I disagree. Bettman understood the situation with ASG fairly well, and Atlanta overall. Moreover he mentioned publicly that he wanted to correct some wrongs from the past if arena and ownership issues made sense, hence the talk about Winnipeg and QC as options.
Will the NHL try Atlanta again?
- Thread starter Melrose Munch
- Start date
I disagree. Bettman understood the situation with ASG fairly well, and Atlanta overall. Moreover he mentioned publicly that he wanted to correct some wrongs from the past if arena and ownership issues made sense, hence the talk about Winnipeg and QC as options.
That's simply him making lemonade after being given lemons. He had no say in Atlanta's demise. Nothing he said in that time spoke of anything about Atlanta as a market for hockey. He simply knew the Thrashers had no hope in staying due to the circumstances with ownership.
Washington is special. I believe that some congresscritters were threatening to "look into baseball's anti-trust exemption" if they didn't get a local team.
I don't see a parallel anywhere else, given that no other league has such an exemption to hold hostage.Around the same time as ASG bought the Atlanta assets, the Cleveland Cavs sold for $320 million with arena operating rights While the Cavs had LeBron who boosted the value of the team an arena in Atlanta is worth more than Cleveland (bigger area, more shows, better economy, etc). That values the Thrashers at nothing.
Why would the Braves want an indoor arena anywhere near their stadium? Why would they want any competition for sports dollars?
The next expansion teams are likely to be in Houston and Kansas City. Both markets are in the Central Time Zone and my thinking is that the NHL's thinking is Colorado being in the Central Division is temporary. A move of Colorado to the Pacific would require the addition of two new Central Time Zone teams, and Houston and KC have arenas all ready to go.
EDIT: It is also my opinion that if Time Warner never sold the Atlanta teams they owned, the Thrashers would still be there, and TBS and not what is now NBCSN would have replaced ESPN as the NHL's cable partner (TBS is available in more homes than NBCSN). TBS sure could use a winter sport to fill the void left by losing their share of NBA rights over a decade ago, and it seems the most likely thing is TBS adding coverage of regular season college basketball to compete with the other networks. They could sublicense games from several top conferences.
EDIT: It is also my opinion that if Time Warner never sold the Atlanta teams they owned, the Thrashers would still be there, and TBS and not what is now NBCSN would have replaced ESPN as the NHL's cable partner (TBS is available in more homes than NBCSN). TBS sure could use a winter sport to fill the void left by losing their share of NBA rights over a decade ago, and it seems the most likely thing is TBS adding coverage of regular season college basketball to compete with the other networks. They could sublicense games from several top conferences.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 78,811
- 53,489
Imagine you and I had split ownership over the Toronto Maple Leafs. You think there's any chance in hell I'm going to sell my shares to start a mystery team out in Markham? Conversely, would you be willing to be a second class citizen all of a sudden?
kdb209
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2005
- 14,870
- 6
Because the stadium is only 25% of the real estate they acquired - 15 out of 60+ acres. They are planning a large mixed use residential/retail/entertainment "destination" development on the rest. An arena would provide a year round draw to the development - beyond just 81 Braves dates from April to Oct.
Mightygoose
Registered User
Though an arena near the new ballpark would still be facing stiff competition from Phillips less than 15 miles away in terms of attracting non-hockey events. Would there be enough to go around making an arena even viable there?
Quite possibly, and as long as Turner was involved. These things always seem to work better when there's someone who's a driving force behind things. The ownership "groups" always make me a little nervous as well.
$300 million for an arena which would compete with Philips and Gwinnett Arena for other events and then almost $200 million for a franchise? I think there are better uses for the money.
One other thing to consider, even if Atlanta was a good hockey market, can we really count on fans having forgiven the NHL and allowing themselves to get emotionally attached to another team?
2000 - Colorado $202 MM
..........NY Isles $130 MM
2001 - Florida $101 MM
..........Phoenix $87
2003 - Ottawa $92 MM (bankruptcy)
2003 - Agreement in principal to purchase Hawks, Thrashers and lease rights to Philips for $250 million
2004 - Ownership transfer approved from NBA and NHL
2004 - San Jose $147 MM
..........New Jersey $125 MM
.........Buffalo $92 MM (BK)
..........Vancouver $207 MM (2004, 2005 See McGaw, Aquilini)
2005 - Anaheim $75 MM
..........St Louis $150 MM
.........Phoenix $____ (Moyes takes over from Ellman who paid Moyes $95 MM and his 36% of Yotes)
2004-05 Lockout
2007 - Nashville $174 MM
2008 - Edmonton $170 MM
..........Tampa $204 MM
..........Minnesota $265 MM (Leipold bought share for $225 MM)
2009 - Florida $200?
2010 - Montreal $575 MM (inc Bell Centre)
..........Tampa $110 MM
2011 - Thrashers sold for $110 million + $60 MM relo fee
..........Buffalo $210 MM
..........Dallas $265 MM
2012 - St Louis $130 MM
..........Toronto $800 MM (inc ACC)*
2013 - Florida $250 MM
..........NJD $320 MM
..........Phoenix $170 MM
Phew. A couple hours of research here. I will let the numbers speak for themselves. The teams in blue font were sold two or more times since 2000.
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
No, there's a subtle difference...
