Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Sporting Events Discussion centered around sporting events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-19-2012, 03:57 PM   #5626
DevinLake
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DevinLake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,019
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Yea triumph, my question was more like this:

When Tampa Bay (baseball) struggles to fill seats are they struggling in the sense that they are only making 20mil rather than losing 20mil?

But regardless, if it's true the plight of the small market teams is not at the root of the problem, then my question is moot.
DevinLake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:03 PM   #5627
GusJohnsonGOAT
SESwamiGOAT
 
GusJohnsonGOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 15,357
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagos View Post
But people ITT are telling me the plight of the small market teams has nothing to do with the lockout. In fact, as Triumph points out, these extended lockouts must hurt small market teams more than they hurt the big market teams.

Yeah, triumph hasn't even cited a source or anything yet. I'd be much more inclined to think this lockout is about the small market teams that are losing money. There's a reason why these teams keep changing ownership.

Just for a comparison with the NBA lockout:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2...ght-in-courts/

Which is basically the amount that was lost since they played 80% of the season. According to the article, with the split going from 57-50%, the owners were to gain $270 million a year. So it would take 3 years just to make up that lost money (assuming that $800 million number is accurate and the $270 million is accurate.)

How would the NHL make up their revenue if they locked out for the whole year? Seems like it would take the entire length of the CBA (not just a 5 year, but a 10 year deal) and maybe longer just to make up that lost money, and then who is to even guarantee that there won't be a lockout the next time around?

If anything, an article like that makes me strongly inclined to believe that this is all about the small markets.

The only thing the lockout hurts for a team hemorrhaging money is the local economy. But a lot of these "small" market teams are actually large markets with a poor hockey niche/following.
GusJohnsonGOAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:07 PM   #5628
WhiteGoose
confirmed loose
 
WhiteGoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,158
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

I know we're talking serious business up in here now, but back to the matter of OSHAWA, Ontario

I just got tickets for Eric Church at the General Motors Centre in February. The fellow Oshawa loving folk ITT will know I am in for the biggest blue collar, country loving, Budweiser pounding **** show Southern Ontario has ever seen.
WhiteGoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:10 PM   #5629
Everlastrr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Everlastrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: @TheLeafsAreActuallyGood
Posts: 12,359
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

When it comes to hockey I don't agree with the cigar dog often but I'm pretty much right with him in regards to this lockout.

The bottom teams in the NHL are interchangeable to the top teams. They know they can fill out the spots between 26-32 teams. It's the players that are desperate to keep those extra teams. Revenue sharing actually makes this even more predatory as the League will constantly pressure the lower ranked teams with bids from other cities trying to lower their share of the revenue tax. It's a viscous circle.

Below, esp the first sentence seems like its saying nothing but irl this is where the bear ****s as they say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post

They're doing it for the next CBA, and the next one, and the next one - the more they take this time, the less they'll have to take next time, and the less they'll have to take next time, etc. But they're the teams paying out the most in salary and they would like to pay out less. When have you heard Bettman talking about small market teams this time around? Have you heard him trot out something like the Levitt Report? Of course not.
Everlastrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:12 PM   #5630
lozen
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
lozen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,154
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NhlNut View Post
Football is unique because they split all the TV revenue which accounts for a huge chunk of total revenue. The split from tv guarantees every team at least breaks even.
Breaks even Try turns a healthy profit. Let alone you can cut a guy mid contract and not owe him the balance of his contract.

Football is set up for the owners. Baseball is set up for the players
lozen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:13 PM   #5631
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

lockouts do not hurt local economies - people spend money elsewhere. they might hurt businesses that directly surround an arena. and they're not going to cancel a whole season unless talks go wildly out of line, because they can bridge the money gap they're talking about now.

tell me how any of the owners' plans significantly improves the issues that small-market teams face. you guys are out of your minds if you think that the big-market owners would just looove to keep paying out enormous front loaded contracts at a rate of 57% of the total revenue.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:23 PM   #5632
Vagos
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Vagos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 40,963
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

No, I think it's pretty clear the owners aren't doing any of this for the small market teams. The fact that substantial revenue sharing is such a nonstarter for them makes that pretty cut and dry imo. I'm just wondering at what point are the big markets costing themselves money the longer this goes on? I agree w/ you Triumph that the small market owners are just essentially 'along for the ride' w/ this whole situation.
Vagos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 04:45 PM   #5633
72off
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
72off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WATZ POPPIIN!!
Posts: 62,110
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
...you guys are out of your minds if you think that the big-market owners would just looove to keep paying out enormous front loaded contracts at a rate of 57% of the total revenue.
yeah, cause that's what anyone has said itt...

edit: also lol @ the big bad players forcing the owners to sign them to these stupid contracts

really was a brilliant ploy for these guys to hand out dumb contracts all summer with full knowledge that they were gonna turn around and ask for a rollback bc the system clearly isn't working for them. can't imagine why the players are upset about that, and this whole thing is difficult once again. teams spending to $70m was just ingenious!

