

The Nuggets had top 10 ticket prices in the NBA in 2014... about on par with the Spurs and more than the Warriors... and they just hiked prices in 2015 (though I'd suspect the Warriors did to, though in that case, with good reason). This isn't coming out of nowhere, but feel free to disagree if you think Nuggets fans should be paying prices on the level of those teams.

The Utah Jazz have affordable tickets and always have good attendance, even if the team hasn't been that good of late. And yeah, obviously one of the primary factors is it's Salt Lake City and they have the only team in town, BUT you can also argue that would give the owners all the more reason to set prices higher... they have no competition. But they seem genuinely interested in making sure people attend the games.

There is always going to be a correlation between winning and attendance, but that doesn't really explain why the Rockies have better attendance. The pricing of the tickets is a factor.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I don't know anything about the NBA so I'm not going there. Really the issue with ticketing is retaining STH anyway. There will always be a swell of casual fans more interested in a winning team. Avs attendance is up over the last 6 years or so, winning doesn't explain that.

The Rockies is some mix of venue and they have a large older fanbase. There's a lot of elderly, they have deals for the 60+. My patents get a package for what's called the silver sluggers. I would think interest in that group is less volatile. The crowd that the Avs advertise to is much younger.

 

[LazRNN]

Yeah I'm sure that elder market is a factor. Honestly this is one issue I raised, but overall I don't have a big issue with the Kroenkes as owners. There are better owners and there are worse. I'm not worried they are going to move the team in 2025. No matter how angry St. Louis sports fans are about the move, obviously it wasn't done out of spite... Kroenke had business incentive for the move and with everything he's established in Denver he'd have little interest in doing the same in 10 years (I'd joked about him moving the teams in another thread, but it was a joke). He's largely a dispassionate owner, and as a fan it's nice to have an owner who clearly hungers to win, like Pat Bowlen. But no question Kroenke understands the business benefits of winning. And Josh has at least been a little more visible and engaged.

 

[famicommander]

Kroenke has dug into this market. He owns two of the four biggest sports venues (Pepsi and Dick's), the biggest cable sports network in this timezone (Altitude), and four of the seven major pro teams in the state (Avs, Nuggets, Mammoth, Rapids).

He's been part owner of the Rams since 1995 and never showed any signs of that sort of thing. He was never in it for the long haul in St Louis. Los Angeles was always in his plans.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

A couple of questions I have when it comes to reporting healthy attendance.

1. On any given night what percentage of the in game audience is composed of STH vs walk-up/one or two off traffic.

2. A follow up question...what percentage of the STH attendance is made up by folks that didn't actually buy the ST.

3. What actually constitutes a STH...someone who purchases a 41 game pass...or do 5/10/15/20 or whatever game packages count? If five people go into together and buy a full season pass and split the games do all five count at STH and get the benefits (fan meet and greets) or does only one of them get all the benefits?

4. If an arena is funded through "public dollars"...why aren't a certain percentage of seats set aside as a lottery for the taxed population to attend for free? Seriously...this one actually kinda bothers me. Tax payers not interested in sports pay for sports and those that do like them still pay through the nose to actually go, park, get a hot-dog and a soda. WTF. At some point that has to stop right? Especially when "true fans" continuously call for teams to re-locate after a region has made a significant investment via tax-breaks or direct funding.

5. It's 2:45am...am I really interested in this or just posting because I'm drunk?

6. Answer to 5 is both.

 

[Bonzai12]

4. If an arena is funded through "public dollars"...why aren't a certain percentage of seats set aside as a lottery for the taxed population to attend for free? Seriously...this one actually kinda bothers me. Tax payers not interested in sports pay for sports and those that do like them still pay through the nose to actually go, park, get a hot-dog and a soda. WTF. At some point that has to stop right? Especially when "true fans" continuously call for teams to re-locate after a region has made a significant investment via tax-breaks or direct funding.

I do like the Broncos deal - they do a lottery of 1/2 off tickets every year. That's the only way I've attended games in the past 2-3 years.

 

[Tweaky]

A couple of questions I have when it comes to reporting healthy attendance.

1. On any given night what percentage of the in game audience is composed of STH vs walk-up/one or two off traffic.

Season tickets count as seats filled whether anyone shows up for it or not. And this number is not a constant for a season ( varies slightly as some folks buy the packages late, and especially higher uptakes for popular games as part of packages. I suppose they could figure it out pretty easily, but without knowing how many package seats are sold for a game and how many total attend, we as fans will likely never know.

2. A follow up question...what percentage of the STH attendance is made up by folks that didn't actually buy the ST.

Every season ticket seat is assumed to be filled by its owner and guests...they do not track resales outside of their own system for it, and don't really care once they get their money (and they do make a bit extra for the resales).

3. What actually constitutes a STH...someone who purchases a 41 game pass...or do 5/10/15/20 or whatever game packages count? If five people go into together and buy a full season pass and split the games do all five count at STH and get the benefits (fan meet and greets) or does only one of them get all the benefits?

One entry per season ticket for those events. Not sure how they allocate the partials for those events. But for whole season numbers (what they report as the number of season ticket holders), they count how many seats are sold for the full 41 games as part of the packages...so if they sell 7000 full ST, 1000 20game packs and 2100 10game packs, the total would be 8000 season tickets sold....even though some of the games will have more STH in the seats.

4. If an arena is funded through "public dollars"...why aren't a certain percentage of seats set aside as a lottery for the taxed population to attend for free? Seriously...this one actually kinda bothers me. Tax payers not interested in sports pay for sports and those that do like them still pay through the nose to actually go, park, get a hot-dog and a soda. WTF. At some point that has to stop right? Especially when "true fans" continuously call for teams to re-locate after a region has made a significant investment via tax-breaks or direct funding.

Good question. The conventional argument is that the city as a whole receives benefits to the economy, more sales tax, tourism, etc. But studies have shown that it is not generally the case. Some do...Coors field revamped LoDo from what I remember of that area as a kid....but how much economic benefit, I dunno. But I like the idea of raffling a number of tickets to those that would not otherwise be able to afford them. The fans that can afford, likely already attend at least some. Tax payers that do not attend by choice, likely would not even if free (some would, and might be a way to grow the game), but to me the biggest benefit would be to help those that love the game, but never have the chance to attend due to economics.

And "true fans" of a team never ask for a team to relocate...at least not their own team unless it is closer to them. You get those yahoos that want other peoples teams to relocate because "not a hockey market" or "city B deserves a team more." But they invariably forget that ANY team will have a number of fans wherever they are. Put a team in Tijuana, and it would have fans after a while....and those fans would be devastated if they moved. But sometimes it does not make business sense to keep a team in a certain location (hence the Avs vice Nords).

5. It's 2:45am...am I really interested in this or just posting because I'm drunk?

Its 12:02am and I am answering, but I am sober

6. Answer to 5 is both.

Yep