In your view, that values the Thrashers at nothing. In ASG's view, the Thrashers were worth $160 million in 2005 when ASG paid $250 million for all three in 2004.
Link please.
We saw no evidence of that. He actually slammed the fans for not going to the games and validated the mythology that Atlanta had already lost one team due to lack of fan support.
If the NHL came back to Atlanta next October, they still wouldn't see a dime of my money. I'm done investing time, funds, and emotions on a sport that cares so little for it's fans.
I'll watch the game on TV because I still love hockey and I'd go to game if someone bought me a ticket but that's as far as I'll go.
I'm not saying split it 50/50 % the team that gets the non leafs gets the pot sweetened and this is the only way in which the indemnification fees could be kept reasonable, if someone other than one of the two parties tried to get into the GTA they would be held ransom. its hard to say " we need X millions" when the other side has access to your books.
People have mentioned that there are deals where if you propose something so outlandish that one party rejects it that the side that rejected it can send it back. the financial equivalent of " you cut I choose".
Toronto's market, specifically the leafs, are not in any imminent danger of not selling out. The market in the GTA would have no problems supporting two teams.
if KC is indeed the next expansion team there would have to be a cataclysmic change of fortunes. The AEG lease will end, the city will run the arena and be profitable on concerts and the mayor of kc says " thanks but no thanks" to the nhl and there is the little minor quibble of NO IDENTIFYABLE OWNERSHIP group and potentially less local demand for hockey.
if they put a team in KC people will be pining for a phoenix like situation.
Also remember being surprised when he called out the fans for not supporting the team. He went out of his way to warn Winnipeggers too that they couldn't waiver in their support. I don't recall any mention of fan support wrt Phoenix.
pld459666
Registered User
Atlanta is a horrible sports town.
When the teams struggle, the fans bail. Baseball, Football, Basketball and we all saw first hand in Hockey.
Successful franchises are not measured on how well they do when the on ice/court/field/diamond product does well, it's measured on how well they do when those teams are not good.
Sports are a cyclical business and it's during the down time that the teams need the fans more than ever and Atlanta has shown time and again that they bail when the going gets rough.
While I agree with the notion of never say never, it's ALMOST a guarantee that the state of Georgia, specifically the city of Atlanta will never see another NHL Franchise call it home.
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,215
Im afraid not Tackla. As Bongo & Fugu mentioned above he for all intensive purposes called out the fans in transferring the NHL & ASG's onus of culpability & responsibility in essentially letting that franchise wither on the vine. Added insult to injury. Nasty jab, mean cut... that being said, I do have some sympathy for Bettman & for the NHL as they most certainly wanted to retain that market however ASG played them & the fan base, never wanting the Red Headed Stepchild of the Thrashers to begin with, unwilling in fact to even honestly negotiate in good faith with local buyer's on sale price & a lease agreement. Just wanted em' gone, period. League was absolutely boxed in. ASG "claimed" publicly they were prepared to move forward & carry on operating the club, y'know, like actually own up to their responsibilities & play during the then coming 2011/12 season & try to facilitate a local sale but I dont think so. That was a fiction. Likely told Bettman expedite a sale and now or else. Seriously messed up the plans for the Coyotes who were absolutely on their way to Winnipeg before the meltdown in Atlanta derailed those contingency plans.
I agree 100 percent, but the corporate money left on the table in Atlanta is too much to pass up
While I'll never understand why anybody goes to see the Falcons, they always draw well in spite of their mediocre history. The Hawks have never had big crowds unless the stars are coming to town. This makes no sense when you consider the demographic. The Braves were one of the best regular season teams in Baseball this past year but rarely sold out. There can only be one reason for this; TV. And before smart fans figured out ASG's jive, Atlanta was supporting not one but two professional hockey teams with respectable crowds.
The Thrasher faithful were called bad fans for not sticking with the team. The support fell off when people realized ASG had no intention of icing a winning or competitive team. I don't consider that poor support but wise consumerism.
People can spend their money any way they want, but this notion of " win or we walk" is going to be the demise of a lot of teams. Only 3% of the teams wins the cup every year and a teams market is not based when things are rolling, its based on when things are going bad.
If winning is cyclical ( it is) and if at the first signs of a prolonged period of less than desirable performance the fans bail, that's not an example of wise consumerism, its an indication of a failing, if not failed, market.
All teams have down period(s), if you have to fear that the majority of your fan base will jump ship to some other team or pursuit when things are tough, you might wan to consider that your fan base was not really yours to begin with. Having fans of " winning" is not hard.
if your team sucks so long that it gets you to cut your nose to spite your face who comes out on top in this situation ? no one.
again its well within your perogative to spend money however you like, but I find this idea of taking teams that are struggling financially, to further cripple them in some sort of perverse enticement for them to spend more ( or more wisely) is just personally incomprehensible.
This sounds like a play right out of the Leafs' hanbook, yet...
Almost every franchise in the NHL since 2000 has had their ups and downs with respect to attendance, save for Toronto, Detroit, Montreal, Rangers and Philadelphia. So if you're saying that all markets should support their teams, and should behave like one-sixth of the League, maybe it's that one-sixth of the league's fans that are bat-excrement crazy. After all, within that thirteen year time frame only one of those teams has won a cup, and it was Detroit that won two.