Last edited by 72off; 10-19-2012 at 05:05 PM.
72off is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 05:21 PM   #5634
GusJohnsonGOAT
SESwamiGOAT
 
GusJohnsonGOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 15,357
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

What do we classify as a "small market" team? A lot of the actual small markets are doing quite well because of their hockey niche.

A few teams ineligible for revenue sharing because of their large TV markets had some of the worst attendances last year: Dallas, Anaheim, NYI, and even New Jersey.

So a lot of the big markets with a small hockey market are doing quite poorly and don't qualify for revenue sharing.

The top 10 teams are responsible for the revenue sharing, and in 2012 they were:

1. Toronto
2. NYR
3. Montreal
4. Vancouver
5. Detroit
6. Boston
7. Chicago
8. Philly
9. Pittsburgh
10. Calgary

Only Pittsburgh had a negative operating income.

Ineligible teams (operating income):

Kings $-2m
NYI $-8.1m
Dallas $-1.1m
NJ $-6.1m

And here is the problem with hockey. These large markets aren't pulling their weight. So, yes, this lockout is about smaller market teams because the large markets have to take more money from the players just to pay them their revenue shares and keep them alive. If small and big markets weren't losing money, then a 57/43 split would be no problem at all.

http://www.thehockeyfanatic.com/2012...rth-2011-2012/


And Bettman loves these large markets with small hockey markets or just small markets with small hockey markets in general. So Bettman has to screw the players over to save his beloved southern hockey teams. But players thinking they can make comparable money to other sports is pretty lol as well. I mean, they could, but that means cutting out half the league and players.
GusJohnsonGOAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 05:23 PM   #5635
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 72off View Post
yeah, cause that's what anyone has said itt...
lozen said that Toronto would play under the old CBA. They absolutely would not.

Quote:
edit: also lol @ the big bad players forcing the owners to sign them to these stupid contracts

really was a brilliant ploy for these guys to hand out dumb contracts all summer with full knowledge that they were gonna turn around and ask for a rollback bc the system clearly isn't working for them. can't imagine why the players are upset about that, and this whole thing is difficult once again. teams spending to $70m was just ingenious!
I never claimed this, and no one has spent to $70M. Most teams are well below that, including usual cap teams like the Wings and Rangers.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 05:45 PM   #5636
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

That has to be data from 2010-11 because there is no way that either the Devils or the Kings lost money last year - each went to the Cup Finals. Also you grunched the thread because we had a debate just last night about small and big markets, but since you insist I will list 10/10/10 where I think teams fall, in no particular order - okay I changed it to 11/9/10

BIG MARKETS:

Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
New York R.
Chicago
Detroit
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Boston

MID MARKET

Ottawa
Minnesota
Winnipeg
Washington
Los Angeles
San Jose
Buffalo
New Jersey
St. Louis

SMALL MARKETS

Phoenix
Florida
Tampa Bay
Carolina
Anaheim
New York I
Dallas
Colorado
Nashville
Columbus

There's some motion in between here obviously - when St. Louis was awesome in the late 90s, they were a big market, ditto Dallas and Colorado. Minnesota will be a big market soon. Detroit could fall out of being a big market, and depending on the Canadian dollar, so could Calgary. Whatever the case.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 05:48 PM   #5637
72off
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
72off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WATZ POPPIIN!!
Posts: 62,110
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)



oh sorry, $68.8m

16 teams over $60m. what are they trying to roll it back to anyway?
72off is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:13 PM   #5638
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
lockouts do not hurt local economies - people spend money elsewhere. they might hurt businesses that directly surround an arena. and they're not going to cancel a whole season unless talks go wildly out of line, because they can bridge the money gap they're talking about now.

tell me how any of the owners' plans significantly improves the issues that small-market teams face. you guys are out of your minds if you think that the big-market owners would just looove to keep paying out enormous front loaded contracts at a rate of 57% of the total revenue.
this is not true. there are markets that enjoy people traveling to the city to spend their money.
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:23 PM   #5639
Vagos
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Vagos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 40,963
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 72off View Post
16 teams over $60m. what are they trying to roll it back to anyway?
Think I heard $59m somewhere but I might be wrong. Something about how teams over that mark would be given some leniency in the first year, but who knows how it was structured down the road.
Vagos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:23 PM   #5640
unicorn_lord
Pooh-Bah
 
unicorn_lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Right behind you... you smell good.
Posts: 4,523
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
That has to be data from 2010-11 because there is no way that either the Devils or the Kings lost money last year - each went to the Cup Finals. Also you grunched the thread because we had a debate just last night about small and big markets, but since you insist I will list 10/10/10 where I think teams fall, in no particular order - okay I changed it to 11/9/10

BIG MARKETS:

Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
New York R.
Chicago
Detroit
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Boston

MID MARKET

Ottawa
Minnesota
Winnipeg
Washington
Los Angeles
San Jose
Buffalo
New Jersey
St. Louis

SMALL MARKETS

Phoenix
Florida
Tampa Bay
Carolina
Anaheim
New York I
Dallas
Colorado
Nashville
Columbus

There's some motion in between here obviously - when St. Louis was awesome in the late 90s, they were a big market, ditto Dallas and Colorado. Minnesota will be a big market soon. Detroit could fall out of being a big market, and depending on the Canadian dollar, so could Calgary. Whatever the case.
How is San Jose small market if it consistently sells out? Is the stadium size that much of a factor?
unicorn_lord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:32 PM   #5641
NhlNut
KANGZ
 
NhlNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: RANGZ
Posts: 17,888
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

lack of tv revenue for a start

LA sells out all the time, but they practically gave away the tv rights. (Just recently changed btw.)
Guessing SJ is the same.
NhlNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:38 PM   #5642
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylar View Post
this is not true. there are markets that enjoy people traveling to the city to spend their money.
do these cities offer nothing besides hockey? i don't think so, besides maybe newark

unicorn: i wasn't sure if you can read, but now i am sure you can't. it's a mid market.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:38 PM   #5643
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NhlNut View Post
lack of tv revenue for a start

LA sells out all the time, but they practically gave away the tv rights. (Just recently changed btw.)
Guessing SJ is the same.
PT regional networks are a lot smaller than ET. something to do with population density I am sure.
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:43 PM   #5644
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
do these cities offer nothing besides hockey? i don't think so, besides maybe newark
??? Sharks, Predators, Canucks, etc.
there is definitely $$$ that come in for the Wild but not for the Timberwolves or the Twins.

you can argue that overall effect is smaller than we think, but the effect exists, and it's not negligible. otherwise, cities who already have a pro team or two wouldn't also pursue hockey.

Last edited by sylar; 10-19-2012 at 06:52 PM.
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 06:51 PM   #5645
72off
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
72off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WATZ POPPIIN!!
Posts: 62,110
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by unicorn_lord View Post
How is San Jose small market if it consistently sells out? Is the stadium size that much of a factor?
didn't you hear, SJ sells out every game, but STILL LOSES $15M PER YEAR!!!

ZOMG THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN, DOES NOT WORK, NEEDS TO BE FIXED!!!
72off is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 07:07 PM   #5646
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Spoiler:
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2012, 11:09 PM   #5647
WhiteGoose
confirmed loose
 
WhiteGoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,158
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Legit question.

These companies operate in the billions of dollars. The current salary cap is what, like $50mil? Is spending another $50M to have a payroll of $100M in an uncapped world for instance... is that extra $50M REALLY that big of a deal to the owners? These teams operate in the BILLIONS again. So what's the deal? The players' salaries are pennies to these media mega-conglomerates.
WhiteGoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 02:28 AM   #5648
GusJohnsonGOAT
SESwamiGOAT
 
GusJohnsonGOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 15,357
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteGoose View Post
Legit question.

These companies operate in the billions of dollars. The current salary cap is what, like $50mil? Is spending another $50M to have a payroll of $100M in an uncapped world for instance... is that extra $50M REALLY that big of a deal to the owners? These teams operate in the BILLIONS again. So what's the deal? The players' salaries are pennies to these media mega-conglomerates.

What are you talking about? These teams don't operate in the billions. None of these teams are even worth close to that much money. The Maple Leafs are worth half a billion and that's the highest value.

See: http://www.thehockeyfanatic.com/2012...rth-2011-2012/

Yes, that jump in salary cap would legitimately close down the league. If salaries could balloon up to that much, ticket prices would have to jump up to compensate. The salary cap is in place to protect owners from exorbitant contracts. NHL players want to paid like the other athletes in the MLB, NBA, and NFL, but the truth is, the NHL can't afford to pay players like that.

Most of these small markets cannot afford a salary cap at something like $100 million. That means there would be a salary floor of $84 million, and there are numerous teams that aren't making that in revenue.

Last edited by GusJohnsonGOAT; 10-20-2012 at 02:46 AM. Reason: I'm guessing you might be referring to some of the owners but they don't want to lose money and most owners are not that rich
GusJohnsonGOAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 02:32 AM   #5649
AdamSchwartz
Shippy McShiperson
 
AdamSchwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 2 twins no cups
Posts: 8,529
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

ATTENTION SEEWISE

http://www.charitybuzz.com/auctions/...g_items/323408
AdamSchwartz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 03:13 AM   #5650
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylar View Post
??? Sharks, Predators, Canucks, etc.
there is definitely $$$ that come in for the Wild but not for the Timberwolves or the Twins.

you can argue that overall effect is smaller than we think, but the effect exists, and it's not negligible. otherwise, cities who already have a pro team or two wouldn't also pursue hockey.
Read Andrew Zimbalist on this - cities pursue pro teams because they are dumb and think that arenas can generate money. They can, but not if they're publicly funded - any money the arena generates can't compensate for that initial funding. That money not spent on NHL hockey still gets spent somewhere - again, the block right around the arena will feel the effects, but everyone else? If anything they will see a gain.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive